topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Monday November 24, 2025, 1:32 pm
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Recent Posts

Pages: prev1 ... 39 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 49 ... 131next
1076
Living Room / Re: Can there be a free Web if no one makes money?
« Last post by zridling on December 08, 2009, 12:46 AM »
Does anyone find it interesting that the only people who seem to be complaining about this are people who already have huge companies with lots of money? - Oshyan

Aye, and there's the rub as Hamlet would say. Those same uber-rich people are have spent quite a bit buying politicians to help them write entire sections of the copyright law that only extends in one direction -- longer and longer -- so that infringement never ends.
1077
Simply put, DonationCoder.com is a place where coders of all kind (programmers, developers, script masters, etc.) can meet in one place, receive input, critical feedback, be challenged in various coding contests, and even make a little money off their efforts. And then there are guys like me who like hanging out with these people and discussing all things software with them!

I'm here because nothing in tech is off limits. Whether it's operating systems, social networking issues, security topics, open source discussions, it's all on the table in a respectful way. That's a rare gem among forums these days.
1078
Living Room / Re: Can there be a free Web if no one makes money?
« Last post by zridling on December 04, 2009, 05:04 PM »
That's true, cable brought us HBO back in the 70s. I pay $5.99/month for DishNetwork's NFL RedZone channel, which is only broadcast Sunday afternoon for seven hours, showing every play (and lots more, such as after game coaches/player interviews, extended series of key games, etc.) within the 20-yard line and every score of the day as it happens. With NO COMMERCIALS, it's absolute heaven. Imagine the world free from ads!

But if everything is going digital, going onto the Net, where is the money for advertising going to come from?

During the first Hackers' Conference in 1984, Stewart Brand uttered the infamous maxim, Information wants to be free. But he meant freedom, not necessarily price.

Entities like Rupert Murdoch's newspapers and TV stations don't "own" the news they cover. RARELY do they write anything original, unless you consider a columnist such. Thus, whatever Rupert's selling, so are many others, but then I can also obtain "it" (the story, the news, the info) for free from other sources (such as daily company press releases). News is not treated as property such as a physical music CD, a book, or a film. Apple's solution is to control access and destination points, which as we all know is expensive.

* Musicians will have to go on tour.
* Newspapers will have to go digital by selling a futuristic digital reader activated by your fingerprint, and then uploading fresh content to it 24/7.
* Novelists are making the transition to ebooks and actually getting paid more per book than paper copies.
* Actors will have to work for $50,000 rather than $25mn per picture; oh, the horror!

I could go on, but the 21st century is a digitized one. Guys like Murdoch and Mandelson (look up "ACTA") prefer the analog economy of the 20th century, where business titans can control supply and artificially leverage their profits at the expense of the consumer. (Bought any computer memory in the past 20 years?!) In a digital economy, some people will have to go back to work and not live off of copyright lawsuits.
1079
Living Room / Re: Should Illegal Downloaders Be Cut Off From the Internet?
« Last post by zridling on December 04, 2009, 03:59 PM »
:-\
Perhaps all the money spent in prosecution cost would be better spent on deciding a universal law which covers every country so that no one is in any doubt about downloading rules and regulations.
Is anybody 100% sure of existing regulations in ANY country? I don't think so!

The United States has long done this through a Uniform Commercial Code when lobbying and negotiating trade agreements with any country via the WTO. The idea is to get every other country to adopt U.S. Copyright Law. Britain has done the same along with many countries, but because Britain produces an incredible amount of creative content (BBC among them) that is seen, read, and heard around the globe, it added significant additions to the US law.
1080
Could it be a virus scanning option or an adblocker setting?
1081
Living Room / Re: Google Wants to Speed Up the Web: Launches Its Own DNS Service
« Last post by zridling on December 04, 2009, 03:26 AM »
Not so fast, Google isn't taking over DNS, just providing yet another alternative that already being offered by several other companies. Isn't this kind of competition good for the web? More services, better web experience, more choice. As Ulevitch noted, most people are unaware they can switch their DNS at any time.
1082
Living Room / Re: Should Illegal Downloaders Be Cut Off From the Internet?
« Last post by zridling on December 02, 2009, 05:20 PM »
I should add: It makes governments crazy because it democratizes knowledge.

If everything is eventually considered illegal, then we're all criminals. I think the Associated Press considers quoting four words or more from a story copyright infringement, and for anything more they want to be paid!
1083
Living Room / Re: Should Illegal Downloaders Be Cut Off From the Internet?
« Last post by zridling on December 02, 2009, 05:15 PM »
Hell no they shouldn't be cut off. Internet access is a human right in the 21st century, since access to information largely controls the quality of your life. Here's a clueful piece from the Guardian:

The emancipatory potential of the free dissemination of intellectual property through infinite replication is overwhelming. Unlike private property that is subject to scarcity, supply and demand laws and other rigid determinations, immaterial property poses an explosive threat to our deeply rooted notions of proprietorship.

It is not only because there can be potentially infinite owners of property that the internet redefines our notion of it. It is also that people who participate in the exchange of immaterial works do not treat them as property. When they exchange music, books or movies, they are not merely transferring ownership from themselves to others; they simply do not recognise themselves as owners in the first place.

_____________________________________
No wonder they want to lock the internet down and lock users out!

1084
Living Room / Re: 74% of the world, Google's Chrome OS is not for you
« Last post by zridling on December 02, 2009, 05:08 PM »
Innuendo, I understand. However, my own cable connection has been the most reliable part of the house; it stays up even during storms when the electricity goes out. To your point, I don't think you should have to be online to use your computer. But for those of us who agree with you, there's Linux, OSX, Windows, et al. But there will be forks of Chrome OS that will work offline or with other localized software, that much is inevitable.

Brilliant 40hz, smack dab brilliant!
1085
Living Room / Re: 74% of the world, Google's Chrome OS is not for you
« Last post by zridling on December 02, 2009, 09:44 AM »
Depends. Since it's open source, there will Chrome OS variants that will take advantage of localized apps. And Chrome itself can work offline via HTML5, which most other browsers don't yet support. It's still a year away. But if a "chromebook" turns out to be a cheap device (<$200), I wouldn't underestimate its popularity for both business and casual use. It doesn't matter if you use Chrome OS or not. If more web apps are built and people use them, Google wins -- as does Linux -- in the long run.

Seems to me that Google's OS is the return of old-style dumb terminals on an 80's style computer network. Everything (apps and data) were stored on the mainframe & the dumb terminals accessed everything off the mainframe in order to do anything. No. No, thank you. Google's OS, and cloud computing in general, are the wrong direction for us to be heading. We already did this in the 80s and...well....it sucked.  :)

Yes but so much has changed since then. Bandwidth is so much better in the past ten years, as are web apps themselves. Some of the things that Bing.com does -- such as visual search -- is quite cool. Zoho is now offering full integration with Google Apps, allowing users to access Google Docs seamlessly from within the Zoho environment. The variety of semantic web apps, such as DBpedia have been a great aid in my work. And I won't even mention the social web.

Point is, most of my computing is accessing and sharing information and data via the browser. The rest is spent in a text editor and a image editor. Even with the Chrome OS beta, I can save my data to an external device such as a USB stick. As I said in another topic: Your garage doesn't have to have two cars. It can have a car and a bike.
1086
Living Room / How to un-Google yourself
« Last post by zridling on December 02, 2009, 09:20 AM »
Improvement_kaptainkobold_flickr_bg.jpg

According to Google, I was a woman from 1997-2003. Wired magazine posts a guide on how to decouple yourself from Google.
1087
Linux-Geeks-Chicks-Ladies.png
1088
General Software Discussion / Re: Windows 7 — first impressions
« Last post by zridling on November 30, 2009, 01:53 PM »
I haven't used Win7 much in the vm I have setup for it under Linux, but my first impression was similar to others': Why the heck did they bury select pieces of the Control Panel and Device Manager? Yet I do think it's the best Windows ever.
1089
Living Room / Re: The End of the CrunchPad
« Last post by zridling on November 30, 2009, 01:49 PM »
Next to journalists, big business people are the dumbest folk I've ever met. The Copycense site is full of the same stories of people who would rather go to court to make money than build something well designed. Perhaps Steve Jobs' greatest success was that he was able to get to market without the annual recurrent lawsuits.
1090
General Software Discussion / Re: Chrome OS preview looks pretty cool
« Last post by zridling on November 26, 2009, 03:15 AM »
Not sure. Didn't see anyone logging in among all the videos presented. When they opened Microsoft-formatted documents, they went to Windows Live when then opened MSOffice '07/10.

The key point, I believe, is not to think that Chrome OS is a Windows killer, or even a full-blown OS. Instead of having two cars in your garage, you have a car and a bike! The most interesting computing advances are happening away from the desktop, a trend that will only continue through the next decade. Chrome OS -- or a Chromebook -- is symbolic of something larger than OS vs. OS. It's Windows vs. the Cloud.
1091
General Software Discussion / Re: Chrome OS preview looks pretty cool
« Last post by zridling on November 25, 2009, 11:45 PM »
That's the whole idea of Chrome OS, to cater only for online Google stuff.... Don't get me wrong, I find it as screwy as you do, but that is the general thinking behind it. Ehtyar.

Not true. While the eventual machine will be setup to take advantage of Google's browser -- which is built to take advantage of Google software and ads (no surprise there) -- you can surf and use any online software you want. You can use Windows Live or Zoho or anything else that's online. Thus the line, "all apps are web apps," and "Chrome OS is just the platform for Chrome OS netbooks."

Being open source, you'll see forks or versions that allow for HDs, local apps, etc.  And probably sooner than expected.
1092
Can anyone setup a greasemonkey script to exclude all of Murdoch's sites from Google search results?  :P
1093
Living Room / Re: Microsoft decries standards grandstanding
« Last post by zridling on November 25, 2009, 11:35 PM »
Here it is almost 2010 and Microsoft is fighting open standards (again). This time with Silverlight:
http://www.osnews.co...rlight_vs_Standards/

Between Apple and Microsoft, it's a "choose your captor" strategy, it seems.
1094
Living Room / Re: Apple Declares Smoking Near Apple Computers Voids Warranty
« Last post by zridling on November 25, 2009, 02:06 PM »
Hey Apple, I'm fat. Void me!

Just saw on Twitter that farting near your Apple computer will void the warranty, too.   ;D
1095
Wow, that explains a lot. Thanks April.
1096
General Software Discussion / Re: Chrome OS preview looks pretty cool
« Last post by zridling on November 24, 2009, 02:52 PM »
I'd agree with that, but not for Chrome OS. It's an OS literally built for a device that runs one thing: the browser. Google explains it far better than I can:

The goal is to build "an operating system that provides a fast, simple, and more secure computing experience for people who spend most of their time on the web." Here are the initial use cases for Chrome OS:
  • Computing on the couch
  • Use as a lightweight, secondary work computer
  • Borrowing a device for use in coffee shops and libraries
  • Sharing a second computer among family members

"First, it's all about the web. All apps are web apps. The entire experience takes place within the browser and there are no conventional desktop applications. This means users do not have to deal with installing, managing and updating programs.

"Second, because all apps live within the browser, there are significant benefits to security. Unlike traditional operating systems, Chrome OS doesn't trust the applications you run. Each app is contained within a security sandbox making it harder for malware and viruses to infect your computer. Furthermore, Chrome OS barely trusts itself. Every time you restart your computer the operating system verifies the integrity of its code. If your system has been compromised, it is designed to fix itself with a reboot. While no computer can be made completely secure, we're going to make life much harder (and less profitable) for the bad guys. If you dig security, read the Chrome OS Security Overview or watch the video.

"Most of all, even though developers can view its source code and compile it, Chrome OS won't be available for download because it requires a special hardware configuration and it's not designed for multi-boot. Chrome OS is just the platform for Chrome OS netbooks. We are taking out every unnecessary process, optimizing many operations and running everything possible in parallel. This means you can go from turning on the computer to surfing the web in a few seconds. Our obsession with speed goes all the way down to the metal. We are specifying reference hardware components to create the fastest experience for Google Chrome OS," explains Google.

...................................................................
Microsoft's Gazelle project is very similar. But I do think that merely being a web machine won't show its full value at least for 2-3 years. I can work within Google Docs (and I do) or Zoho Office online, but I prefer OpenOffice on the desktop for a wide variety of more complex tasks. I can see its value, assuming it's a $100-$150 machine or so, but if someone takes the code and opens it up to a few big apps, then it will level a lot of Linux distros in its path. And that won't be a bad thing; they need move beyond KDE/Gnome at some point.
1097
General Software Discussion / Re: Chrome OS preview looks pretty cool
« Last post by zridling on November 24, 2009, 02:28 PM »
Great find, f0dder. When you consider what people would be using a Chrome machine for -- social networking, flickr, banking, travel arrangements, buying tickets, etc., if it's not reasonably secure, it would be a terrible device indeed! It takes my bank 10 business days to replace my debit card (not everyone accepts the temporary one they provide in the interim), you can imagine the hassle of a web machine that is too loose with your data, ID, and password info.
1098
General Software Discussion / Re: Chrome OS preview looks pretty cool
« Last post by zridling on November 24, 2009, 12:16 PM »
Google is asking developers to contribute to the Chrome extensions gallery -- an act that will put third party applications on both the Chrome browser and eventually the operating system.  Developers can contribute to the project by uploading their creations to the Developer Dashboard. You figure the best place to start would be the "Most Shared" in the Firefox Add-ons Gallery and work on porting some of those for Chrome.

"Once an extension is uploaded, our gallery takes care of packaging and signing. Updating an extension is also incredibly easy — all a developer needs to do is to upload a new file in the gallery. Finally, to further help developers, in the next few days, we plan to open up the gallery to a small group of trusted testers."
1099
Yea, I just wish Microsoft wouldn't pay them for the privilege. Book reviewers don't pay novelists; Murdoch doesn't pay the content creators of his newspapers' reports and stories; so why should Microsoft be the only one paying?

I'm sorry. I get Murdoch's 'Fair Use' point. What he's not telling you is that you can copy any WSJ.com headline, paste it into a Google search, and then read the entire story without paying a dime. At this point, he doesn't even want Google to post the first sentence or two of a report. Oh well.
1100
General Software Discussion / Re: Top Greasemonkey userscripts that you use
« Last post by zridling on November 24, 2009, 01:41 AM »
Wow, several of these are really helpful. Thanks April, et al.
Pages: prev1 ... 39 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 49 ... 131next