djcapelis

109 ms·

961.
by djcapelis 17y ago
There's "sandboxes" and then there's sandboxes. Native Client uses the latter while ActiveX had barely the former. It does present a real concern and exposing additional APIs is going to always present increased security risk. That said,
962.
by djcapelis 17y ago
But it isn't that far-fetched to say that some of the people behind Go did made substantial contributions to computer science. Which is indeed what he wrote. Whether those four particular aspects of their work are the same ones you'd po
963.
by djcapelis 17y ago
You're not using OpenID if you do this, you're using Google's id. It's fine if that's what you expose by default, but you really do need to give the user a checkbox or something so they can input their own if they have one. I have an OpenI
964.
by djcapelis 17y ago
The "Setting up more compose sequences" of http://canonical.org/~kragen/setting-up-keyboard.html is also helpful. (I don't use those exact sequences, some of them make little sense to me... but it's nice to see a bunch of examples on how
965.
by djcapelis 17y ago
The right there would be what we call a feature.
966.
by djcapelis 17y ago
I do this with webservers running trac all the time. Except I just restart the webserver I don't bounce the entire machine. I also find it relatively unbelievable that the linked post claims that restarting servers requires a 24/7 operatio
967.
by djcapelis 17y ago
It certainly doesn't have a right to publish those materials. It has every right to index them. I agree that Google News will need to die if the publishers don't want them to list their news there, but the actual search engine itself? Inde
968.
by djcapelis 17y ago
Copyright law doesn't cover google indexing the page for its search engine anymore than it covers me posting a list of my favorite songs on my blog. Would you argue that someone can't develop a song recommendation engine without acquiring
969.
by djcapelis 17y ago
Uhm. I didn't say the factory model was an argument for universal coverage. The argument however, that we couldn't take advantage of things like this in this country in part because we didn't have universal coverage, was. It appears you ma
970.
by djcapelis 17y ago
Will someone please inform Mr. Cuban that Google's opt-out procedure is entirely voluntary on their part and there's nothing that says they have to continue to offer it or abide by it? I'm really getting sick of reading about this harebrain
971.
by djcapelis 17y ago
You've just made an excellent argument for why universal coverage (of some sort, public or private) is essential. This is part of why some starry-eyed supporters predict cost savings. Hard to argue too much, it sounds like they do more for
972.
by djcapelis 17y ago
I'm in a completely separate group in a completely separate place who happens to have seen this link before. We haven't done anything worth linking to yet, just have a little bit of knowledge about this area since we've been looking at it
973.
by djcapelis 17y ago
It is, but I'm of the opinion that HTTP needs more than pragmatism to solve its woes at the moment. The latency issue with the protocol is just immense and this takes a whack at a main issue, but doesn't quite get to where it should. One o
974.
by djcapelis 17y ago
The naive implementation of this ruins all the elegance of caching which is very important in modern websites. You end up choosing between getting all the common elements shoved down the wire at you every time or invariably having to go ba
975.
by djcapelis 17y ago
Taxation takes a portion of what you make while this imposes a burden to buy something even if you don't have anything. I don't see the argument for how any of this violates property rights, but it's different from taxation. With taxation
976.
by djcapelis 17y ago
I re-read your post and wanted to clarify what you meant by: Apple (and previously NeXT) inarguably demonstrated its value and ease-of-use over the past 20 years. Producing x86-32, x86-64, armv6, armv7, and PPC binaries all from the
977.
by djcapelis 17y ago
OS X has a unified set of libraries to work with, Linux does not. This means the problem is much more complex. Creating a binary that simply runs on different distributions all on the same architecture is a fundamentally hard problem.
978.
by djcapelis 17y ago
As someone who has actually built binaries to run across multiple distros, this doesn't address even half the issues. Very few people are concerned about binaries that run on more than one architecture when distributing binaries that run o
979.
by djcapelis 17y ago
It's pleasant. Rough around the edges of course, but it's moving fast. And thanks, was lurking for a bit and then finally realized it was past time I created an account.
980.
by djcapelis 17y ago
Exherbo