Disqus - Latest Comments for naiserie

Re: The Technology Liberation Front » Archive » Ajax Revolution

naiserie — Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:54:18 -0000

Hmm. I've played with this a few times and the problem I kept having was that since I'm a FF user, I kept accidentally closing the tab Meebo was open in. Also, due to FF excessive memory leakage, I have a habit of closing and reopening every hour or so...signing in all over again is a hassle.

All in all, it's a good idea, but with some things (IM clients), my habits are so hardwired, that a desktop client (miranda, trillian, gaim) suits my needs much better.

Your general point re:Ajax is true...though I think there are an increasing number of "wow Ajax" apps that aren't very unique or useful in any way (i.e. the dozens of Ajax start pages). Moreover, there are privacy issues (especially with this sort of application, or email clients) which aren't always clarified by the vendors, as well as dependancy issues (i.e. network stability, offline work etc). I do think Ajax applications will continue to show innovation and change the way people interact online, but there is a lot of garbage that will have to be sorted through.

Re: The DMCA versus Computer Hobbyists

naiserie — Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:23:11 -0000

Yay, more reasons not to use MS!!!

Seriously though, very few people will bend over for this sort of thing. Who is going to drop money on a brand new machine immediately simply because it's "certified"?

Moreover, it's only a matter of time before the protection is cracked...someone somewhere will code the bios/firmware enabling those of us who prefer to continue using XP or *nix to view/record despite the DRM. Then we'll get more of the same "piracy is bankrupting hollywood" drivel.

As evidenced by reactions to this story (and the ongoing DRM drama generally), I don't think this sort of strategy from MS will payoff in the long run. Consumers want flexibility with their content, and one way or another ("illegally" if need be) most of us will have it. Statements regarding restricted usage from MS and others are direct challeges to teh haxxors out there, and more often than not, teh haxxors win.

Re: DRM vs. Fair Use

naiserie — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 14:21:49 -0000

DMCA supporters? Such people exist? (outside of Hollywood & the Beltway?)

Re: The Technology Liberation Front » Archive » Are Young Libertarians Anti-IP?

naiserie — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:32:47 -0000

I'd place myself more in the "wacko anarchist" camp (that's some "engaging" rhetoric); and (after having just read it) am also clearly too stupid "to fully grasp the import of [his] book chapter on the topic".

Nevertheless, the ageist implication of his little rant (and apparent emailings), is easily turned on its head. There is a new economy. There are new technologies. He is too obstinate to deal with them (I refrain from fully flipping his bigotry).

Want to solve piracy? Let me download Lost or the Daily Show for 25 cents as it airs, and play it on my ipod, computer, and burn to disc to watch on my DVD player (I'd go as high as $1, but I don't think the advertising lost is worth much more per viewer--which would be an interesting study in itself).

Honestly though, kudos, Tim, for making a slight effort to engage someone who doesn't appear to be willing to listen in the least.

Re: Microsoft-only Government

naiserie — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 09:04:29 -0000

While I understand your point about formats, Tim, I'm not sure it's the biggest deal in this case. Not only because there are 2 different work arounds in place, but also because PureEdge is shooting for a November 06 multiplatform support.

As it happens, I work in a major research department, and have worked with scientists preparing applications using Mac's with no problems at all, using both the Citrix method and VirtualPC. Sure it's a teensy bit more work than using a PC, but nothing mind bogglingly prohibitive.

Again, I agree with your sentiments about formats, but in this case, I don't think they are, as you state "requiring someone to acquire a particular operating system or web browser in order to participate in a government program." If there were no workarounds or efforts to accomodate Mac's, then sure, it's inexcusable.

Also, how exactly does your bit about designing websites for PC's and Mac's fit into this?

Re: Microsoft-only Government

naiserie — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 09:52:14 -0000

Tim,
The Citrix method does not require purchasing a copy of Windows. Why do you think it does? You are right about VirtualPC.

MikeT,
The article doesn't go into the greatest depth about the exactly how the application process works, but the problems for Mac users have nothing to do with the website not being compatible for them.

Re: Microsoft-only Government

naiserie — Tue, 14 Feb 2006 10:20:39 -0000

Tim,

Go look! www.grants.gov...it's free and open to all to examine the process. Hell, you could even try it out yourself, I'm sure you are eligible to apply for some grant or other. They use some software (PureEdge Viewer, developers of which were recently acquired by IBM *I think*) to download, complete, and submit the applications electronically.

The Citrix method logs into their server directly, and is free.

Re: Microsoft-only Government

naiserie — Wed, 15 Feb 2006 14:16:55 -0000

MikeT,

Yes, the software can only be used on Macs using one of the work arounds I described above. Again, I don't think it's the best solution to require platform specific software, but they are working on supporting Macs, there are work arounds in place (which in my experience are fairly simple to use), so I don't see what the fuss is about. In 9 months (or whenever Macs are supported) it will be a non-issue anyways.

Re: Video Security Blanket

naiserie — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:29:05 -0000

http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography@metzdo...

Looks like people have been well on their way to cracking this standard since it was made public.

It's fun to see the entertainment industry creating new incentives to engage in piracy.

I tend to think that piracy is the market force that will actually change the industry's thinking re: DRM. If content creators can continue to profit despite piracy (and their claims to the contrary), they could afford to reduce the cost of the content sans DRM, thereby removing much of the incentive to engage in piracy. My grasp of all things economics isn't stellar, but is there any reason this wouldn't work?

Re: A Few Snooty Words about Technological Etiquette

naiserie — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 10:09:39 -0000

I beg you, as a professional pedestrian roaming DC, that you never ever ever talk on your cellphone while you drive. I don't care how well you *think* you can handle both tasks at once. While studies provide conflicting evidence about exactly how hazardous it may be, minimizing distractions while driving, cellphone use, eating, or otherwise, should be encouraged. While your gargantuan brain no doubt enables you to walk and chew gum at the same time, you are unlikely to kill anyone in the process of doing so.

Sorry, but drivers in DC should be ticketed for using cellphones, eating, playing with the radio, or anything else that might distract them long enough to run me over while I cross the street.

Re: Is pay-as-you-go the devil?

naiserie — Thu, 02 Mar 2006 15:24:01 -0000

I guess that'd be one way of solving the p2p problem...

Also, regarding the "ISPs' concerns about who is paying for their networks"...I'm fairly certain the ISPs owe tax payers around $200 billion worth of undelivered networks. I'll happily pay for my 100+ gigabyte usage/month from my share of that pot.

Re: The Economist Speaks Out Against Regulation

naiserie — Fri, 10 Mar 2006 11:31:41 -0000

meh, the more I read re: network neutrality, the less of a big deal the whole affair becomes.

MikeT: I suppose you will be appointed to determine the "legitimate services"?