Disqus - Latest Comments for Brian Liu

Re: Lent Commitments and Goals

Brian Liu — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 05:41:32 -0000

Quite a bit. I need to do like you, instead of complaining that I have no time (which I seem to have misplaced between my 6 classes and 4 organizations and 2 blogs and 2 sites), I need to make time and push out all the crap which isn't worthwhile. I just need to balance the need to be productive and the need to stay sane... and you may think im kidding. Encouraging.

Re: Lent Commitments and Goals

Brian Liu — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 05:41:32 -0000

Re: 2 hours versus 50 minutes

Brian Liu — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:22:49 -0000

speaking of externals mine just died to power surge. i loathe you electricity, i do.

thinking of getting some semantic web online data action...

Re: 2 hours versus 50 minutes

Brian Liu — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:22:49 -0000

speaking of externals mine just died to power surge. i loathe you electricity, i do.

thinking of getting some semantic web online data action...

Re: 2008/08/29/ubiquity-will-not-be-ubiquitous/

Brian Liu — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 01:37:46 -0000

While I do understand both the views of Rob and "Random Visitor", I believe that the purpose of releasing in 0.1 was to show proof-of-concept. While the benefits may still not be great, it definitely shows potential for a largely-used framework.

Essentially, they are building a portion of the Contextual Web, albeit very early-stage. With the Semantic Web sitting server-side, the Contextual Web may sit client-side to preserve privacy. Ubiquity may provide necessary contextual information (which may be automated in the future).

Personally, I feel that Ubiquity has large potential and Mozilla made the right move in developing a new platform since the Semantic Web is out of their sandbox.

Re: If buggy smartphones are the “new reality”, here’s some free advice for handset makers

Brian Liu — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 18:22:56 -0000

Mobile phones used to have 4-year development cycles, but due to consumer pressure and CEOs making ridiculous promises, the development cycle has been compacted into as little as 6 months. This is not enough time for accurate testing on all fronts (variables double out in the field).

Furthermore, over-the-air updates are not used due to hacking. Though there could be copious amounts of security, one fail would mean complete loss of mobile communication in large areas, if not nationwide.

Features cannot be cut since the products will not sell. Apple could afford it only because it was riding the success of the iPod - other, unpopular companies cannot do the same. While I agree that there needs to be a better balance of features and quality, there isn't too much leeway especially because handset manufacturers are doing especially bad in this economic downturn.

I agree transparency is a great thing - but it may also cause a PR nightmare. There needs to be great discretion in revealing problems especially in a field where consumers understand little. Discussing problems may only make consumers more disgruntle or panicked.

Operators (Networks) control everything. EVERYTHING. They choose which phones are allowed and which ones are not. Again, Apple had a lot of leverage due to their popularity, but ultimately lost out to AT&T control. It isn't as simple as "keeping operators out" - laws would need to be instated and Networks would have to yield control (they definitely won't go easily).