Entries:
Comments:
Posts:

Loading User Information from Channel 9

Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9

Latest Achievement:

Loading User Information from MSDN

Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN

Visual Studio Achievements

Latest Achievement:

Loading Visual Studio Achievements

Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements

Discussions

William Kempf wkempf
  • Cyber warfare and Hollywood cowardice

    @ScanIAm: Huh, so now you're claiming it is NK?

    In any case, what you just said is just "blaming the victim". You can't really compare this to calling in a bomb threat, though I'll point out that that is illegal as well. They didn't just make threats in the same way they didn't just attack our culture. They exposed private information that can literally ruin lives. Sorry, you can't minimize what these hackers have done. Could it have been "schoolboy shenanigans"? Nope, sorry. May have been done by some teenager that thought he was having lolz, but what's been done can never be labeled as "shenanigans". You can, and should, label it as terrorism, even if it was "done for the lolz".

  • Cyber warfare and Hollywood cowardice

    @ScanIAm: All true. I have to backtrack a little bit on my own statement above. I questioned the validity of the tie to NK from the beginning. The main stream media reporting the FBI links NK to the attack is what brought me around to what I said above. Gut reaction, because I usually question government as well. At this point, I find it likely NK is responsible, but I don't have proof, and I'm reluctant to accept reports, even from our government, without evidence.

    If it wasn't NK or some other state government it's still an act of terrorism... and deserves extreme response. There's no way to label it as an act of war, however, if it's not state sponsored. So, that was hyperbole on my part.

    I guess the main reason I reacted so quickly and passionately to the OP was @JohnAskew labeling it a "cultural attack". I could give a flip about that. This was far more than a cultural attack, or even "just" an attack on a corporation. Serious damage has been done to all of the employees and to many people who have just had some sort of contact with Sony. This was a terrorist attack and not just an attack on our culture.

  • Cyber warfare and Hollywood cowardice

    , JohnAskew wrote

    I think we are at war because we are being attacked culturally.

    This was much more than a cultural attack. Only congress can decide whether or not we're at war, but this was a state sponsored terrorist attack and should be treated like an act of war.

  • love this bit on the angular web site

    @figuerres: Amen. The attacks grew out of hand, and the name calling (on both sides) was unnecessary. Surprised this thread didn't get locked.

    , Bass wrote

    *snip*

    You are right. There is deficiencies on the web for highly interactive apps that need to be sorted out for the web to literally take over everything, if that's what we even want in the first place. But the whole "web is crap, we need to replace it entirely" is just another Itanium processor.

    You can fix all of the deficiencies, and most users will still prefer native apps. The browser chrome adds complexity that users have to struggle with, and given an alternative where that doesn't exist, they'll choose the alternative. I never claimed "web is crap", I claimed it's the wrong tool for most applications. The push to put all applications into the browser is stupid. The benefits perceived (deployment, management, updates, discoverability) can be achieved in far more productive ways if we abandoned the notion that all apps should be web apps. The web was not designed for applications.

    , Bass wrote

    *snip*

    And in the case of the Facebook apps, it's more that Apple's JavaScript VM in the iPhone is a turd sandwich.

    Which explains why Android and WP users prefer Facebook apps how?

  • love this bit on the angular web site

    , Bass wrote

    *snip*

    I stand by that. Webdev is popular, surely, but not because it's inherently developer friendly. Web is picked for other reasons. Like for instance, imagine if Channel 9 wasn't a website, but an *.exe you had to download. Is the dev productivity advantages worth that? Some people here I'm sure are like HELL YEA!!! F* WEB THE WEB!!, but reality seems to point differently. I personally couldn't imagine using an executable fat client to do something the web does pretty well.

    Channel 9 is doing what the web does well: document distribution, linking and searching. It's not what I'd call an application at all. Right tool for the right job. Most applications, however, don't fit this model, AT ALL. Then the web is no longer the right tool for the job.

    That said, I'll also point out that most users actually do prefer native clients over the web for things like C9 and Facebook. No one uses their phones browser to interact with Facebook, they all use a Facebook application. There's a reason for that. :)

  • love this bit on the angular web site

    @Bass: The type of development you're describing, isn't being done with JS/HTML either. It's being done with Haskell, LISP, Erlang and several other non-mainstream languages. Or it's being done in venerable C or C++.

    JS/HTML is being used for the here today, gone tomorrow, consumer products. Occasionally it will be used for your enterprise application as well, but almost always in conjunction with Java or .NET. The boring stuff you don't care about, where the vast majority of development actually occurs, is owned by Java/C++/.NET. The truly innovative research stuff... that's not using any mainstream language.

    So, no, .NET hasn't sunk, it's not sinking (yet, anyway) and you're POV is skewed. That's fine, because you're choosing tools for what's appropriate for what you're doing. I've got no beef with that... just don't think your domain is more significant than it is. Because, it's not.

  • love this bit on the angular web site

    @Bass: BS. .NET isn't a sinking ship, and "modern" is not HTML/JS. I hardly hate UI development... I hate web development. Or, more specifically, I hate using HTML/JS to create applications, whether they are on the web or not. Those are the wrong tools for the job. I don't need to use .NET, I can code in a very large number of languages (including HTML/JS... I've done more than my share of that). I'll choose the appropriate tool for the job at hand, thank you. That means I will choose HTML/JS from time to time... but it's rare that it's for application development.

  • love this bit on the angular web site

    @Bas: None. They'll just claim that Angular is the answer. It's not, but they've deluded themselves for two decades, why stop now?

  • What's up with update quality MS?

    @magicalclick: Nope. The "chrome" still coordinates the tabs, among other things. It can still crash... and said crashes can be caused by problems in the tabs themselves. As @Bas says, every modern browser uses separate process for each tab, and yet we've all seen "the entire browser" crash. I can't agree totally with @Bas, I've seen tabs crash but the browser continue just fine on several occasions. So, the concept does work at least some of the time. There's also reasons other than "so only the tab crashes instead of the entire browser" for have a process per tab. Regardless, though, making it so that "the browser" never crashes is a pipe dream akin to finding a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. Good luck with that.

  • What's up with update quality MS?

    @spivonious: Running a separate process in each tab should reduce the likelihood of the whole thing crashing... but there is simply no way to entirely prevent taking down the entire thing. It's not realistic to say "never". To say "rarely", or in this case just complaining that the whole thing crashes in these situations would be more realistic, but that's not what he said.