I'm surprised none of the browser vendors hired the author of this virtual machine, which beats both V8 and TraceMonkey in the shootout benchmarks by a wide margin.
I'm hoping Google or Mozilla does that eventually, it'd be a pity if he got hired by a closed source browser vendor.

I never tried Moonlight, but all vm / interpreted languages can usually call native code. That's with .NET, Python, Java, etc.

Sure, but we're talking about web apps, there's a different standard of openness, accessibility and security we expect from those. Neither javascript in browsers nor actionscript in flash allow native code.

While personally I think Mono is a very nice piece of technology, in many ways superior to the Java platform... in my eyes Miguel lost all credibility back when he endorsed OOXML and later Silverlight.
Helping Microsoft embrace/extend the web with Silverlight by giving the illusion that it's cross-platform was the last straw.
For reference, Silverlight is neither cross-platform by design, because it's able to call native DLLs, or in practice because Moonlight is waaay behind.

Overengineering your first proof-of-concept implementation is a good way to get overwhelmed by its complexity and never complete it.

very much like having sex

I don't understand, what is this "sex" you speak of?

It's nice to know that there are alternative fuels, but that doesn't solve anything. There's a bazillion things produced from oil: rubbers, plastics, fertilizers...
And the article seems to only take personal gas usage into account, ignoring how dependant industries are on oil. It's considerably easier for a person/family to scale down gas usage than for 20 ton trucks and agricultural equipment or aircraft.
There's no way that very high oil prices will not significantly affect the economy, they'll make a lot of products and processes infeasibly expensive. I don't think the average family will be very concerned about gas usage when they'll have trouble affording or finding food (which today is mostly grown far from the consumer, using tons of oil for planting, fertilization, processing and shipment.)

I wonder why my employer's WebSense filter blocked it as being "tasteless." Any ideas?

I'm not sure how "tasteless" is grounds for blocking at all.

So if i write a book - and you buy one physical copy from me - you should be able to rewrite that book digitally and give it to the world?

In my scenario, sure, I just don't see why, since digital copies would be available anyway. (At least if you were a smart author who wanted to reach a wide audience.)

If i write something - who says the world should see it - what if i only want 100 people to have it?

Either you trust those 100 people, or you don't give them access to your infinite resource. Regardless, artificially restricting your audience is not a good business model.

i like this idea - as it presents another way of compromising, and eventually reaching that happy medium.

I'd be fine with DRM as long as it wasn't running on hardware I own, which conflicts with the fact that I also want to have access to content I bought or downloaded, from the very same hardware.

Without the incentive of making money (either extra or a living) these works would not otherwise exist.

Except selling copies is not the only way of making money off art and literature. Commissions have worked fine before the advent of copyright (technical works in particular could be commissioned by universities or enterprises.) Selling scarce goods bundled with intellectual works is already being employed by artists.
The only thing standing in the way of creators making money without charging for digital copies is the sense of entitlement that they (and their children) should be paid for every copy ever made.

Careful with connlimit, it's pretty easy to DoS yourself. Its implementation has O(N) computational complexity, for each packet that gets classified by it. (It iterates all remembered connections to check if they're still alive.)
That said, a limit of 20 should work fine.

Seems like the Indian government has found a more effective way of building a great wall around its borders - let the people outside build it.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like Go. The coding style of the standard library is an ugly CamelCase style thing that just makes me want to run away. But it has some very interesting programming paradigms behind it. And Google is using it to some extent already. Maybe they have something even better that they don't tell the world about yet. I mean, that's a very central aspect of their daily bread, I can't imagine them not have thought about it for long and deep hours.

Go seems more like an experiment in language design than a real effort at creating a practical language. Go's developers took way too many controversial design decisions that polarize programmers, and it only takes one to give up on a language.

Some obvious off-putting aspects of Go:
* case influences semantics
* whitespace sensitivity wrt. { placement
* lack of exceptions or a nice way of propagating errors, like ADTs, all you get are MRVs
* explicit this declarations
* ugly reverse syntax for types
* no equality operator for structs or arrays
* and no operator or method overloading

Then again, it's an improvement over C, so it might find some use.

Sadly, only C# 1.0 and 2.0 are open standards. All the goodies of C# 3.0 and 4.0 weren't included in any standards yet, and 3.0 is already 3 years old.

It's a pity. It wouldn't even have to be open source, but a free license for open source apps would be nice.
They're not going to make C# ubiquitous in the open source world if they don't cater to open source developers. Java is a better investment for them, despite being technologically inferior, because they can reuse code and skills between desktop and mobile development.

It's not actively making it harder, it's just making it so that people actually have to show they have a right to license the content that way. How would you like it if you released something under a particular license, and then somebody else got the content, then put it out under some other license which you didn't approve of? Maybe the Czech government just wants to be sure that anything they're being asked to protect in certain ways is actually being done right.

I don't see how it needs special casing, it's copyright infringement. I'm no fan of the Berne Convention, but it requires copyright to be automatic and involve no formal registration. It's only fair to either uphold that treaty for both copyright and copyleft, or neither.
Neither would be the preferred solution. Registration would simplify a lot of things and ensure survival of works throughout the ages if coupled with compulsory archival in national libraries.
You could even legitimately call unauthorized use or fraudulent registration of unregistered works "theft" then.