And if they choose to ignore it?

All it takes is a couple high profile sites to recognise this header. Something along the lines of "Hey, we see you requested DO-Not-track, and we'll honor this" . Once this feature and it's usage is in the average user's radar, it creates an incentive for the website to garner some karma. And as the web grows focuses more on privacy issues, this would very likely lead to content providers and advertisers honoring the header. I'd be interested in seeing how Mozilla and others promote this.

Chrome privacy window is of a different color. When you regularly use it, you immediately know when you're in privacy mode by the color. It's intuitive, and in no way confusing when you're used to it.

The best methodology would obviously be a blind test. divide a page into two, and present a set with 10 pairs of {Link, blurb} on both sides. Randomly assign which side Google/Bing is shown. Ask the user to try searches, and rate which he/she thinks was a better search.

If the formatting is the exact same, and no engine specific keywords (inurl, date range etc) are allowed, running this test on the internet for a couple days would give an unbiased estimate of search prowess. Something I've pondered about for a while..

If the students are going to slack off, they were never interested in what was going on. Simply ask that those not interested may not intermingle in anyway with others to disturb the others' concentration. Or better yet, leave the class.

Those who are interested would use laptops to their advantage, be it for reference, quick search, etc.

Interesting theory if you buy the premise that random X and Y chromosomes are on average more different than two random X chromosomes, and thus lead to a larger degree of mutations.

Can someone with some knowledge in genetics/related fields comment.

but someone got to actually run those servers also

Dont volunteer.. the servers will come down NOW!!

ZFS as it is today, even without any further feature additions, is miles ahead of any other FOSS filesystem in features and stability. As far as support goes, there is enough community and kernel expertize outside Oracle to atleast maintain the code (my employer Nexenta has made code contributions back into ZFS : the in-kernel iscsi code). So there is no reason for the doom and gloom.. that's the beauty of FOSS, you cant take back what you've provided.

~Anil

Nexenta uses apt. Illumos as yet is packaging independent. It's chosen by downstream distributions.

ouch! I was going for funny :(

Streiiständt üffect

I'm one of the NCP guys, and currently at Debconf. I'm hoping to engage the community about this. We'll have updates posted to the project on where NCP4 is headed soon.

The referenced OpenSolaris is not the code, but the distribution OpenSolaris (formerly project Indiana).

The most important bit (libc_i18n) is opened. The rest is in the process, and will be pushed into the repo in very short time.

(I'm in the project leadership team of Illumos)

We've opened the closed bits of libc - specifically the i18n portion of it.

What's still closed (and soon to be opened) is some additional drivers (mpt, etc) that are almost prepared to be released. All of the closed bits would be open in a short timeframe (weeks).

What you've quoted Garrett saying is in reference to OpenSolaris's code. That is followed by the announcement that we've opened it.

~Anil

Mike Arrington from techcrunch has an opposing take on the handshake
http://techcrunch.com/2009/05/09/hand-shaking-is-so-medieval-lets-end-it/