Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Golden Hammer (Score 1) 175

by NotInHere (#48181127) Attached to: JavaScript and the Netflix User Interface

That "somebody" is W3C. And if Microsoft doesn't implement it in their internet explorer, the fact that it is a "standard interface" is not the fault of "browser vendors", but of microsoft. and browser vendors (even microsoft) have aligned their js implementations.

So yes, there is no "generally accepted" standard interface, when you define "generally accepted" as being runnable on IE8. But when you can afford to say to your users "get a modern browser" (still don't understand why google discontinued their chrome frame), you can use that standard interface. In the meantime, you can write in HTML5 and provide a flash fallback, there are lots of good libraries that provide you with such a solution without much effort from you.

Comment: Re:Golden Hammer (Score 2) 175

by NotInHere (#48178471) Attached to: JavaScript and the Netflix User Interface

You are right in principle. All it takes is to make the browser a real VM environment with security guarantees, a standardized interface, etc. But that is not going to happen anytime soon,

... because the standardized interface has already happened, or is happening:

The fact that browsers have such a large userbase, and its incredibly easy to make browsers execute potentially evil javascript, js is one of the most secure and best sandboxed languages that exist, that is still powerful. OK there are things as canvas tracking, and webgl shaders. But show me something that supports truly secure accelerated graphics.

When I run my browser, I choose which file to upload. A program running on my computer can read every file I can read. When an application wants to access my webcam, it asks me. On the desktop the application simply accesses my webcam. On you can even write a keylogger without having extra privileges.

Comment: Re:Why the hell... (Score 4, Insightful) 175

by NotInHere (#48177647) Attached to: JavaScript and the Netflix User Interface

First JVM is not language-specific:
Second, javascript can be the compile target of LLVM bytecode. You can compile your favourite C program to js. See emscripten:
Third, javascript has a very fast but still backwards compatible bytecode like subset called asm.js:
asm.js can be set as target for emscripten. The browsers supporting asm.js simply JIT it to bytecode, and those which don't still can run asm.js, but way slower.

Comment: One of the worst points about systemd (Score 5, Interesting) 507

by NotInHere (#48169517) Attached to: Debian Talks About Systemd Once Again

is for me that it isn't interoperable. Please correct me when I'm wrong, but AFAIK systemd never did anything to create standards their new functionality is compatible with. Instead they only support linux APIs. I recognize that their needs exceed POSIX, but their current approach "lets make everything a hard dependency" is -to be polite- hacky. It doesn't have to be an official ISO standard, a simple document that ensures exchangeability of components inside systemd, and perhaps even makes systemd cross-platform.

Comment: Re:Given that the mobile world has moved to apps.. (Score 1) 46

by NotInHere (#48160511) Attached to: Microsoft's JavaScript Engine Gets Two-Tiered Compilation

Browsers are the most secure and privacy preserving way today to execute programs on your computer. They maintain a clear separation between the data on your HDD and theirs, if they need access to your camera they ask you, and it has become really hard to develop an exploit to break out of this sandbox. Because of xkcd 1200, I usually avoid using closed source apps on my desktop, but inside a browser I know it doesn't steal my data, or break something else in my system. Do you remember all those "splash screens" that appeared when you have logged in, advertising some bloaty software? In the browser there are no splash screens. I know, app stores also ensure standards and such, but browsers are still better, as they ensure basic features (copy text, ctrl f etc) I need in everyday computer use.

+ - After Negative User Response, ChromeOS To Re-Introduce Support For Ext{2,3,4}

Submitted by NotInHere
NotInHere (3654617) writes "Only three days after the large public has known about ChromeOS to disable ext2fs support for external drives, and linux users voiced many protests on websites like reddit, slashdot, or the issue tracker, the ChromeOS team now plans to support it again. To quote Ben Goodger's comment:"

Thanks for all of your feedback on this bug. We’ve heard you loud and clear.

We plan to re-enable ext2/3/4 support in immediately. It will come back, just like it was before, and we’re working to get it into the next stable channel release.""

+ - Ask Slashdot: increasing browser cache will result in increase or decrease in br 2

Submitted by ltorvalds11
ltorvalds11 (3774511) writes "In Mozilla Firefox we have a option to set cache size as we wish. It can be 100MB or 2GB or more. Cache memory is suppose to increase browsing speed as browser does not have to download frequent HTML,CSS, image, etc. What if someone has set it browser to use very large cache ? Will it increase browsing speed or decrease browsing speed as browser has to scan to very large sets of folders and files before loading the website ?"

What this country needs is a good five dollar plasma weapon.