>> The security issue is a valid question.

Not really. WebGL, like OpenGL, Glide or D3D is just an API abstraction. The way MS would likely implement WebGL (or WebD3D) is as a "wrapper" layer that would re-interpret all the WebGL calls to another lower level API - essentially, a shim would exist that would use lower level APIs, but not expose them. The layer that deals with the WebGL calls can be as hard as the engineers make it - there is no requirement in the WebGL spec that the API provide unfiltered access to lower level system APIs.

What MS is saying is actually just not factually accurate. I'm pretty surprised more haven't caught on to that.

> But even if it is harder to break into a cloud service, the reward:effort ratio is much, MUCH higher for the cloud service.

That's a darn good point.

Or stored on anything connected to the net at all? Do you really think most people's personal computing equipment (including - maybe especially - their smart phones) is more secure than a cloud service?

If I were betting on which, as a class of internet connected storage - cloud services, or personal hardware - is more secure, I'd bet on cloud services.

I guess I have the same problem with that scope as I did with the healthcare reform push by Barack Obama and the democrats - you really need to aim for something much higher than what you'll settle for. We need to be selling paper ballots - not agreeing to a system we know is extremely problematic, before there is even a discussion. There's so little benefit gained from using OSS in computerized voting machines, when compared with not using computerized machines at all. I don't see the point in making it a goal. In other words, seek what you want, not what you'll settle for.

Cheating is always possible and will always be attempted. What you want is a system that makes it harder to cheat. Paper ballots required a coordinated effort by a lot of people to cheat - that's why you see so much voter intimidation and other screwy (and visible) tactics when votes are cast on paper.

E-Voting machines - they just need one or two strategically placed individuals to heavily skew the results - that's why voter intimidation tactics decrease with these machines (come on NAACP - why do you think intimidation decreases?).

Open source does nothing to address this problem - using these machines, all you do is boil the system down to a very small target for tampering, and at the same time, increase the impact of that tampering. Open source software provides only false assurance, and can still be easily replaced by tampering with just a few people.

If it was open source software running on a micro architecture, it still wouldn't matter. The fact that they are machines is what the problem is. In NY we use a lever system - they are also problematic for the same reason, though at least you can look inside the thing and see what it's doing - and tell when tampering has occurred. With a computer you can NEVER EVER look inside and see what it's running, no matter how clean you think the millions of lines of open source code you looked at last week are.

Please gain some sanity - you can never EVER trust these machines. It's a PHYSICAL impossibility. Wise up.

Pen and paper is the least problematic, most accurate way to do polling. It's even the cheapest - but it's the hardest to tamper with - which is why politicians don't like it. This isn't hard to understand, so let's get with understanding it.

I have to say, out of all the alternative languages (to the web languages I'm used to JavaScript/ActionScript/PHP) I've been most interested in learning that one. All I need is a Mac! :-/

I think I'll look for a good Snow Leopard hacintosh guide.

Does that do object literals (json), closures, and dynamic (untyped) variables (sometimes those are nice to have). I know on the desktop there is a garbage collector, but that's not available on the iPhone (not necessarily bad).

That's why I once held hope for Adobe's Actionscript 3.0 - it promised static (I read lower level) language support with the richness of ECMAScript (JavaScript) - but they seem to have implemented their static class system on top of ECMAScript underpinnings, without addressing the shortcomings of their dynamic runtime (it's still crazy hard to debug dynamic code written in AS3, and it's slow). So we ended up with all the bondage and discipline of a static language, without any of the performance benefit. I guess that's par for the course for Adobe.

Anyway, I'd still love to see a language like that - one that provides all the lower level, bare metal features of a language like C, with the higher level runtime sweetness of JavaScript (one for performance critical libraries, the other for tying it together).

Well, you are talking about the dumb crap the corporate media is whining about - I don't care how much emotion he shows, I don't think it matters.

What I want is a bold mission statement, a vision - something to get behind. I want him to lead. His problem is he's a process guy, and so he comes off as wishy washy, aimless and emotionless (which is what the no-nothing media has picked up on). He needs to have some kind of vision to point to in all of his messaging. Something different from the Reagan era, something new - something that signifies change is coming. A Green energy push would be nice - or anything that indicates real benefit for working and middle income citizens.

Ultimately I do think he is just another trickle-down free-market Chicago school of economics failure - but I was hoping he could see the error of his ways, and reach for something a bit more inline with the truest American values. THat's maybe a tall ordre, considering the place the culture in DC is today, but I don't think that's too much to ask.