Yeah but that company has the i-factor, this mysterious elixir that makes people get addicted to your meaningless electronic toy products as if they were crack.
Without that companies have to compete in an actual free market, where trying to be economically efficient and lowering your price is the key to survival.
Shroedinger's cat could be dead or alive. Each time I log in to Google+ on the other hand - it's dead.
"even watching can be mentally taxing if you wish."
only if your so fucking stupid that watching a bright orange 30 inch chunk of rubber being tossed around is mentally taxing
Troll? Gentlemen this should be modded 5: "Genius Irony" !
I don't understand, it's enough to just graze a microscopic layer off the tip of the firing pin to render the gun "unidentifiable" ?
Yet Another Google Language.
There might not have been a lot of travel back then, but there was enough.
2000 years ago at the height of the Roman Empire there was *a lot* of travelling. Not all of it by will...
Considering that we have no proof that Jacob is a real person who actually existed, let alone having any surviving genetic sample from him, I think any attempt to assert that a person living today descended from Jacob or not is nonsense.
As an Earthling I feel like throwing in the towel and getting the hell out of this dump of a rock a while now.
You are comparing two different things in this context. jQuery isn't meant to insulate you from what you describe as "browser craziness". jQuery is meant to give you browser abstraction, while still speaking browser.
GWT on the other hand gives you the ability to develop with a desktop-like API and behaviour inside the browser, which comes at a price. GWT is much slower to develop in then simple HTML/CSS/JS and this insulation also means you are too detached from the underlying HTML/CSS which isn't necessarily good when you do want to think in terms of HTML/CSS for validation / accessibility / SEO purposes.
For people familiar with HTML/CSS/JS doing simple stuff with a couple of jQuery lines is preferable to GWT. In really depends on the context.
I work as a Java developer and we're building websites on an SOA architecture with restful backends. In this regard we see the web app as "just another client".
We use spring MVC for the browser-facing server app, and Jersey for the backend (I use the terms loosely here because this backend is still public-facing since it serves the mobile apps as well, so it is in itself a standalone secure web app).
We use velocity or freemarker for the web app pages.
I would warm-heartedly recommend this setup, it's hard to go wrong with it. That said, it's only one valid approach.
GWT is good if you want to create a RIA, when the presentation logic is so complex developing it in javascript is a nightmare, but without having to use Flash or silverlight. If the presentation is simple enough however, I would stick to HTML5 + jQuery. In fact the "simple enough" bar in that last statement is gradually pushed forward.
As a rule of thumb I'd say if you have a lot of moving parts on the page and you are basically creating a desktop application inside the browser ala Google docs, then consider GWT. Otherwise it will do more harm than good.
If the US wants to block a given
What's the obsession with
What I'm suggesting will create anarchy in TLDs, that is true. But in practice nothing really has to change. The registry for
In practice 99.9% there won't be any issues, and the rest of the time it will be around politics or intellectual property. But it is exactly this potential of fragmentation and anarchy that will guarantee the global neutrality of the "global" TLDs.
I think your understanding kinda sucks. The US didn't "build" the internet. US-based researchers developed the initial concepts and protocols that are the foundation of the internet. "The US" didn't build the communication infrastructure in Europe, Canada or the Middle East. "The US" didn't raise ISPs around the world and didn't connect households in Norway to communication hubs.
"The US" can't tell an ISP in Germany or Brazil what IP address to map a given domain name to. If those ISPs decided to map it to something else, there is fuck all "The US" can do about it.
I don't understand one thing - all of this is based on David Sanger's book, which in turn is based on "unnamed US, European and Israeli sources".
Other than the author's reputation, do we have anything resembling evidence that this isn't just a science fiction book being sold?
Nobody. As in "I think Nobody should have complete control over the internet".
The internet is a global "region". I don't use the word "resource" here because I don't consider it a resource in this context. I think it's more comparable to international waters. There are globally accepted rules about international waters and the global community enforces them. Any country with a coast also has a portion of the sea which is considered "theirs" and within it their rules apply. But the rest of it belongs to no one.
I think the same thing should happen to the internet. And let's be frank, by "the internet" here we mean control of TLDs, as everything else derives from that. The US government can then block "fuckamerica.com" from within the US, but not completely take it down in the rest of the world. That's the way it should be.
I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"
