I agree. I salute them for their courage and I applaud their perseverance and I embrace them for their faith in the face of adversarial forces.

That makes sense, thank you, and that goes for everyone else who has posted insightful answers as well. :)

I really wasn't trolling, some people have just been arguing that Apple really doesn't want other ways to access applications than through the app store. (There was something about a C64 emulator being removed as well.)

So I just didn't understand why HTML5 was OK then, when it gives at least some of the same possibilities.

So again, thank you for your time everyone. :)

How did you guess? :)

The Flash games I have seen people play lately have certainly had better graphics, but I'm not sure they're more advanced. Usually it's something about hitting a ball or throwing a penguin or something like that. I don't see many people playing huge, deep games, it's usually something very simplistic.

Alright, thank you for your time. :)

Admittedly this is far from Quake 2, but it's still an HTML5 game for the iPhone:

http://purplefloyd.wordpress.com/2010/02/04/html5-platform-game-for-iphone/

With proper optimization, don't you think most 2D games could run pretty well in HTML5?

This is a serious question: Why does Apple appear to be OK with HTML5, but not with Flash? There are lots of posts claiming Apple is "afraid" of Flash, because the app store is their cash cow and Flash is a threat to that.

Now, I realize there is a lot more Flash content than HTML5 content, but isn't the basic principle the same? Couldn't I go make just about any game in HTML5 right now and have it work on the iPhone and iPad?

Is it because the source for any HTML5 game is viewable that Apple think "serious" game developers will avoid it?

Or another reason I'm missing?

Thanks. :)

Pretty much everyone involved here screwed up and it's a horrible tragedy. However, Wikileaks could certainly have handled this better and parent is IMO right about the things he points out that Wikileaks did wrong. The video speaks for itself, we didn't need all the other stuff and we didn't need to be told in advance those objects were cameras and not weapons. They could have told us afterwards instead and perhaps we'd go: "Oh, wow, I too was certain that guy peeking around the corner was pointing an RPG at the chopper!" Also, what was the deal with the son of one of the men who were killed? I mean, this is about the actions of the soldiers. If two soldiers each shoot an unarmed and innocent man, should we then go: "Oh, it's no big deal about this one over here, because he had no kids." How is the soldier supposed to know who has children and who don't?

(Oh, and why is this on every European news site, but not on the major American ones?)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0O4mm3hXNgA

I thought the definition of a machine was something about moving parts?

That's how I see it too. The first version was better.

Fair enough, but then what is the point of a statement like: "We're coming to the end of a decade."? Aren't we every year?

Fixing bad moderation.

Are you serious? So all the decades go from xxx0 To xxx9, except the first one, which went from 1 to 10? So the year 10 was in two different decades?

We're only entering the 2010th year now. When it's over, the decade will be over.

No one is allowed to steal my code by breaking into my house or hacking my server and I will do what I can to prevent that from happening. However, if someone obtains my code, one way or another, they can do anything with it that they want, because it's really just a big number, and I shouldn't be able to sue people for distributing a number, whether it's just one byte, like 0x2F, or millions of bytes.

So I should be able to sue the thief for breaking into my house, but not for putting my code online. The latter would be like if I had a painting hanging in my living room of the number "67". If the thief steals my painting, I can sue him for that, but if he decides to write the number "67" everywhere online, I shouldn't be able to sue him for that. It's just a number and it shouldn't belong to anyone, regardless of how big it is.

I have had data stolen from me in the past, and I only have myself to blame. I would never sell code with the disclaimer: "I like this sequence of 0s and 1s. If you feed it to your computer, it will do some fancy things for you. However, this is a very good number, and I made it up, so you're not allowed to give it to anyone else. They have to buy it from me."

This is of course what's done everywhere. People sell big numbers, known as software, which they then sue other people for distributing.

As it is now, you can't own small numbers, but you can own big numbers. Who set that arbitrary limit? It's certainly not very scientific: "Well, this number is short, so that's for everyone. Oh, you made a big number? Sure, let's sue anyone who shares that number online."

I don't believe that anyone should be able to own a piece of information or a number. I don't care how long my number is or how long it took me or cost me to make that number, it's still just a big number. That is why I no longer sell my code, but now sell my time as a developer instead.