TechProsaic

Hi honey. Her name is Staci. She’s a hot mama.

Share This

Slashdot | The Mythbusters Answer Your Questions

As long as the parent doesn’t blow up or otherwise harm the child, which would, of course, be counterproductive. –Jamie Hyneman

Share This

I just made a comment on a recent Slashdot article, but unlike some of my political viewpoints, this one is not based on a lot of research into the issue. I don’t know a lot about patents and why they should or should not exist. But my relatively uninformed opinion says to do away with them.

Full comment follows:

But where did this idea come from that the inventor has exclusive right to “benefit completely from its investment and effort”? I’m comparing this to deregulation. Regulation fixes prices at artifically high levels, increases cost of business (compliance), and more.

Let’s compare to patents:

• fixes prices (corp partnerships and duopolies collude)
• increases costs of doing business (legal, licensing)
• Plus, it allows monopolies to form

I don’t see any positives. But I’m not a reserach scientist Why do researchers publish their findings? Is it to:

1. Help mankind
2. Fame/prestige
3. Make money (by selling their ideas)

You can do A and B without patents. You can only do C if you sell under NDA before publishing your findings, but you would in fact make less money because a company will pay less if a stipulation of the purchase is that the idea is still published, thus opening the company up for competition.

I guess the compromise here is for those scientists who wish to make money off of their ideas to sell under NDA, but bargain for their own sort of patent arrangement. This takes the control away from the government and corporations and gives it to the citizens, right? How can anyone (on slashdot anyway) not like that?

Comments please–this is not my area of expertise.

Share This

Check my gallery for Microsoft Office 12 Screenshots.

Overall its looking good.

Share This

Google Talkabout: Jingle All The Way

Today, two major advances have been made in the openness of our voice capabilities. This morning, the Jabber Software Foundation (JSF) introduced two new proposed extensions to XMPP, known as Jingle and Jingle Audio.

Also, don’t forget to check out the libjingle page.

Share This

Cool new little Google thingy: Google Music Search

Mama sing sing when she gotta jibboo, man!

Share This

As a follow up to my post t’other day, there is news today that the Jabber Council (of Elders ) decided to publish the two Google-inspired voice-over-IP protocols as JEPs. This is good news. Right now, VOIP is extremely bifuricated (good word). Not just in the Jabber space but we’re talking the whole concept. There are some front runners like SIP and IAX, then a mish-mash of uninteroperable stuff like Skype, MSN, and Yahoo. Now when I say uninteroperable, I mean something that does not meet these criteria:

• Uses open standards-based protocols
• Accessible hardware reference designs when you are talking about things like PSTN interfacing
• Free to implement (i.e. no royalties or restricted federation agreements)
• Cross-platform; at least the client(s) and preferrably the server(s) too.
• I personally don’t mind if something is not opensource, but I know the rabid GNU‘ers out there will add that as a requirement.

But even inside XMPP , the most bestest interoperable messaging system available, there are a few uninteroperable VOIP implementations! Best examples of this would be iChat, Tipic and GTalk. Apple could have worked to make their VOIP stuff a Jabber standard and maybe through some evangelism programs help some of the open source clients. They are big enough that their weight would have lent weight to the XMPP/VOIP movement. Didn’t happen. I respect Tipic, they’ve been around a while. But they would have to expend a lot of time and money to turn what they have done into wider usage, and that hasn’t happened.

So that leaves Google. There are some smart cookies over there. They looked at the IM landscape and decided there was promise. They looked at the various business models and partnership possibilities and decided that the IM networks were pretty much dominated by their competitors. Partnership here wouldn’t make a lot of sense, especially since MSN, AOL and Yahoo couldnt get along together before Google jumped in the ring.

The obvious choice is to think wider, think stuff like “why is SMTP ubiquitous?”. When you think like that, the obvious answer is to go with XMPP for instant messaging. Or SIMPLE, but that’s not as good, and of course one of Google’s competitors has its large hands in that. I bet that was not an easy decision to make though. SIP has big VOIP inroads.

Ok, skip forward to today. Google had voice (and likely video) as a part of their plan from day one I’m sure. Text is the core component but they know voice and video are key pieces for the future of IM. The nice guys that they are, Brin and wosshisname, they are taking the future dominant player in IM–XMPP–and bringing that future a little closer.

They made GTalk. That really helped give Jabber some mindshare. Then they started working within our processes to make VOIP a standardized part of Jabber-something that has been an obvious lack for some time.

I’m not sure how this will pan out, (well I do know some things I won’t share) but it is quite exciting. Will Google’s work help make VOIP commonplace? Is video on the way? What about groupchat (MUC) integration, encryption, and maybe alternate media streams such as…I dunno, XMPP < -> 3GP video < -> mobile communication networks?

Neat stuff.

(I apologize if I’m rambling. I’m writing this while in a training class and I am at least pretending to pay attention to it. Hopefully this post made some sense.)

Share This

(Score:5, Insightful) by smchris (464899)

Trust me. I know a couple guys with a bunch of computers each I
wouldn’t trust around any of my machines if they were on fire. I figure it is the
modern equivalent to having several cars on blocks in front of your trailer
home.

Technorati Profile

Share This

Word of the Day:

Mercantilism is stealing from the majority to support a minority that the majority didn’t want to support at the price they were asking.

dada21

Share This

Check out the latest emails to the standards-JIG list. The important thing to note here are the authors of these documents…

Title: Jingle Signalling

Abstract: This document defines signalling methods for initiating and managing peer-to-peer sessions (e.g., voice and video exchanges) between XMPP clients in a way that is interoperable with existing Internet standards.

URL: http://www.jabber.org/jeps/inbox/jingle.html

Title: Jingle Audio

Abstract: This document defines a session description format for Jingle audio sessions.

URL: http://www.jabber.org/jeps/inbox/jingle-audio.html

Share This