** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD **

[Neko]

Originally Posted by Shoe Lace

What they "wrote it in" is much less relevant than "what they are executing when people actually visit their site". DUCY?

Relevant to what? You claim that "it's not fair to say they are using php". This is a trivially false statement. DUCY?

edit: the whole article was about the PHP language...which most of(?) the code for Facebook is written in.

[Neko]

Originally Posted by gaming_mouse

interesting article about cracking lottery scratcher tickets:

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/01/ff_lottery/

Cool. That article reminded me of the Wired article on Stuxnet that is worth a read also.

[NoahSD]

If you like stuxnet, you'll love conficker: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...y-within/8098/ . It's not as sophisticated, but it's got way more mystery surrounding it.

Spoiler alert: Stuxnet was the Israelis or the Americans, obv. Conficker is someone who's incredibly knowledgeable and even more crafty, but apparently all he wants to do is spam people or something?

[Neko]

Sweet. I have heard of conficker a couple times but didn't know how huge/advanced it was. This stuff is fascinating.

[NoahSD]

Originally Posted by Neko

Sweet. I have heard of conficker a couple times but didn't know how huge/advanced it was. This stuff is fascinating.

Yeah. I wonder how accurate the MD6 part is. It's hard for me to gauge just how few people knew about MD6 and its original flaw when Conficker's creator did.

Actually, now that I think about it, I'll be working with Yevgeniy Dodis next year, one of the designers of MD6. I should totally ask him about this and report back.

[NoahSD]

Also interesting: An article about how Google manages its network with a relatively new open-source piece of software http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise...w-google/all/1

[tyler_cracker]

Originally Posted by daveT

are you Mel?

no.

[gaming_mouse]

so dumb question about google/oracle lawsuit, but i know one of you can answer easily. i'm confused because i thought java was and always had been open source -- were people building apps with java 10 years ago paying sun anything? but if it's open source, or was, and google started doing android like at least 5 years ago, i don't understand how oracle can now claim they are owed money. which of my assumptions is wrong?

[Xhad]

I don't know the full answer to your question, but Java wasn't always open-source. I distinctly remember reading things like this when they were current and wikipedia says it happened in 2006

EDIT: This article makes a mention of patents...

[NoahSD]

Originally Posted by gaming_mouse

so dumb question about google/oracle lawsuit, but i know one of you can answer easily. i'm confused because i thought java was and always had been open source -- were people building apps with java 10 years ago paying sun anything? but if it's open source, or was, and google started doing android like at least 5 years ago, i don't understand how oracle can now claim they are owed money. which of my assumptions is wrong?

I'm not sure, but I *think* that sun is accusing them of copying Java in its implementation of Android and Dalvik, both infringing on patents and copying code. That's different from using Java as an platform to run their operating system on, which is what I think Java's license allows.

Obviously, there's something weird about one company suing another for allegedly copying its free-to-use open-source software to create new free-to-use open-source software, but they're both presumably making money off of these things (Google certainly is, I have no idea if Sun/Oracle makes money off of Java somehow), so it's a legit accusation IMO.

Here's an article that discusses Oracle's opening statement, and links to the full slideshow, which Oracle made publicly available: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-574...ith-91-slides/

[gaming_mouse]

Originally Posted by NoahSD

I'm not sure, but I *think* that sun is accusing them of copying Java in its implementation of Android and Dalvik, both infringing on patents and copying code. That's different from using Java as an platform to run their operating system on, which is what I think Java's license allows.

Obviously, there's something weird about one company suing another for allegedly copying its free-to-use open-source software to create new free-to-use open-source software, but they're both presumably making money off of these things (Google certainly is, I have no idea if Sun/Oracle makes money off of Java somehow), so it's a legit accusation IMO.

Here's an article that discusses Oracle's opening statement, and links to the full slideshow, which Oracle made publicly available: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-574...ith-91-slides/

That would make sense. The bolded captures my confusion exactly. Assuming your explanation is correct, is Google about to get pwned?

[NoahSD]

Google is unpwnable. They make over $10B/year. The lawsuit will probably cost them less than $100M if they lose. Whether they lose depends on the facts and software patent law, both of which are complicated as hell.

Some people seem to think that there's important precedent involved here. I'm not sure if that's true or just hype.

[Ryanb9]

When you copy free-to-use open-source software dont you have to give credit?

[greg nice]

not all "open source" software are created equal. depends on the license. GPL is usually considered most restrictive. i like the WTFPL:

DO WHAT THE **** YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE
Version 2, December 2004

Copyright (C) 2004 Sam Hocevar <sam@hocevar.net>

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim or modified
copies of this license document, and changing it is allowed as long
as the name is changed.

DO WHAT THE **** YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION

0. You just DO WHAT THE **** YOU WANT TO.

[Ankimo]

Gullanian you could at least find a better comparison than 15" vs 17"

I admit there is a premium but if u actually did a fair comparison, then the difference isn't that great when you factor in build quality, esthetics, battery and OS X (W7 is a huge improvement over XP but out of the box it doesn't compare to OSX).