Archive for the ‘Teh Intarwebs’ Category

Facebook and the Online Economy

Saturday, June 2nd, 2012

I’m not a fan of Facebook. But I can see what they’re doing, and why their current advertising revenue is irrelevant to their long-term profitability. And it seems someone else (at TechCrunch of all places) seems to get it:

Facebook has won the identity wars. So their advertising income is relatively speaking peanuts. Who cares? They don’t need to invent a new form of monetization. They have one already: Facebook Credits. Right now their income from it is a rounding error. But as years go by, and people slowly get accustomed to buying and using and transferring them, and as Facebook grows more and more intertwined with every online action we take–which is to say, nearly every action we take–it could well become the first global virtual currency … and then ultimately lose that “virtual” disclaimer.

via Bashing Facebook For All The Wrong Reasons | TechCrunch.

What Linden Lab did with their virtual currency within Second Life, Facebook is doing on the broader internet (and so, essentially, to the developed world as a whole): they are solving the micro-transaction problem. And they intend to take a little slice of the action — a tiny, tiny slice, percentage wise — and it will make them a mint. They will in fact become a mint, literally making the new currency for the online world.

Given how cavalier they have been with privacy, this frankly scares the pee out of me. If it had to be someone in that position, I’d prefer it was Google; not that Google is all that saintly, “Don’t be evil” notwithstanding, but they do seem to be the least-bad of the major powers on the ‘net.

An even better solution would be competing currencies: Facebucks, Amazon Credits, iDollars, Googold, and of course Microsoft Live Currency Units for Mobile Windows. (I kid.) (A little.) (No seriously, whatever the official name was, we’d have to call it Microsoft X-Bucks. I insist.)

Anycast

Thursday, December 3rd, 2009

For this reason, anycast is generally used as a way to provide high availability and load balancing for stateless services such as access to replicated data; for example, DNS service is a distributed service over multiple geographically dispersed servers.

One of many things I need to learn more about one of these days is Internet infrastructure. For some reason, I’d never heard of ‘Anycast’ until today, as I was reading up on how Google’s new DNS service would work. Interesting stuff in there too about using Anycast as part of the transititon to IPv6.

Posted via web from Kevination

Convicted Murderer To Wikipedia: Shhh!

Wednesday, November 11th, 2009

In 1990, Bavarian actor Walter Sedlmayr was brutally murdered. Two of his business associates were convicted, imprisoned for the crime, and recently paroled. Who killed Sedlmayr? Its a matter of public record, but if one of the men and his German law firm gets their way, Wikipedia (and EFF) will not be allowed to tell you. A few days ago, the online encyclopedia received a cease and desist letter from one of the convicts—represented by the aptly named German law firm Stopp and Stopp—demanding that the perpetrator’s name be taken off of the Sedlmayr article page.

German convicted (and paroled) murderer attempts to censor Wikipedia, to hide his crime. I suspect this will be subject to the “Streisand effect” — where trying to hide something only succeeds in drawing more attention to it.

“Oh, and by the way, the convicts were Wolfgang Werlé and his half-brother Manfred Lauber.”

Posted via web from Kevination

The One Where I Say Something Nice About .NET

Friday, October 9th, 2009

I’m working my way through  Pro ASP.NET MVC Framework, by Steven Sanderson, published by Apress. So far, I like it, for values of ‘it’ of both the book and the framework.

The book — well, the reviews on Amazon were glowing, and they’re basically right: clear prose style, ideas well expressed, and enough critique of other Microsoft technologies that you can tell it’s not a Microsoft Press title.

The framework … is interesting. It mostly abandons the ASP.NET model of server-side controls, postbacks, and viewstate in favor of plain HTML and CSS. (Though there are still advantages to using their HTML helper functions rather than coding up raw HTML yourself.) For pity’s sake, they even make jQuery available for your AJAX hacking pleasure.

What has always bothered me about “classic” ASP.NET was that it seemed to be an attempt to transplant the VB/WebForms style of development — drag-and-drop controls, a low-level event loop — onto the web. It’s a layer of abstraction over the web in an attempt to hide that fact that it is the web.

And it shows in terms of performance. Outside of low-latency intranets, the underlying architecture doesn’t support the chatty postback/viewstate implementation needed to emulate a desktop GUI event loop.

ASP.NET MVC, in contrast, feels like a web-native architecture. It’s designed around the strengths and limitations of HTTP, rather than fighting against it.

On top of that, it encourages the strong separation of concerns implied by ‘MVC’; it nudges the developer towards unit testing and test-driven development; and with the source code placed under an OSI-approved license, it represents a step by Microsoft into the world of Open Source.

All in all, I think ASP.NET MVC is quite cool.

RSSCloud Vs. PubSubHubbub: Why The Fat Pings Win

Thursday, September 10th, 2009

I’d been hearing the terms ‘PubSubHubbub’ (silly name) and ‘rssCloud’ a lot lately, and decided I ought to figure out what the heck these people are talking about. Just in time, along comes Josh Fraser with a guest post on TechCrunch, RSSCloud Vs. PubSubHubbub: Why The Fat Pings Win.

Both [PubSubHubbub] and rssCloud address a fundamental flaw in the way web applications work today. Currently, getting updates on the web requires constant polling. Subscribers are forced to act like nagging children asking, “Are we there yet?” Subscribers must constantly ping the publisher to ask if there are new updates even if the answer is “no” 99% of the time. This is terribly inefficient, wastes resources, and makes it incredibly hard to find new content in as soon as it appears. Both protocols flip the current model on its head so that updates are event driven rather than request driven. By that I mean that both protocols eliminate the need for polling by essentially telling subscribers, “Don’t ask us if there’s anything new. We’ll tell you.”

While Fraser favors PubSubHubbub, he apparently agrees that the name just doesn’t work, and refers to it throughout his piece as ‘PuSH’. If fate is kind, that name will win out. (Or else it will get submitted to IETF, and given a nondescript acronym, a la Jabber’s rehabilitation as the more businesslike XMPP.)

Whimsley: Online Monoculture and the End of the Niche

Sunday, July 5th, 2009

Internet sharing mechanisms such as YouTube and Google PageRank, which distil the clicks of millions of people into recommendations, may also be promoting an online monoculture. Even word of mouth recommendations such as blogging links may exert a homogenizing pressure and lead to an online culture that is less democratic and less equitable, than offline culture.

Whenever I make these claims someone says “Well I use Netflix and it’s shown me all kinds of films I didn’t know about before. It’s broadened my experience, so that’s an increase in diversity.” And someone else points to the latest viral home video on YouTube as evidence of niche success.

So this post explains why your gut feel is wrong.

via Whimsley: Online Monoculture and the End of the Niche.

Rock On, Dudes

Thursday, February 26th, 2009

I don’t bother with most viral Internet memes, but this one sounded like fun…

leclapier-albumcover1

The source material:

The band name

The album title

The cover image

I’m surprised how well the title and the image worked together.

You Say Netbook, I Say Smartphone

Wednesday, October 29th, 2008

According to CNET, HP is diving headfirst into the Netbook market. The interesting part of the article, though, is not so much about HP, as about netbooks in general, and how they are being marketed in Europe and Asia:

It’s a dramatic increase, and the difference is all coming out of Europe, the Middle East, and Africa (EMEA), where Asus and Acer have been incredibly aggressive about their Netbooks, the Eee PC and Aspire One, respectively. Of the 10.9 million units that are estimated to ship worldwide by the end of 2008, 8.1 million will go to EMEA, says IDC.

Acer and Asus have done well in the region, as evidenced by Acer’s quick rise to the top of the portable PC market there. But they’ve been aided by local telecom companies, who are subsidizing Netbooks in exchange for a signed wireless service contract. It’s a model that in the past few months has thrived in Europe.

Dell signed up Vodafone for this kind of deal on its Netbook, the Inspiron Mini 9 in September, but HP’s mostly been on the sidelines in this regard, and representatives for the company haven’t indicated if a similar deal with wireless providers are in the works.

Wireless service contract to subsidize a Linux-based device optimized for mobile Internet access. Other than the physical size of the device, how is this different from Android (and, Linux notwithstanding, the iPhone)?

At some point in the near future, somebody is going to put Android on a netbook-class device, and the shape of the future of client computing will become clearly visible. And the day that happens is the day that Microsoft’s desktop monopoly will be truly broken.

MVC Done Right?

Friday, October 17th, 2008

Model-View-Controller (MVC) is a design style that dates back (as so much does) to the pioneering work of the Xerox PARC facility. The idea is that applications should be separated into:

  • Model: the data that the application manipulates, and the fundamental operations it performs on that data
  • View: How the application looks to the user.
  • Controller: How user, view, and model interact.

(Yes, yes, I’m sure anyone who cares to can pick apart my definitions. Don’t care.)

The idea is, views change all the time (today it’s radio buttons, tomorrow it’s drop-downs), controllers change moderately (add a confirmation step, tighten up the authentication), and models hardly change at all (an accounting program isn’t going to change into an MMORPG). So isolate the fast-changing bits from the slow-changing ones. And also allow different specialties — database hackers, usability analysts, graphical designers — to put apply themselves to their own field exclusively.

How do you do that in web applications? The received wisdom of the day is:

  • Model: database + ORM (e.g., Hibernate, ActiveRecord)
  • View: templating language
  • Controller: application framework (Struts, Spring, Rails, etc.)

In other words, do it all on the server, all in one language (which, of course, fits all purposes, because it is the One True Language). Maintain separation of concerns with iron discipline and wishful thinking.

My own view:

  • Model: database + RESTful web service, delivering information in JSON
  • View: Static (X)HTML/CSS
  • Controller: Javascript/AJAX

The model code can be implemented in any server-side language: Java, C#, Ruby, Python, Erlang, whatever; it just needs to be able to talk to the database and send JSON over the wire. The view can be created in an HTML/CSS environment like Dreamweaver, with no worries about whether it’s compatible with the developer toolset. And the controller logic… Well, I’ve been playing with jQuery lately, and it may shock some folks to learn that coding client-side Javascript with a good compatibility layer library is actually fun.

Dividing tasks by physical location and implementation language creates a strict separation of concerns. Server-side code does not generate HTML. Controller code does not do SQL queries. View markup contains no executable code at all: there is no template language. There is zero possibility of the parts bleeding together.

Why wouldn’t this work? Am I missing something?

Ftrain on The Chilling Effect of IP Laws

Wednesday, October 15th, 2008

Paul Ford publishes an excellent essay on intellectual property laws, and the chilling effect they have on innovation, in Learning to Fear the Semantic Web.

As a bonus, it includes this lovely turn of phrase:

I believe, as in don’t-get-him-started, that…

I will now have to use this in everyday conversation on a regular basis. Consider yourself warned.