nikils

No, like browser 2.0 with different presentation format.

Why not create a different rendering engine and replace HTML,CSS, JS ?

Intel (a small business in 1968) was started by two physics phd guys. Adobe (a small business in early 1980s) was started by two phd guys. Google (a small business in 1998) was started by phd-dropouts. I think there are many companies started by phds.

If a small company is trying to solve sufficiently complex problem, like what Intel (in 1968), Adobe(in 1980s) and Google(in 1998) were trying to solve they need a phd. If a small company is building a new social network or social app it might not need a phd.

How about p2p cloud ? Where volunteers run p2p client on their desktop, which contributes space to p2p cloud and users can store data on p2p cloud.

Literate Programing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literate_programming ?

isn't arrows http://www.cs.umd.edu/projects/PL/arrowlets/example-drag-and... supposed to solve this problem.

Using this exploit is it possible to install any app ? I mean by passing the app-store ?

Looks like Google adopting 'confuse competitors' strategy (similar to Windows and OS/2).

It is available in Nexus One http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/22/android-froyo-nexus-one/

isn't it possible to distribute apps written using other languages with this method ? http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/040810-apple-iphone-os...

Reminds of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microso...

A new approach to China

1/12/2010 03:00:00 PM

Like many other well-known organizations, we face cyber attacks of varying degrees on a regular basis. In mid-December, we detected a highly sophisticated and targeted attack on our corporate infrastructure originating from China that resulted in the theft of intellectual property from Google. However, it soon became clear that what at first appeared to be solely a security incident--albeit a significant one--was something quite different.

First, this attack was not just on Google. As part of our investigation we have discovered that at least twenty other large companies from a wide range of businesses--including the Internet, finance, technology, media and chemical sectors--have been similarly targeted. We are currently in the process of notifying those companies, and we are also working with the relevant U.S. authorities.

Second, we have evidence to suggest that a primary goal of the attackers was accessing the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists. Based on our investigation to date we believe their attack did not achieve that objective. Only two Gmail accounts appear to have been accessed, and that activity was limited to account information (such as the date the account was created) and subject line, rather than the content of emails themselves.

Third, as part of this investigation but independent of the attack on Google, we have discovered that the accounts of dozens of U.S.-, China- and Europe-based Gmail users who are advocates of human rights in China appear to have been routinely accessed by third parties. These accounts have not been accessed through any security breach at Google, but most likely via phishing scams or malware placed on the users' computers.

We have already used information gained from this attack to make infrastructure and architectural improvements that enhance security for Google and for our users. In terms of individual users, we would advise people to deploy reputable anti-virus and anti-spyware programs on their computers, to install patches for their operating systems and to update their web browsers. Always be cautious when clicking on links appearing in instant messages and emails, or when asked to share personal information like passwords online. You can read more here about our cyber-security recommendations. People wanting to learn more about these kinds of attacks can read this U.S. government report (PDF), Nart Villeneuve's blog and this presentation on the GhostNet spying incident.

We have taken the unusual step of sharing information about these attacks with a broad audience not just because of the security and human rights implications of what we have unearthed, but also because this information goes to the heart of a much bigger global debate about freedom of speech. In the last two decades, China's economic reform programs and its citizens' entrepreneurial flair have lifted hundreds of millions of Chinese people out of poverty. Indeed, this great nation is at the heart of much economic progress and development in the world today.

We launched Google.cn in January 2006 in the belief that the benefits of increased access to information for people in China and a more open Internet outweighed our discomfort in agreeing to censor some results. At the time we made clear that "we will carefully monitor conditions in China, including new laws and other restrictions on our services. If we determine that we are unable to achieve the objectives outlined we will not hesitate to reconsider our approach to China."

These attacks and the surveillance they have uncovered--combined with the attempts over the past year to further limit free speech on the web--have led us to conclude that we should review the feasibility of our business operations in China. We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be discussing with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all. We recognize that this may well mean having to shut down Google.cn, and potentially our offices in China.

The decision to review our business operations in China has been incredibly hard, and we know that it will have potentially far-reaching consequences. We want to make clear that this move was driven by our executives in the United States, without the knowledge or involvement of our employees in China who have worked incredibly hard to make Google.cn the success it is today. We are committed to working responsibly to resolve the very difficult issues raised.

Posted by David Drummond, SVP, Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer

will it response to RFS5 http://ycombinator.com/rfs5.html ?

Is Facebook a brain virus or meme ?

What language to use to program such a computer ?

This means now vegans can eat meat ?

link to Ken Thompson's previous c-compiler paper http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/4th_edition/papers/compiler search for 'Performance'

might be influenced from this http://www.vitanuova.com/inferno/papers/limbo.html

Is it Innovator's Dilemma ?

Inferno plugin http://www.vitanuova.com/inferno/pidoc/index.html . It is similar to NativeClient/Java

if you dont want to register try this

wget --referer='http://news.google.com/' 'http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123197886745683743.html?mod=...

is it time to start working on androind instead of iphone ?

Science is like sex: sometimes something useful comes out, but that is not the reason we are doing it -- Richard Feynman

s/Science/Startup/

Interview of Emmanuel Todd (2005) http://www.truthout.org/article/emmanuel-todd-the-specter-a-...

http://jsext.sourceforge.net/ supports lighttpd

I am not much familiar with anti trust laws. Can a foreign firm make this deal with Yahoo ? If yes then Google can create a proxy firm to make the deal, will it still be considered monopoly ?

more reviews here http://app-store.appspot.com/?url=viewSoftware%3Fid%3D293743...

another link http://app-store.appspot.com/?url=viewSoftware%3Fid%3D288141...

so iphone/virtual-keyboard is more secure ?

there was an article posted yesterday that said diversity is more important than ability. So ethnically unified might be disadvantage compared to diverse population of US.