felipe

> I think Google would like to make browsers into commodity pieces of software

But isn't what Mozilla is already doing? I honestly don't see the point of putting all this effort in creating something new to support performance and standards, when there is already something else in place achieving those very same goals.

Also, mind you that Mozilla is a foundation, while MS and Google are monopolies.

Not sure about detecting the capabilities of the user-agent, but Aptana did a quite interesting server-side Javascript implementation:

http://www.aptana.com/jaxer

Interestingly enough, server-side Javascript is actually quite old. I remember one of the very first web apps I worked with was in SSJS (aka Server-Side JavaScript), on the Netscape Enterprise Server.

It seems to me that most here actually did not watch the link to the original blog with Judy Estrin's video interview:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Foremski/?p=301

Her point is that too much focus on short-term / "this quarter" type of mentality, associated with the declining of education and the lack of national leadership is killing innovation in Silicon Valley.

This is not the first time that I hear this argument. The author of "Silicon Dragon" says that the Valley is in a state of denial:

http://venturebeat.com/2008/08/03/silicon-valley-if-we-ignor...

True, but in all those industries public money was heavily used to remove risk from the market, by either buying unproven technology (electricity, railroads) or by creating a "protected" (i. e.: regulated) space for private companies to operate.

In mobile, take Nokia for example: Until the 80s Nokia's major activity was rubber-related products (seriously). That changed when they bought a state-owned telecom company, and that's when Nokia really focused on mobile telephony and made it popular. In other words, the government invested in the technology and removed the risk, enough so a private company could take it to the next level.

When I watch 2001, I somehow feel like our generation failed the previous one. People at that time thought "well, we went to the moon, so 30 years from now we should be going beyond Jupiter!", and here we are praising Twitter and Google's latest browser.

I understand your argument, but at the same time I believe that in order to bring the "big stuff" to reality that truly impacts people lives, it requires heavy high-risk investment that only few organizations can absorb (normally governments). For example, the Wright Brothers succeeded because the military invested heavily in the first airplanes. Other examples are the Internet, the space program, cars (highway investment), commercial airlines, etc... A lot of the big stuff is initially subsidized with public money, and then thrown to the private sector.

That's a big lesson for small-scale mobile-based start-ups: Whatever you do in this space, you must start with a sustainable business model.

In my previous start-up we ignored that fact, and we failed. Unfortunately, the mobile space is not as "free" as the Internet. Especially here in the US, we basically have an oligopoly, so don't think you can just build something and "put it out there"... Everything you do will have a cost, and someone will have to eat that -- Either you or your customer.

I was quite impressed with Zimbra Desktop, it is really worth a try.

The only reason I am not using it today is because I figured it would be a pain to migrate my current calendar, to-dos and address book to it, but Zimbra is the one I'd be using if I was starting from scratch today.

On the bright side...

Brazil also suffered from hyperinflation during the late 80s and early 90s, requiring programmers to deal with the craziest policies you (or the IMF) can imagine -- From nationwide account freezes to exchanging entire currencies overnight. As a result, today Brazil has one of the most advanced banking systems in the world, even compared to systems in the US and Europe, and extremely competent senior programmers and innovators in the industry.

I think the main source of this confusion is the lack of understanding of the difference between computer science and software engineering:

"A scientist builds in order to learn; an engineer learns in order to build."

http://www.stevemcconnell.com/psd/04-senotcs.htm

It seems to me that this professor is teaching CS to students who actually should be enrolled in a SE program.

Seriously, how can someone possibly review Children of Men in less than 160 chars???

And what's your point?

And ironically the only one who actually made money out of this whole deal was the guy who jumped out of the ship at the early beginning...

Google the keyword "ICT4Dev".

I think it's pretty much what edw519 already said: Build something of value and you are already making a difference.

I think the step one for you is to figure out what community (target user) you feel connected and want to serve. Then, step two is to find a solution that A) you can realistically build; and B) it is sustainable (resource-wise)

The world is full of problems for you to solve. Just pick one and do it!

> When we pay for foreign students to earn advanced degrees, only to kick them out of the country once they've graduated, we're cutting off our nose to spite our face.

Right, I agree with you, and I understand your argument (though I don't agree with it per se) that the return is questionable. I was just asking about your claim of "a huge number of foreign grad students and post-docs are being paid off", especially grads in high-tech industry (which is the focus of the article)

> I can name at least a half-dozen foreign doctoral students and post-docs, whom I know personally, who are/were on NIH and NSF funding

Those grants are research-based, so NIH and NSF are paying them in exchange of research work. In your argument, you sound like they are giving money to foreigners who get the money, say good bye and run away with a degree.

Could you please share some numbers? Is this the case for the high-tech industry in specific (the argument is around high-tech workers)

I have a grad degree. Certainly I didn't get any help at all, and I don't know any one in my class who got any kind of NSF grants. I studied with someone who got a grant from his govt employer, but he is American.

I have never met any high-tech immigrant worker who complained about making less than others. I, for one, know for a fact that my salary was compatible to other with similar skills and experience

Maybe you are talking about offshored jobs, that's a whole different story. If anything, we (immigrant workers) are helping to keep jobs in the US!

> We already pay for foreign citizens to get graduate degrees from US schools

I think this is a tiny minority, and in fact foreigners don't even have access to subsidized loans (I know that because I fully paid for my education by myself and with personal loans -- I definitely looked for other kind of loans and grants)

The reason I posted this article is because I have first-hand experience as a foreign-born worker who immigrated via a work-visa and eventually got my masters here in the US.

The fact is that the immigration process for high-skilled workers is very long, cumbersome, and one must be pretty motivated to stay. I know many high-skilled people who were not able to stay even though they wanted to.

He is talking about an IDE feature that indicates that, well, your test passed!

http://www.eclipse.org/ajdt/EclipseCon2006/shots/junitTestsP...

The idea is that you write a few lines of code, test it (most likely you'll get red), and you keep fixing your code until you get green, and only then you proceed to the next task.

As far as I know, it started with jUnit on Eclipse, and then others implemented the concept on other languages / IDEs.

Unit testing written first actually forces you to throw away bad code more often. The test is independent from the production code.

I hated unit testing until I learned this practice:

http://www.extremeprogramming.org/rules/testfirst.html

Since then I really enjoy writing unit tests. It really changed my mindset. Unit testing is more about design rather than testing itself.

Sorry for this bad situation. What I would do in your situation is to try to pre-sell this solution to potential customers (hospitals, healthcare companies, etc... You definitely have a leverage there as a nurse). Once you get a few commitments (and that will take a lot of "nos" and paper prototyping back-and-forth), then it will be much easier to recruit someone to develop the app for equity-only, or you might even be able to get an hospital to pay for it.

There's a great book called "Bootstrapping" by Greg Gianforte, that outlines this process of pre-selling without a product. I highly recommend you to at least take a look at the first chapters.

The world is not in panic because of the US housing market. The world is in panic because of the falling dollar and inflation.

"Four Steps to the Epiphany" is a must-read. Also, get "Bootstrapping" from Greg Gianforte.

"The Fortune At The Bottom Of The Pyramid" is excellent too: http://www.amazon.com/Fortune-Bottom-Pyramid-Eradicating-Pub...

Have you tried Prosper? http://www.prosper.com

knowledge != information

> I would be willing to bet you that they have no interest in becoming a service economy.

I completely agree with you. More so, I believe China (and other developing nations) is pursuing a knowledge economy. We were pursuing it too, until neocons like Brooks took over 7 years ago and got us stuck in the middle of the transition.