As for the differences to Pie...I cant tell because there seems to be very little information on Pie online, nor a working copy. Id guess however Pie is a closed, unfederated messaging system though. Can previous messages be edited? is the conversation thread non-linear? The differences between a wave server/client system and a (typical) " fun messaging app" would be quite a lot. -- http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story generator.
On 18 March 2016 at 18:26, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > There is at least one commercial successor - https://www.co-meeting.com/ > There was also another commercial attempt, which failed but is now open > sourced - https://github.com/jorkey/Wiab.pro > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:29 PM Adam Bielski <a_biel...@ymail.com.invalid> > wrote: > >> Hiya all! >> I am new to this mailing group and I wanted to further understand the >> limitations OR differences that WiaB provides in comparisson to: >> >> >> https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/pie-computing#/entity >> >> And WHY has there not been a successor (based on the GOOGLE WAVE project) >> that has ever been launched for commercial use!? >> Cheers! >> Adam >> 2:29 środa, 2016-3-16, Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> napisał(a): >> >> >> >> >> Sorry many mistakes, currently on mobile. Meant to say "the OS editors arnt >> bad but....." >> On 16/03/2016 11:18 AM, "Evan Hughes" <ehu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > I had a look at quill and react seperatly dismorning, interestingly the >> > atom editor is built using react and they have done at least one if not >> > more about how they get more performance out of it, moving rendering to >> the >> > gpu and such. >> > >> > Do you think itll actually be possible to remove ot somewhat from the >> > client, how do we efficently send data to the client that the document >> has >> > changed. >> > >> > Also we must be very careful abiut what editor we choose if we arnt >> > building one inhouse, debugging could destroy us all. >> > >> > But the c-rendering we could do inhouse then we would have a basis for >> > creating a c-editor from scatch. Not that the OS projects are bad but >> its a >> > pretty broad featire set we need. >> > On 16/03/2016 11:00 AM, "Joseph Gentle" <m...@josephg.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Sorry, just poking in here - >> >> >> >> A couple of years ago I worked with QuillJS's author to add OT to >> >> quill. Its a rich text editor, which emits user events and Jason (the >> >> author) has a module which interprets those events, builds operations >> >> and can do OT with them. It doesn't support rich embedding of >> >> components yet, but he's working on that now. >> >> >> >> React's Draft-js might also work well. >> >> >> >> -J >> >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Michael MacFadden >> >> <michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > All, >> >> > >> >> > A few things on the editor. For one. I think ACE is a plain text >> >> editor, which I have used for a bunch of things. Has a great API for >> >> collaboration integration, but it is not rich text, which is what wave >> is >> >> all about. So I don’t think that will work. >> >> > >> >> > Also, I think perhaps I should clarify the term editor. I probably >> >> used in inappropriately. >> >> > >> >> > There are two parts to be concerned with. The first is collaborative >> >> rendering. If you are just looking at a blip, you can still see it >> change >> >> in real time. So this would be collaborative rendering. Then when you >> are >> >> actively editing a blip, you need a collaborative editor. Both are >> >> important. >> >> > >> >> > The main performance issue comes in two places. First I may have a >> >> conversation model that contains hundreds of blips. Some sort of lazy >> >> loading strategy here is probably required and smart attaching and >> >> detaching of listeners. If you have hundreds of blips all rendered at >> once >> >> and all having to have listeners attached to them because any one of >> them >> >> can change at any time you can run into rendering performance issues. >> >> Secondarily, if you do have lots of people editing lots of blips, much >> of >> >> that will not be “on screen” for a given user, and you don’t want to be >> >> processing all of those events and messing with the DOM if you don’t >> need >> >> to. So there are performance and complexity issues there. >> >> > >> >> > Then there is the actual editor. Building a Rich Text Editor is not >> >> trivial (still.. How can this be???). So you have to deal with all the >> >> issues of building a rich text editor. Then on top of that you want to >> >> integrate remote cursors, selections, authorship, etc. into that editor. >> >> Most editors do not have that (a few do, and some are easier than >> others to >> >> add that). So there is complexity here as well. >> >> > >> >> > If you want to use an open source editor you need one that does the >> >> kind of rich text editing you want to do. It needs to either have the >> >> collaboration capabilities (shared cursors, etc.) that you want, or it >> has >> >> to be reasonably easy to implement them yourself. And it needs to have >> a >> >> good enough eventing API for you to hook into it to capture local >> changes, >> >> and to have API to allow you to drive remote changes into it. >> >> > >> >> > The point being that, the conversation renderer and rich text editor >> is >> >> a very non-trivial component, if the assumption is to roughly replicate >> >> what is there. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > One point I definitely agree with is that the editor itself really >> >> should know nothing about OT. It should be decoupled and just needs to >> >> have a good API with good events. >> >> > >> >> > ~Michael >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On 3/15/16, 10:11 AM, "Pablo Ojanguren" <pablo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >>Talking about editors I suggest ace from mozilla, >> >> >>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ace_%28editor%29 >> >> >> >> >> >>BTW, as example, this is an app we are developing on with SwellRT as >> >> >>backend: http://staging.teem.works , -it is the staging version, you >> >> can >> >> >>play! ;)- >> >> >> >> >> >>2016-03-15 17:12 GMT+01:00 Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com>: >> >> >> >> >> >>> No, not really. Javascript on client side is enough - this is how it >> >> was >> >> >>> originally implemented in microwave by antimatter. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:08 PM Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> > Ah, right. I am all for realtime, merely that I was also happy to >> >> lose >> >> >>> > it if it meant significantly more simple implementation. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >>"Otherwise we can use Robot >> >> >>> > >>API - like in https://github.com/vega113/microbox"; >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > Not keen on RobotAPI as every time I read its use it seems to need >> >> an >> >> >>> > extra server in the chain/ >> >> >>> > ie; >> >> >>> > ...<>WaveServer <> Google App Engine <> client >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > It should be possible with the web today to avoid that and have >> >> >>> > clients connect directly to the wave server no? (hopefully using >> the >> >> >>> > same protocol as any desktop/mobile client). >> >> >>> > Of course, I assume you could run host both servers on the same >> >> >>> > hardware, but still seems unnecessary to have that extra step. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > -- >> >> >>> > http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. >> >> >>> > http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story >> generator. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > On 15 March 2016 at 16:48, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> > > Yeah, the intention is to have realtime editing. Otherwise we >> can >> >> use >> >> >>> > Robot >> >> >>> > > API - like in https://github.com/vega113/microbox >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 5:45 PM Thomas Wrobel < >> >> darkfl...@gmail.com> >> >> >>> > wrote: >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > >> Does it need to be OT aware on that scale? I thought that was >> >> only >> >> >>> > >> needed to have fully realtime blip updating rather then a >> "edit + >> >> >>> > >> submit" system. (whereupon the differences could be calculated >> >> >>> > >> separately from the editing) >> >> >>> > >> Is the intention then to still have realtime editing ? or is >> this >> >> >>> > >> needed anyway regardless? >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> I admit I only know the basics of OT and am vaguely >> remembering a >> >> >>> > >> conversation about realtime blip editing adding complexity to >> >> things. >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> -- >> >> >>> > >> http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. >> >> >>> > >> http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story >> >> generator. >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> On 15 March 2016 at 16:30, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> > >> > Not really. You would need to make it OT aware. and then make >> >> it >> >> >>> > >> efficient. >> >> >>> > >> > Lot's of effort. >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >>> > >> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 5:24 PM Thomas Wrobel < >> >> darkfl...@gmail.com> >> >> >>> > >> wrote: >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >>> > >> >> As a side, I noticed Michael MacFadden mentioned building a >> >> rich >> >> >>> text >> >> >>> > >> >> editor in the browser, this much at least have been done in >> >> GWT >> >> >>> > >> >> libraries; >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> http://www.gwtproject.org/javadoc/latest/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/RichTextArea.html >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> Its fairly basic, but then, I would assume to start with at >> >> least >> >> >>> any >> >> >>> > >> >> new wave client should stay fairly basic? >> >> >>> > >> >> -- >> >> >>> > >> >> http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site. >> >> >>> > >> >> http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story >> >> >>> generator. >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> On 15 March 2016 at 15:48, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> > Yeah, we need to re-use the existing editor. Patches would >> >> be >> >> >>> > great! >> >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> >>> > >> >> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 4:46 PM Pablo Ojanguren < >> >> >>> > pablo...@gmail.com> >> >> >>> > >> >> wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> I agree with the dependency hell issue and the suggestion >> >> for >> >> >>> > >> throwing >> >> >>> > >> >> >> away the GWT client. This would require a new >> >> client-server API >> >> >>> as >> >> >>> > >> >> >> suggested, however I think a Rest API won't be enough, >> >> because >> >> >>> > real >> >> >>> > >> >> editing >> >> >>> > >> >> >> needs websocket. >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> I also agree with Michael, developing a new editor is a >> >> massive >> >> >>> > >> task, so >> >> >>> > >> >> >> we should use an existing one and plug it in the new API. >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> To write again the server in other language would be >> >> great, but >> >> >>> I >> >> >>> > >> think >> >> >>> > >> >> it >> >> >>> > >> >> >> requires a huge effort. >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> I will be happy to help in decoupling the server-client, >> I >> >> can >> >> >>> > >> provide >> >> >>> > >> >> the >> >> >>> > >> >> >> experience from my fork. And I plan to send some patches >> >> to Wave >> >> >>> > >> soon. >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> These are some slides about my fork (swellrt) it could >> >> give you >> >> >>> > some >> >> >>> > >> >> ideas: >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1WFDS_m7eyNjBjcdPs0zH496Y9bMSl0_JnSEYGjxNFn0/edit?usp=sharing >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/18hMYyECo5EmQsrAb8DT6SkO7LksWVJnhdZmqeCsar4c/edit?usp=sharing >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> btw, I would like to start a business providing these >> >> SwellRT >> >> >>> > >> services. >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> 2016-03-14 23:27 GMT+01:00 Joseph Gentle <m...@josephg.com >> >: >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> I've been playing with the idea of starting a company >> >> around a >> >> >>> > >> rewrite >> >> >>> > >> >> of >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> wave for years. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> -J >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> On Tuesday, 15 March 2016, Adam Bielski >> >> >>> > <a_biel...@ymail.com.invalid >> >> >>> > >> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > Hiya all!I wish I could find out who is potentially >> >> >>> interested >> >> >>> > in >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> creating >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > the WAVE for a commercial service/productwith my seed >> >> >>> > >> startup!Cheers! >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > Adam >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > 20:23 poniedziałek, 2016-3-14, Zachary Yaro < >> >> >>> > zmy...@gmail.com >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > <javascript:;>> napisał(a): >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > I am inclined to agree with Yuri—if the alternative >> >> >>> > >> implementation >> >> >>> > >> >> can >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> be >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > developed in parallel around the same protocol, that >> >> would >> >> >>> seem >> >> >>> > >> to be >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> the >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > best scenario, but the existing codebase should be >> kept >> >> >>> because >> >> >>> > >> it is >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > (AFAIK) the most functional implementation of the >> >> protocol. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > Zachary Yaro >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > On Mar 14, 2016 15:05, "Yuri Z" <vega...@gmail.com >> >> >>> > >> <javascript:;>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > I think that more "wavy" projects are nice, but IMO >> it >> >> >>> > doesn't >> >> >>> > >> >> mean we >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > should abandon Apache Wave as it is now. I agree >> >> there are >> >> >>> a >> >> >>> > >> lot of >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > issues >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > with current code, but I think there's still value >> as >> >> >>> people >> >> >>> > can >> >> >>> > >> >> see >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> what >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > Wave can potentially be. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 8:46 AM Evan Hughes < >> >> >>> > >> >> wisebald...@apache.org >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > <javascript:;>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > The link for those who wish to join, Ill also add >> >> this >> >> >>> link >> >> >>> > >> onto >> >> >>> > >> >> the >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > new >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > website. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > https://www.hipchat.com/gsModF8CY >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 at 12:12 Michael MacFadden < >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > michael.macfad...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > Yeah. Chatting is fine and beneficial. We just >> >> need to >> >> >>> > make >> >> >>> > >> >> sure >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> we >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > capture key decisions and rationale back in the >> >> list >> >> >>> for >> >> >>> > >> all to >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> see. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > ~Michael >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > On Mar 12, 2016, at 6:07 PM, Evan Hughes < >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> wisebald...@apache.org >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > <javascript:;>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > It does not so as Ive seen other projects >> state >> >> this >> >> >>> > motto >> >> >>> > >> >> "If >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> its >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > not >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > on >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > the mailing list it didnt happen at all", but >> >> allows >> >> >>> > for >> >> >>> > >> non >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> formal >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > talk >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > and back and forth discussion realtime. The >> >> Monthly >> >> >>> > >> reports >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> that we >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > talked >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > about back when we did the hangout session >> >> should >> >> >>> > >> probably be >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > picked >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > up >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > again, ill add it to the monthly todo's. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 at 11:58 Michael >> MacFadden < >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > michael.macfad...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> One follow up question though. Does hip hat >> >> store >> >> >>> > >> >> conversations >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > in a >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> publicly accessible manner? If not, we need >> >> to make >> >> >>> > sure >> >> >>> > >> >> key >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > decisions >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> that come out of chats are captured and >> >> discussed on >> >> >>> > the >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> mailing >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > list >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > for >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> all to see. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> ~Michael >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> On Mar 12, 2016, at 7:15 AM, Evan Hughes < >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> wisebald...@apache.org >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > <javascript:;>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> I would get infra to make us a hipchat >> >> channel so >> >> >>> we >> >> >>> > >> have >> >> >>> > >> >> some >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > place >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > to >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> talk casually web interface / irc, but seesm >> >> the >> >> >>> > jira's >> >> >>> > >> >> down. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > Looking >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > to >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> getting this rolling in some way or another >> >> by mid >> >> >>> > week. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> ~ Evan >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 at 19:48 Evan Hughes < >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > wisebald...@apache.org <javascript:;>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> The client-server protocol would define a >> >> protobuf >> >> >>> > and >> >> >>> > >> >> json >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> rest >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> services >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> so any language that support protocol >> buffers >> >> >>> would >> >> >>> > be >> >> >>> > >> >> able >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> to >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > make >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > a >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> client or fallback to the json rest. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 at 19:24 Andreas Kotes >> < >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> count-apache....@flatline.de <javascript:;>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> FWIW, >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> I also consider the idea pretty good and >> >> would >> >> >>> want >> >> >>> > >> >> stronger >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > decoupling >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> of server/client. I'd be interested in a >> >> python >> >> >>> > client >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > implementation, >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> mostly for CLI and bot integration. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> Not sure whether doing a client-side C >> >> >>> > implementation >> >> >>> > >> of >> >> >>> > >> >> the >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> communication protocol would be best here >> >> (so >> >> >>> > wrapper >> >> >>> > >> for >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> more >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> languages >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> can follow), or whether native Python >> would >> >> be >> >> >>> > >> better. We >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> need >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> something >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> for non-Java folks in any case, I think. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> Cheers, >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> count >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 10:52:34AM +1000, >> >> Evan >> >> >>> > Hughes >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>>> Thankyou all for your feedback and >> >> expressions >> >> >>> of >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> interests, >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > seems >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> like >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> we >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>>> may be able to develop some teams >> together >> >> to >> >> >>> make >> >> >>> > >> this >> >> >>> > >> >> a >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > faster >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> reality >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>>> than just I. Hopefully we can get some >> more >> >> >>> > people to >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> express >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> interests >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> in >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>>> this way forward. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> -- >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> Andreas 'count' Kotes >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> Taming computers for humans since 1990. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> "Don't ask what the world needs. Ask what >> >> makes >> >> >>> you >> >> >>> > >> come >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> alive, >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > and >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > go >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> do >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> it. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> Because what the world needs is people who >> >> have >> >> >>> > come >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> alive." -- >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > Howard >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >>>>> Thurman >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >>
