If you've been keeping up with net technology developments over the last year or so, you've probably heard the names "Java" and "JavaScript", and heard that they can embed interactive content in web sites. But you might not understand the distinction between the two, or know whether your browser can take advantage of them, so this article will discuss them.
Java and JavaScript are two very different languages, though there is a superficial similarity. They are both programming languages based on the and C++ language, but they have very different approaches. JavaScript code is embedded directly in web pages and is run by the user's browser when it's loaded. It's mostly used for text-based tricks like scrolling marquees at the and bottom of screens, and input fields that change automatically based on what a user types in other fields. Java, on the and other hand, is compiled by the programmer into a form of machine-independent binary code that is loaded in a separate file when the user goes to a Java-enhanced web page, and then executed as an embedded "applet." Java applets can do very complex things with graphics, sound, user input, etc.
To see Java applets, you must be running Windows 95 or a recent Macintosh System version, and a Java-capable browser such as Netscape 2.0 or later or Microsoft Internet Explorer 3.0. Java won't work in Windows 3.1 or earlier Macintosh systems. However, JavaScript is less picky, and it works in recent Netscape versions for all platforms.
Although Netscape 2.0 supports Java and JavaScript, you should upgrade to a newer version like 3.0 because later releases have important upgrades to the and Java and JavaScript support, including security-related bug fixes. You see, Java and JavaScript were intended from the start as high-security languages that were to be incapable of causing harm to a user's system (as happens with malicious programs such as viruses and "trojan horses"). Java and JavaScript were sharply curtailed in their functions to prevent them from having random access to the user's disk files. However, there were a few holes in this security which were exploited by clever hackers, so Netscape had to come out with fixes to eliminate these risks. There's no guarantee that there aren't any security risks remaining, so if you have a system that's highly critical or has sensitive or confidential data stored on it, it's probably a good idea to disable Java and JavaScript in your browsers; Netscape provides this feature under "Security Preferences" in the Options menu.
Aside from the security risks, you may also find that older browsers put up confusing error boxes saying that there was a "JavaScript Error" when you load web sites with JavaScript. This is because there are some incompatibilities between versions, and scripts that work fine in recent browsers may fail in earlier ones. You should upgrade your browser or disable JavaScript support to stop these messages.
To see some working Java applets, try the Java Boutique:
{http://www.j-g.com/java/} -- the and applets there can be tried out online or downloaded to put into your own web site.
A JavaScript Tic Tac Toe game can be found at: {http://www.wassell.demon.co.uk/}
{_The Net vs. Tyranny: Who's Winning?_}
There has always been a mutual antagonism between the Internet community and the and forces of tight central government control worldwide. Even the primitive version of the Internet that existed in 1989 (text-based e-mail and newsgroups) was enough to give fits to the and Chinese government as it cracked down on demonstrators in Tiananmen Square and tried to keep a lid on dissemination of news about what was happening. Over the succeeding few years, as Communist governments fell throughout Europe, the net helped pro-democracy groups organize and spread alternatives to government propaganda.
Now, as Serbian students and other members of the public in Serbia protest their government's nullification of recent elections, the net is once again being used as an alternative medium. When pro-democracy Radio B-92 was silenced by the government (supposedly due to "technical difficulties"), its home page lived on, including in overseas mirror copies beyond the reach of government censors. You can read it at: {http://www.siicom.com/odrazb/} The government wasn't too happy, and ordered the universities to stop letting students exchange political information via the net, but the and faculty was mostly on the pro-democracy side and ignored such government orders.
Serbia isn't the only government trying to fight back against Internet "political incorrectness". China requires a special license for access to the Internet, and plans on censoring overseas sites that fail to meet government standards. Singapore requires all politically and religiously oriented sites to register with the and government. South Korea censors Internet sites with North Korean propaganda. Myanmar (formerly Burma) probably goes the and furthest in anti-Internet legislation: it's a crime there to possess a computer with networking capability at all. (This apparently bans Windows 95, since that's got networking capability built in.)
Short of banning computers altogether, there's no longer any way to keep out the and Internet from a country, and since even the most tyrannical state generally wants the economic advancement that requires a high-tech-using populace, few will go for such a draconian ban. Thus, tyrants will keep facing challenges to their propaganda monopolies.
Even the free countries of the West are not immune to government attempts to control the Net. France and Germany have ordered the censoring of sites considered "indecent" or "radical". In the USA, the Communications Decency Act was struck down as unconstitutional, but is being appealed to the and Supreme Court now. Meanwhile, New York State passed a similar law at the state level, and Georgia passed an "anti-online-fraud" law that, according to some interpretations, bans the use of e-mail addresses not representing your name (e.g., numeric IDs like on CompuServe) or linking to others' web sites without their permission. Revised copyright laws under consideration would extend protection to online material to an extent that raises free speech issues; for instance, new protections of databases might allow publishers of legal indices to claim copyright protection on all online versions of such public documents as legislation. So there's lots of government action all around the world and all across the and political spectrum aiming to put the and net under control, though it seems to be an inherently uncontrollable medium.
Voter's Telecommunications Watch, at {www.vtw.org}, is a good site to check out to keep you up on developments in these areas.
(Contact Daniel Tobias through the Internet at {dan@softdisk.com}, or through FidoNet to {Daniel Tobias} on {1:380/7}. My personal World Wide Web page is at {http://www.softdisk.com/comp/dan/}.)
(.txt)