> What makes you think Japanese copied your engineering? Unlike British and American cars in the '80s when the Japanese began to dominate the auto market,
I actually had a Japanese car in the mid-eighties. They were horrible horrible rust buckets even compared to the awful cars from British Leyland, they sold because you got everything in the basic package whereas with a British car you would pay a Pony just to have a passenger side door mirror and a hundred sovs to have a car radio. (for American readers a Pony is approx $45).
It was only later that they began to produce good quality products... so much so that Toyota and Honda became a by-word for quality. Of course compared to some of the junk Detroit produced in the 80s they must have seemed like a breath of fresh air.
This Patent application for a system to analyze and compare of portfolios by citation submitted by Microsoft sounds like it might actually help a patent examiner find prior art for all these Microsoft software patents. It describes a system for classifying documents and finding and analyzing relations (citations) between two sets of documents. Although that does sound a lot like PageRank and anchor text analysis doesn't it?
I'm slowly working through the meat of these patents but the first one in the list Ranking results using multiple nested ranking appears to document the current state of the art in search. That is that ranking algorithms are applied in stages to progressively filter results. It doesn't appear to describe anything new.
I should maybe clarify that. The results put too much weight on blogs and on on-page factors such as keywords in the URL or domain name. This has been a constant theme for MSN search properties. The results are certainly different from Google but they are not better quality.
it is only a hit if someone uses Live.com, searches on results and then clicks on a link. Measuring on searches that arrive at a website then the varous MS properties are #3. The result from Live.com are not good either. Lots of dupe results and easy to spam.
> And before anyone brings it up, yes I am aware that zero day means the exploit was released the day the vulnerability was announced/discovered. That still doesn't change my opinion.
ahhh, I didn't know that but there is so much jargon around these days from people trying to sound sexy and intelligent I do let a lot go over my head. Thanks for the clarification. I've been hearing "zero day zero day" everywhere I thought it must be some kind of clevel attack like Birthday or something. There you go, learn something new every zero day.
You forget a major problem with farmed fish... they feed them on food pellets made of fish! No fish to catch, no farmed fish. Most of the food pellets used in the planet come from fish farmed around the Pacific coast of latin American. Its like Soylent Green for fish, which is probably what we will be eating by 2048!
> Click fraud is so rampant at this point, that I wouldn't consider using AdWords until they have a real solution to this.
The figure I hear for click fraud is around 20% but this isn't a problem unless your advertising budget is bringing in less than you spend. Most advertisers report good success with AdWords despite the fraud. Unlike an ad in BusinessWeek you can monitor every click coming through to your site with CTA to see if it makes a sale. You could say budget a couple of hundred dollars and see exactly what they makes for you. If it doesn't work stop using CTA.
In short click fraud is only a problem if you are not seeing a return from your ad budget and this you can monitor much more easily with CTA then with other forms of advertising.
> Google depends on new content constantly being added to the web.
This is hyperbole. Google depends on people using their search engine in preference to Live.com or Yahoo! and then rather than clicking on the free results, clicking on the sponsored ones. Google depends on knowing how to get the mix between relevant free and paid for results right. It also in part depends on a netword of websites taking up its AdSense programme and for its AdSense adverts to be more appealing than any internal link or bouncing out of the site.
Yeah, I've read through the DMCA and it looks like YouTube falls down on a few points. As a poster above says on these grounds someone you set up a:
YouWarez.com
site allowing people to share software charging for downloads and so long as it responds to take down notices it would be legal. Yeah right.
As for the argument that "YouTube wouldn't work if it moderated uploads"... well boohoohoo, isn't it usually up to businesses to ensure they operate within the law.
It seems pretty far fetched that YouTube is just some innocent "common carrier".
he means "at" as in "@" not aerobase - dontcha just love these expats who are oh so immersed in the French culture zey eeer cannot speek zee English no more?
How about a piece about people who turned Google down? Google were desperate to hire the writer of SquashFS onto their team of geeks, offering him all sorts of incentives to scrabble aboard (this was pre-IPO too). He turned them down because he didn't feel he would be free enough to continue development of SquashFS.
Kudos to the geek who puts OSS before a cushy job at Google and untold wealth in stock options.
Finally the tin foil hat brigade has something to teach us. To stop your RFID cards being read you simply need two sheets of tin foil (aka bacofoil) on either side of your wallet. I predict that such wallets will soon be on sale as will metalized pockets for coats.
Google does comply with the DCMA but it is quite a complex procedure you have to go through to show you are the copyright holder. It is not just a question of blasting off an email or tagging a video you can see violates your or someone else copyright.
DCMA seems to be getting a bit overused. It is designed to extend common carrier type status to ISPs. Having read the relevant sections it is not obvious that it covers an online service that is sytematically profiting from copyright content. But only a judge/court could decide if that is the case. I suspect that all the services such as Google Video that are currently trying to hide behind the DCMA fig-leaf don't want to see it tested in court.
This judgement, if followed through, would be a big blow for continued US governance of ICANN. The Free speech argument is good as afar as it goes but don't people also have the right not to listen to the message? The judge is effectively saying that if someone is spouting crap defended by the right of free speech he also has the right to restrain people and force them to listen to this message. That surely can't be right, even in the United States.
Yeah I read that but it doesn't seem to cover YouTube too well. YouTube's express reason for existing is selling advertising on the back of largely pirated material. It is not some ISP who happens to have such pirate material travelling over its wires at the "direction of a third party". I don't think the DCMA will protect them.
Arianne 5 is one of the best launch vehicles in the known universe. For a change France is concentrating on practicalies - comms systems, observation and weather satellites, interplanetary studies etc. ESA have had some fantastic programmes recently. Whinching over-evolved chimps into space on the back of ICBM as some kind of vanity exercise (a la China etc) is not where it is at.
> The only reason why Amazon keeps coming up is that they collectively sell lots of esoteria, thus managing to hit a farther end in the population dropoff (i.e. the longest part of the tail) than a business like AtariAge could reasonably profit from.
That is not the example Chris uses though. He sites the author who had been in the doldrums for years then, via Amazon's "readers who bought this book also bought X" is rediscovered. The agregation of lots of small sales is important but also the data mining possibilities it gives between the short and long tail. It may be that lots of stuff on the long tail is there for a reason, it is crap, but there are a few gems hidden away that computers can discover by analyzing customer choice.
Slashdot Mirror
> What makes you think Japanese copied your engineering? Unlike British and American cars in the '80s when the Japanese began to dominate the auto market,
I actually had a Japanese car in the mid-eighties. They were horrible horrible rust buckets even compared to the awful cars from British Leyland, they sold because you got everything in the basic package whereas with a British car you would pay a Pony just to have a passenger side door mirror and a hundred sovs to have a car radio. (for American readers a Pony is approx $45).
It was only later that they began to produce good quality products... so much so that Toyota and Honda became a by-word for quality. Of course compared to some of the junk Detroit produced in the 80s they must have seemed like a breath of fresh air.
This Patent application for a system to analyze and compare of portfolios by citation submitted by Microsoft sounds like it might actually help a patent examiner find prior art for all these Microsoft software patents. It describes a system for classifying documents and finding and analyzing relations (citations) between two sets of documents. Although that does sound a lot like PageRank and anchor text analysis doesn't it?
I'm slowly working through the meat of these patents but the first one in the list Ranking results using multiple nested ranking appears to document the current state of the art in search. That is that ranking algorithms are applied in stages to progressively filter results. It doesn't appear to describe anything new.
> easy to spam
I should maybe clarify that. The results put too much weight on blogs and on on-page factors such as keywords in the URL or domain name. This has been a constant theme for MSN search properties. The results are certainly different from Google but they are not better quality.
it is only a hit if someone uses Live.com, searches on results and then clicks on a link. Measuring on searches that arrive at a website then the varous MS properties are #3. The result from Live.com are not good either. Lots of dupe results and easy to spam.
> And before anyone brings it up, yes I am aware that zero day means the exploit was released the day the vulnerability was announced/discovered. That still doesn't change my opinion.
ahhh, I didn't know that but there is so much jargon around these days from people trying to sound sexy and intelligent I do let a lot go over my head. Thanks for the clarification. I've been hearing "zero day zero day" everywhere I thought it must be some kind of clevel attack like Birthday or something. There you go, learn something new every zero day.
You forget a major problem with farmed fish... they feed them on food pellets made of fish! No fish to catch, no farmed fish. Most of the food pellets used in the planet come from fish farmed around the Pacific coast of latin American. Its like Soylent Green for fish, which is probably what we will be eating by 2048!
> Click fraud is so rampant at this point, that I wouldn't consider using AdWords until they have a real solution to this.
The figure I hear for click fraud is around 20% but this isn't a problem unless your advertising budget is bringing in less than you spend. Most advertisers report good success with AdWords despite the fraud. Unlike an ad in BusinessWeek you can monitor every click coming through to your site with CTA to see if it makes a sale. You could say budget a couple of hundred dollars and see exactly what they makes for you. If it doesn't work stop using CTA.
In short click fraud is only a problem if you are not seeing a return from your ad budget and this you can monitor much more easily with CTA then with other forms of advertising.
> Google depends on new content constantly being added to the web.
This is hyperbole. Google depends on people using their search engine in preference to Live.com or Yahoo! and then rather than clicking on the free results, clicking on the sponsored ones. Google depends on knowing how to get the mix between relevant free and paid for results right. It also in part depends on a netword of websites taking up its AdSense programme and for its AdSense adverts to be more appealing than any internal link or bouncing out of the site.
Yeah, I've read through the DMCA and it looks like YouTube falls down on a few points. As a poster above says on these grounds someone you set up a:
YouWarez.com
site allowing people to share software charging for downloads and so long as it responds to take down notices it would be legal. Yeah right.
As for the argument that "YouTube wouldn't work if it moderated uploads"... well boohoohoo, isn't it usually up to businesses to ensure they operate within the law.
It seems pretty far fetched that YouTube is just some innocent "common carrier".
Okay how about "first purveyor of bug riddled software and daft eastern european ideas about programming" in space? Is that okay?
> france aerobase mayle point org
he means "at" as in "@" not aerobase - dontcha just love these expats who are oh so immersed in the French culture zey eeer cannot speek zee English no more?
or to paraphrase: Marketing
and the author managed to get through the whole article without using the FLA: VRML!
> Today Google is arguably the number one place to work for in the US.
I thought that was working as ahem "an actor" for Playboy Productions? I've always fancied a job in penetration testing?
How about a piece about people who turned Google down? Google were desperate to hire the writer of SquashFS onto their team of geeks, offering him all sorts of incentives to scrabble aboard (this was pre-IPO too). He turned them down because he didn't feel he would be free enough to continue development of SquashFS.
Kudos to the geek who puts OSS before a cushy job at Google and untold wealth in stock options.
Finally the tin foil hat brigade has something to teach us. To stop your RFID cards being read you simply need two sheets of tin foil (aka bacofoil) on either side of your wallet. I predict that such wallets will soon be on sale as will metalized pockets for coats.
|| Music company lawyers first warned and then sued individual users who downloaded their songs.
:-)
|Good thing thats perfectly legal in my country.
In Eastern Europe there are more effetive ways of dealing with copyright infringers
> So why cant Google Video
Google does comply with the DCMA but it is quite a complex procedure you have to go through to show you are the copyright holder. It is not just a question of blasting off an email or tagging a video you can see violates your or someone else copyright.
DCMA seems to be getting a bit overused. It is designed to extend common carrier type status to ISPs. Having read the relevant sections it is not obvious that it covers an online service that is sytematically profiting from copyright content. But only a judge/court could decide if that is the case. I suspect that all the services such as Google Video that are currently trying to hide behind the DCMA fig-leaf don't want to see it tested in court.
I actually have your book Intelligent Java Applications
This judgement, if followed through, would be a big blow for continued US governance of ICANN. The Free speech argument is good as afar as it goes but don't people also have the right not to listen to the message? The judge is effectively saying that if someone is spouting crap defended by the right of free speech he also has the right to restrain people and force them to listen to this message. That surely can't be right, even in the United States.
A solar still produces water in the desert and uses no external energy source other than sunlight (there is plent of that in the desert)
Yeah I read that but it doesn't seem to cover YouTube too well. YouTube's express reason for existing is selling advertising on the back of largely pirated material. It is not some ISP who happens to have such pirate material travelling over its wires at the "direction of a third party". I don't think the DCMA will protect them.
Arianne 5 is one of the best launch vehicles in the known universe. For a change France is concentrating on practicalies - comms systems, observation and weather satellites, interplanetary studies etc. ESA have had some fantastic programmes recently. Whinching over-evolved chimps into space on the back of ICBM as some kind of vanity exercise (a la China etc) is not where it is at.
> The only reason why Amazon keeps coming up is that they collectively sell lots of esoteria, thus managing to hit a farther end in the population dropoff (i.e. the longest part of the tail) than a business like AtariAge could reasonably profit from.
That is not the example Chris uses though. He sites the author who had been in the doldrums for years then, via Amazon's "readers who bought this book also bought X" is rediscovered. The agregation of lots of small sales is important but also the data mining possibilities it gives between the short and long tail. It may be that lots of stuff on the long tail is there for a reason, it is crap, but there are a few gems hidden away that computers can discover by analyzing customer choice.