Finally, someone, somewhere - particularly in the Whitehouse, is thinking. I don't really care why, I just hope this bill never passes. The last thing we need are more enforcers of ignorance, taking advantage of those not in power.
wow...first comment?!
If people haven't realized by now that unnecessary patents hamper innovation, they need to wake up. Common sense would be awesome if applied to the patent system - that would perhaps be the single best improvement in the system. Also, having patents summarized in plain English would be nice for small companies desiring to create products and solutions. If the people involved in the system acknowledge its flaws...you know it's well past time to do something, as many insiders prefer blissful ignorance.
This law does not allow for "Greater government accountability!" It greatly diminishes accountability, while allowing for more abusive powers. I have no idea where you came up with your conclusion. You are correct in saying that they have to have paperwork filed within a week, but you fail to note that they can incorrectly file, or be denied, but appeal, reappeal, appeal again...dragging out the process for 4 months (I think that was the max of an "Emergency Tapping"). By that time, it won't matter what the court does, as their tapping will most likely be complete. It also allow for much more broad tapping, such as at a datacenter level, which is extremely invasive. Their tapping devices can also be configured to assist the FBI with investigations/curiosities over copyright violation, file sharing, illegal crap, etc...not just international terrorism bs.
I'm not trying to incite an argument, I'm just saying that I don't think you, and others, fully understand the provisions in this law. Check out the EFF's take on it...it's not a good law, it's not for the people, and it does very little to increase security/track terrorists.
Re:Head First Series = Kick Ass
on
Head First C#
·
· Score: 2
I have read the OOP book in this series and I learned lots from it. I had done PHP in a very non-OOP way, so seeing this book, visually, and having many examples that I could relate to really helped me learn fast. It was easy to understand and easy to read. It was repetitive, but that was helpful for me. It also showed different methods/scenarios for using the same principle, helpful if you don't understand why/how a certain thing works - as seeing it from different angles can help understanding.
The HeadFirst series is easy to read, yet can teach "advanced" concepts with relative ease. It was a great help for me learning OOP, and I will most likely but this C# book. It is sad to hear about all the errata, but the idea/message will get through.
I was bummed I wanted to comment, because I also wanted to mod the parent up, oh well...now you all can enjoy my 10 cents.
Viacom wants the data to prove that infringing material is more popular than user-created videos, which could be used to increase Google's liability if it is found guilty of contributory infringement.
It would seem, based on the language of this judgment, that Viacom should wait until AFTER a guilty verdict and been announced, which could necessitate this kind of data. Otherwise, Google shouldn't have to turn over Terabytes of personal data until it is found guilty...in which case I still don't think that should expose user data...but that is besides the point.
Hello Viacom?! You need user data so that IF Google MAY be guilty it MIGHT help you get more money - ######## greedy morons.
It's amazing how many times I try to stress this fact to the programmers/dev's I work with. I work for a very large industrial company, which unfortunately, has little emphasis on IT, but depends heavily on apps they create. Therefore, our developers are our designers, which is a rough combination. I have a degree in UI/Graphic Design, and have an interest in programming...so I make a very effective bridge between the two sides. However, trying to explain a developer that the usability of something is extremely important:it is the only thing a user will ever know/see, is a hard concept for them to understand. They just care about the programmatic efficiency and architecture, saying all web apps are forms and such. Poor guys. Hopefully this book will help me learn better methods on bridging that gap!
Slashdot Mirror
Blocked here too... If anyone knows a different place, well then...
Finally, someone, somewhere - particularly in the Whitehouse, is thinking. I don't really care why, I just hope this bill never passes. The last thing we need are more enforcers of ignorance, taking advantage of those not in power.
wow...first comment?! If people haven't realized by now that unnecessary patents hamper innovation, they need to wake up. Common sense would be awesome if applied to the patent system - that would perhaps be the single best improvement in the system. Also, having patents summarized in plain English would be nice for small companies desiring to create products and solutions. If the people involved in the system acknowledge its flaws...you know it's well past time to do something, as many insiders prefer blissful ignorance.
Some common sense comes into play! Hopefully something happens as a result of this.
This law does not allow for "Greater government accountability!" It greatly diminishes accountability, while allowing for more abusive powers. I have no idea where you came up with your conclusion. You are correct in saying that they have to have paperwork filed within a week, but you fail to note that they can incorrectly file, or be denied, but appeal, reappeal, appeal again...dragging out the process for 4 months (I think that was the max of an "Emergency Tapping"). By that time, it won't matter what the court does, as their tapping will most likely be complete. It also allow for much more broad tapping, such as at a datacenter level, which is extremely invasive. Their tapping devices can also be configured to assist the FBI with investigations/curiosities over copyright violation, file sharing, illegal crap, etc...not just international terrorism bs. I'm not trying to incite an argument, I'm just saying that I don't think you, and others, fully understand the provisions in this law. Check out the EFF's take on it...it's not a good law, it's not for the people, and it does very little to increase security/track terrorists.
I have read the OOP book in this series and I learned lots from it. I had done PHP in a very non-OOP way, so seeing this book, visually, and having many examples that I could relate to really helped me learn fast. It was easy to understand and easy to read. It was repetitive, but that was helpful for me. It also showed different methods/scenarios for using the same principle, helpful if you don't understand why/how a certain thing works - as seeing it from different angles can help understanding. The HeadFirst series is easy to read, yet can teach "advanced" concepts with relative ease. It was a great help for me learning OOP, and I will most likely but this C# book. It is sad to hear about all the errata, but the idea/message will get through. I was bummed I wanted to comment, because I also wanted to mod the parent up, oh well...now you all can enjoy my 10 cents.
Viacom wants the data to prove that infringing material is more popular than user-created videos, which could be used to increase Google's liability if it is found guilty of contributory infringement.
It would seem, based on the language of this judgment, that Viacom should wait until AFTER a guilty verdict and been announced, which could necessitate this kind of data. Otherwise, Google shouldn't have to turn over Terabytes of personal data until it is found guilty...in which case I still don't think that should expose user data...but that is besides the point.
Hello Viacom?! You need user data so that IF Google MAY be guilty it MIGHT help you get more money - ######## greedy morons.
It's amazing how many times I try to stress this fact to the programmers/dev's I work with. I work for a very large industrial company, which unfortunately, has little emphasis on IT, but depends heavily on apps they create. Therefore, our developers are our designers, which is a rough combination. I have a degree in UI/Graphic Design, and have an interest in programming...so I make a very effective bridge between the two sides. However, trying to explain a developer that the usability of something is extremely important:it is the only thing a user will ever know/see, is a hard concept for them to understand. They just care about the programmatic efficiency and architecture, saying all web apps are forms and such. Poor guys. Hopefully this book will help me learn better methods on bridging that gap!