OK, it's obvious that the permissions are worded vaguely (i.e., not in the usually thick legalese). If you choose to read to your children, or a blind friend, you're not violating the agreement (at least not in a way that will land you in court). Sure, if I chose to read it to a group of colleagues or at a bookstore event, that'd be a violation. There's little reason to get upset over the concise and simple language. It appears that everyone's getting really pissed that these guys didn't drown them in details. I would rather it be open for limited interpretation than have a 200 page itemization of appropriate places to read aloud.
Slashdotters are often eager for a chance to scream "bloody murder!!", when all that this really warrants is "um, maybe they should change it to PUBLIC reading."
The biggest issue is what users are looking for. Things should be organized the way users think of them. Sure a powerful search engine will help some, but effective organization and naming conventions will be even more powerful. So if, for example, you have a section on vehicle and transportation policy, don't call it Vehicle & Transportation Policy. Call it something intuitive to the user (e.g. Stuff about Your Car). I good search engine should be a fall back, not the prime navigation tool. Catagorize items around the users life, not the bureaucrat's Policy Manual. Someone will more likely ask "Can I burn that there old outhouse in my backyard?" than "What are the residential zoning requirements of my neighborhood?"
And no one is going to a government page for entertainment. Skip the Flash, no one's going to say "Hey, you seen that killer Flash intro at the DMV homepage?"
How can the government be considered an effective representative of the "people"? I would run like hell from a country where the government has any power over what I can listen to, what games I can play, what art I can enjoy.
Rather than seek a "utopia" that would leave us with the economic strength of North Korea, let's just abolish Limited Liability Corporations. CEOs and ranking company officials should be criminally (not civilly) liable for their actions. If Mr. Gates' Company violates the law, he should be held personally responsible insofar as he was a decision-maker.
-we're all pink and squishy on the inside.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, it's obvious that the permissions are worded vaguely (i.e., not in the usually thick legalese). If you choose to read to your children, or a blind friend, you're not violating the agreement (at least not in a way that will land you in court). Sure, if I chose to read it to a group of colleagues or at a bookstore event, that'd be a violation. There's little reason to get upset over the concise and simple language. It appears that everyone's getting really pissed that these guys didn't drown them in details. I would rather it be open for limited interpretation than have a 200 page itemization of appropriate places to read aloud. Slashdotters are often eager for a chance to scream "bloody murder!!", when all that this really warrants is "um, maybe they should change it to PUBLIC reading."
to summarize: big deal.
The biggest issue is what users are looking for. Things should be organized the way users think of them. Sure a powerful search engine will help some, but effective organization and naming conventions will be even more powerful. So if, for example, you have a section on vehicle and transportation policy, don't call it Vehicle & Transportation Policy. Call it something intuitive to the user (e.g. Stuff about Your Car). I good search engine should be a fall back, not the prime navigation tool. Catagorize items around the users life, not the bureaucrat's Policy Manual. Someone will more likely ask "Can I burn that there old outhouse in my backyard?" than "What are the residential zoning requirements of my neighborhood?" And no one is going to a government page for entertainment. Skip the Flash, no one's going to say "Hey, you seen that killer Flash intro at the DMV homepage?"
How can the government be considered an effective representative of the "people"? I would run like hell from a country where the government has any power over what I can listen to, what games I can play, what art I can enjoy. Rather than seek a "utopia" that would leave us with the economic strength of North Korea, let's just abolish Limited Liability Corporations. CEOs and ranking company officials should be criminally (not civilly) liable for their actions. If Mr. Gates' Company violates the law, he should be held personally responsible insofar as he was a decision-maker. -we're all pink and squishy on the inside.