It's an API for a Google-hosted service that controls the device.
Apparently, its (still) amazon (that doesn't change its bad):
$ dig home.nest.com
[...];; ANSWER SECTION: home.nest.com. 120 IN CNAME home-hme01-production-526484131.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com. home-hme01-production-526484131.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com. 60 IN A 54.235.188.46 home-hme01-production-526484131.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com. 60 IN A 184.72.232.126 home-hme01-production-526484131.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com. 60 IN A 54.225.207.213
Even in the tech world, one year is not long. You should rather limit it to 10 years. Make the limits depending on the industry. In software development, innovation is blazingly fast, so you don't need so long terms here. 7-10 years would be enough for you to make sufficient money. OK, perhaps you need more in the embedded sector.
Compare email (you can choose your provider, but regardless, you can email anyone) vs. social networking (if you choose Facebook and your friend is the one person on Google+, you're out of luck)
That's one of the reasons why I have email, jabber, and sms (and webrtc), but no social network.
For example a human can recognize the picture of another person in about 100 ms. Given the processing time of 1 ms for an individual neuron this implies that a certain number of neurons, but less than 100, are involved in serial; whereas the complexity of the task is evidence for a parallel processing, because a difficult recognition task can not be performed by such a small number of neurons, example taken from [zell94, p24,]. This phenomenon is known as the 100-step-rule.
Google is not such a huge market leader for video than Microsoft is for Desktop OS. In the video platform market there is still something like real competition.
It's not "giving more value" to it -- it's just making it harder to find. It only has value if people know it exists and are willing to pay someone else to find it. If people don't even know the thing exists, why would anyone pay?
If people know that the result of their google search might not cover certain aspects of a person, as they know of the "right to be forgotten", then they perhaps pay someone who searches for the information instead of just relying on the google search.
Wrong, the right analogy would be that you don't just build a embankment right before your own house, but spanning the whole affected part of the shore, including your neighbours.
Thank you, Mr. Canadian Judge for imposing the world's conflicting and restrictive laws on the Internet.
If the courts remain inactive, they will soon face strong international internet companies which build their own oligarch-controlled "states" that apply their own rules. Look at the restrictions on apple app store or the recent mega-troll made by amazon.
There is no global institution to apply rules to those companies. If you only apply the rules of their "home country", they like to choose the most liberal state as "home country" so that they can do what they want. Why did facebook chose Ireland for Europe? Of course I'm against north korea enabling to forbid global internet access. Its hard to find a good solution to this problem, but to allow those huge companies to act like states is not the right direction. They are there to help the economy, not to play around with it.
The Internet can bring more freedom to people than anything else in the world, but it shouldn't be an anarchy. The outdated business model of the media companies shouldn't be fought by technology, but by politics.
At least the canadian judges do at least understand how the internet works, when they requested a global ban. However, rulings like these will create a (black?) market for disclosing information. The court is only giving more value to the information, not stopping it spreading.
I'm not against the idea of responsible GMO, but I'm against monsanto feudalism. I admit research is expensive, but I think that the money should come from taxes instead.
What about Min Soo-Ah, how will wifi balloons save her from living in a country where hot water doesn't reach above the second floor?
That ain't such a big problem, if you don't have cold winters. You should name basic santitation or access to clean water first. We would have achieved a lot when there were a toilet and a tap for clean (hot or cold) water in every house in the world.
Being able to reuse more browser code might well improve the existing proprietary client; but (as with any DRM system) you can't eliminate special client software
I've meant that the developers don't have to reinvent the wheel. Of course the software will be closed source, but the developers of the medical application won't need to invent their own access control, but can use this component. Its a good idea when it makes hospitals more secure.
You don't need your fridge to send information about its contents to google for the fridge being abled to recieve unidirectional energy price broadcasts. You can design protocols which remove the need for your energy company to know every detail of your energy consumption, and still enable dynamic energy prices.
The original paper has examples where such a DRM-based system has some legitimate usages. One was for patient data. If you want to eliminate special client software there, you can have this system, and run everything on the browser. The system abstracts and standardizes the access control, which is hopefully already present, and helps to close holes in the implementation. For intranets the model perfectly makes sense, however deployment into the wild wide web is of course extremely harmful.
Media people didn't alter the story, as the paper already contained discussion about www deployment, but only picked the bullshit non-intratnet-web part.
I've never seen the movement to HTTPS-only to be bad, but as this always envolves a certificate and therefore registration, I now think that there might be disadvantages connected with forced HTTPS. To some extent, this even resembles the russian blogger law. To run a website, one must have a certificate. To have a certificate, one must register himself. As I still want more websites (including this one) to switch to HTTPS I realize that enforced encryption can be seen as bad. I hope the IETF figures out a far more better CA system, which doesn't need registration, and allows people to set up an apache in their local network.
Slashdot Mirror
It's an API for a Google-hosted service that controls the device.
Apparently, its (still) amazon (that doesn't change its bad):
$ dig home.nest.com
[...] ;; ANSWER SECTION:
home.nest.com. 120 IN CNAME home-hme01-production-526484131.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com.
home-hme01-production-526484131.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com. 60 IN A 54.235.188.46
home-hme01-production-526484131.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com. 60 IN A 184.72.232.126
home-hme01-production-526484131.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com. 60 IN A 54.225.207.213
If this wasn't /., I'd have fed you... Doh!
This is going to introduce yet more attack vectors and bugs into the code.
They won't write it natively, but in js+xul. Won't add much security relevant bugs.
Even in the tech world, one year is not long. You should rather limit it to 10 years. Make the limits depending on the industry. In software development, innovation is blazingly fast, so you don't need so long terms here. 7-10 years would be enough for you to make sufficient money. OK, perhaps you need more in the embedded sector.
How much is that in Library of Congress?
They should copy other stuff first, for example the multiprocess design. Why does Electrolysis have such a slow roadmap?
Compare email (you can choose your provider, but regardless, you can email anyone) vs. social networking (if you choose Facebook and your friend is the one person on Google+, you're out of luck)
That's one of the reasons why I have email, jabber, and sms (and webrtc), but no social network.
Its amazing:
For example a human can recognize the picture of another person in about 100 ms. Given the processing time of 1 ms for an individual neuron this implies that a certain number of neurons, but less than 100, are involved in serial; whereas the complexity of the task is evidence for a parallel processing, because a difficult recognition task can not be performed by such a small number of neurons, example taken from [zell94, p24,]. This phenomenon is known as the 100-step-rule.
How do you index them? Which software?
I admit I have underestimated google's market share. Of course antitrust applies here.
What, no GPS transmitter in the filament of each paper Euro? Amateurs.
They have planned to add RFID. However AFAIK this has never been realized (yet).
Google is not such a huge market leader for video than Microsoft is for Desktop OS. In the video platform market there is still something like real competition.
It's not "giving more value" to it -- it's just making it harder to find. It only has value if people know it exists and are willing to pay someone else to find it. If people don't even know the thing exists, why would anyone pay?
If people know that the result of their google search might not cover certain aspects of a person, as they know of the "right to be forgotten", then they perhaps pay someone who searches for the information instead of just relying on the google search.
Still no Klingon?
At least the Vulcan salute.
Wrong, the right analogy would be that you don't just build a embankment right before your own house, but spanning the whole affected part of the shore, including your neighbours.
Software is like a gas, such is the Internet.
Thank you, Mr. Canadian Judge for imposing the world's conflicting and restrictive laws on the Internet.
If the courts remain inactive, they will soon face strong international internet companies which build their own oligarch-controlled "states" that apply their own rules. Look at the restrictions on apple app store or the recent mega-troll made by amazon.
There is no global institution to apply rules to those companies. If you only apply the rules of their "home country", they like to choose the most liberal state as "home country" so that they can do what they want. Why did facebook chose Ireland for Europe?
Of course I'm against north korea enabling to forbid global internet access. Its hard to find a good solution to this problem, but to allow those huge companies to act like states is not the right direction. They are there to help the economy, not to play around with it.
The Internet can bring more freedom to people than anything else in the world, but it shouldn't be an anarchy. The outdated business model of the media companies shouldn't be fought by technology, but by politics.
At least the canadian judges do at least understand how the internet works, when they requested a global ban. However, rulings like these will create a (black?) market for disclosing information. The court is only giving more value to the information, not stopping it spreading.
I'm not against the idea of responsible GMO, but I'm against monsanto feudalism. I admit research is expensive, but I think that the money should come from taxes instead.
What about Min Soo-Ah, how will wifi balloons save her from living in a country where hot water doesn't reach above the second floor?
That ain't such a big problem, if you don't have cold winters. You should name basic santitation or access to clean water first. We would have achieved a lot when there were a toilet and a tap for clean (hot or cold) water in every house in the world.
Google wil never ever connect the tinfoil people to the internet. It may be any company in the world, but not Google.
Being able to reuse more browser code might well improve the existing proprietary client; but (as with any DRM system) you can't eliminate special client software
I've meant that the developers don't have to reinvent the wheel. Of course the software will be closed source, but the developers of the medical application won't need to invent their own access control, but can use this component. Its a good idea when it makes hospitals more secure.
The Nightmare On Connected Home Street
Connected Home Street itself is already a nightmare.
You don't need your fridge to send information about its contents to google for the fridge being abled to recieve unidirectional energy price broadcasts. You can design protocols which remove the need for your energy company to know every detail of your energy consumption, and still enable dynamic energy prices.
The original paper has examples where such a DRM-based system has some legitimate usages. One was for patient data. If you want to eliminate special client software there, you can have this system, and run everything on the browser. The system abstracts and standardizes the access control, which is hopefully already present, and helps to close holes in the implementation. For intranets the model perfectly makes sense, however deployment into the wild wide web is of course extremely harmful.
Media people didn't alter the story, as the paper already contained discussion about www deployment, but only picked the bullshit non-intratnet-web part.
I've never seen the movement to HTTPS-only to be bad, but as this always envolves a certificate and therefore registration, I now think that there might be disadvantages connected with forced HTTPS. To some extent, this even resembles the russian blogger law. To run a website, one must have a certificate. To have a certificate, one must register himself. As I still want more websites (including this one) to switch to HTTPS I realize that enforced encryption can be seen as bad. I hope the IETF figures out a far more better CA system, which doesn't need registration, and allows people to set up an apache in their local network.