My question is why was this in ANY of their services TOS?
Because Google services, in order to function properly, need to copy and redistribute user-uploaded content with, in the absence of a license, could potentially be construed as a violation of copyright. The inclusion of the license in the TOS protects them against lawsuits for the normal operation of services which involve sharing material which may be protected by copyright.
If I were to setup something like Picasa then I would want to word the TOS in a way such that the ALL rights to uploaded pictures stay with the original owner.
If the original owner didn't provide you with a license for any rights, then you wouldn't have legal permission to copy and redistribute the works on their behalf.
The original Microsoft anti-trust was brought by a Democratic President who got distracted by Monica-Gate and eager to please all in the aftermath...
It would be more accurate to say that the original Microsoft antitrust case was brought under a Democratic administration whose second term ended while the case was in progress; Microsoft was left off the hook by the Bush Administration, not as a "please everyone" move by the Clinton Administration.
You know one major reason why this would be hard as hell to get passed?
One reason why it would be hard to get passed is that it is contrary to the entire theory and purpose of a criminal justice system, to wit, to provide for dealing with offenses that need to be addressed because they threaten the public, not merely the particular victims, and whose prosecution is, therefore, reserved to those who are elected to serve the public interest.
Further, because of protections against double jeopardy, it would allow real criminals to get off by being prosecuted incompetently by independents that were either hyperzealous amateurs or secret coconspirators.
For things where you are harmed and want to sue, we have the civil justice system, and most criminal acts which cause harm to individuals can also be pursued as civil matters.
CPUs use a let less power idle than working. I'd rather waste potential CPU power than real electric power.
And I'd rather get whatever I'm doing done quicker so I can put the computer back in hibernation and turn the monitor off, and not waste anything.
Re:Market. People. they decide. and they did.
on
Django 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 2, Informative
PHP is nice example. It had advantage in allowing having business logic directly in HTML pages (i.e. easy creation of dynamic pages compared to CGI), and was free. But there was a disadvantage to this approach, so the MVC model and frameworks using templates were invented.
Yes, the Model-View-Controller model was invented to deal with problems identified in PHP-based webapps. The amazing part of this is that MVC was first described in 1979, and PHP wasn't invented until 1995, so clearly there was considerable time travel involved.
Most people who haven't written any Python think it's an awful idea. Most people who spend a few hours learning Python change their mind.
I've spent more than a few hours learning Python. I like most things about Python (though, in most areas, I like Ruby -- which I started learning later -- more than Python), except the indentation thing.
Since we cannot anyways see the satellite in the morning, I wonder whether we can find an object if it absorbs the EM - since it will look like the background in the night?
There are things that provide or reflect EM radiation from beyond the orbit of satellites in the sky at night; the most obvious being the moon and stars.
Just to expand on the medical terminology comment, the upcoming new X12 5010 data format standard, expected to be put into law via HIPAA probably by 2010, was developed by a 3rd party. It boils my brain to know that the government is going to yet again mandate that we follow rules developed by a 3rd party (as good as they might be), AND PAY A SEVERAL HUNDRED DOLLAR LICENSING FEE TO SAID PRIVATE CORPORATION!
As, of course, was the preceding 4010 standard (the same "third party" that developed the 5010); early on, the Department of Health and Human Services subsidized the publication of the standards documents, and they were consequently available free of charge (in electronic format). But they stopped doing so, so you have to shell out a pretty penny to get them (either the 4010 or the 5010.)
Paul Thurrott's coverage of the Google Chrome leak/announcement ends with the remark that "what we've really got here is an example of Google pulling a Microsoft: Creating an unnecessary me-too product that they can use for product tie-ins. All of the features here are present in existing browsers, all of them. So what does Google really bring to the table?"
A JavaScript engine 10x faster than current versions of Firefox and Safari, and 56x faster than the current version of IE, at least according to the Wired article on Chrome.
I mean, if embryonic stem cells could really cure cancer, paralysis, palsy and alzheimers, and can do so much, don't you think big Phara would and should pay for their research when they stand to make not billions, but trillions off of all of these miracle cures?
Like most areas of basic research, any particular avenue of embryonic stem cell research has a very low probability of leading to marketable product in any reasonable time frame (but potentially a very strong upside if it succeeds). Further, the benefit to be realized if it does succeed will be over a very long period of time, far exceeding the amount of time those benefits would be exclusive to the discoverer under patent laws. So, there are a number of reasons why. even if investing in a wide range of basic research including multiple different research avenues in the embryonic stem cell world are, on balance, expected to produce an overall positive result when taken together, individual corporations have very little incentive to undertake that research on their own.
Untyped languages are evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil. They're designed by lazy-ass programmers for other lazy ass programmers. If you want to change variable type, then you should be forced to explicitly cast, not have the dumb-ass interpreter do it for you.
In dynamic languages, variables often don't have types, so talking about changing the type of a variable doesn't even have any meaning. In some languages, values don't really have types beyond "object" (classes in OOP are not the same things as types in general, though the concepts may be conflated in certain languages) so talking about changing the type of values wouldn't make sense, either.
Further, the use of profanity does not mask the absence of either evidence or reasoning offered to support your position.
I've never, ever seen JavaScript used for or run in such a way that it's not intended to be used with a webpage (though I have seen semi-standalone JavaScript interpreters, they're mostly intended for working out bugs without using a full browser).
I've never, ever seen a live collosal squid, nevertheless, I'm quite aware that they exist. Similarly, while I've never seen non-demonstration desktop or server-side JavaScript usage, I'm well aware that that exists.
Or if you want to look at it the other way, I've never seen Python/Perl/Ruby scripting capabilities embedded in a browser, setting them apart in the same way.
The current lack of widespread browser support (combined with widespread browser support of JavaScript) does keep that from happening much, though there are a number of efforts to host those in a browser environment to allow them to be used that way (Microsoft, IIRC, is pushing technology that lets you run anything that runs on.Net in a browser, including IronRuby, IronPython, etc.; Mozilla has a project to build support for non-JS scripting languages on top of their new VM used in their JS engine; there is the HotRuby VM, which is a VM executing Ruby 1.9 bytecode that is written in JS to allow pre-compiled Ruby to run in a browser or other JS environment; and so on.)
I think Perl's going down that route, and the longer it takes, the fewer programmers there will be to try it when it comes available. I'm not a Perl hater by any means, but I jumped ship for Python a long time ago. I think most Perl hackers have done the same, or picked up Ruby.
Ruby's going through its own somewhat painful transition right now, what with 1.8.7 and 1.9. Hopefully that'll work itself out fairly soon, though.
And if government and private funding for fundamental research dries up, what then? They'd have nowhere to go, that's what.
Not so much because of the labs (which are often supported, to some degree, by the companies that pay to use them), but because the VC money that goes to those startups is, exactly, "private funding for fundamental research", so if it dried up, those startups wouldn't get the capital to exist in the first place.
Of course, if you posit the elimination of "government and private financing" for any industry, it is equivalent to assuming the elimination of the industry. So what?
Startups that you never see except in highly-specialized media (or if you happen to know someone who works there), because they either fail, or about the time they'd make news big enough to put them in the mainstream press (and for the very accomplishment that would put them there), they are bought out by one of the big players who wants to take the IP and commercialize it, and its usually just as cheap (and far less risk of disputes down the road) to buy the company as to license the technology.
Do you understand the kind of research facilities and monetary outlay required to study nanotechnology or materials science?
Lots of science startups don't own all of their own lab facilities, they make arrangements to use university labs or those owned by other firms. At least, that's been the case in every industry related to the sciences I've seen, I would imagine that nanotech and materials science aren't completely different than everything else.
Maybe I'm reading this wrong. But, an index is not the same as a pk or a fk.
A primary key is both a constraint and an index, at least in every RDBMS I've ever seen (it is, IIRC, in the standard semantically equivalent to UNIQUE NOT NULL, which is an index that implies a constraint and a second constraint, though SQLite, again IIRC, treats it only as UNIQUE.)
A poorly indexed table may or may not have a PK (it could be poorly indexed and still have a PK), but not having a PK would be one example of a poorly-indexed table.
Not only do you not have to care about how fast your program runs, you also have to not care about its stability when using Ruby. You'll spend a lot of time trying to fix and optimize the unoptimizable.
Actually, once you have the stats on what needs optimized, if you reach the wall of optimization within Ruby and genuinely need further optimization, you use the well-defined C interface, and optimize by rewriting the portions that need optimization in C. Same with Python. You get working, correct software, and then you optimize what you need with the right tool for the optimization needed. Programming languages aren't exclusive choices.
Why wouldn't the web site use their existing private key to perform an authenticated update the notary's records shortly before expiration
Because the whole idea is that the web sites never initiate contact with notaries; the notaries check the web sites current credentials on client demand and store history.
AFAIGT (as far as I get it) - the idea is that if all notaries show the certificate changed on the same day, it's likely it was a renewal or actual change. If some show a change, or all do but on different dates, then something fishy is going on.
But then, a MITM close (by network topology) to the server may succeed rather easily, since it will be appear to a change on the same date.
We've made progress down about ten different paths over the past eighteen months, but we haven't been able to reach the end of any of them yet.
Surprise, surprise.
Maybe their overall vision was too ambitious, maybe the whole central hub idea was never going to work, maybe not. But if you can't focus and prioritize tasks so that you actually deliver real concrete value, rather than building pieces of lots of different features, you aren't going to have anything that's worth anything, no matter how acheivable your goal is.
But its easier to say the whole idea was "too ambitious" than to say "the execution was completely fouled up", especially when you are the one with management responsibility for the execution, but certainly people above you that weren't involved in the execution were involved in (or at least bought off on) the broad concept.
The MITM attack would have to be in-place from the moment the self-signed cert is first used, because the "notaries" keep logs and would notice a change.
No, it would need to be in place before the moment that the self-signed cert is first reported to the notaries, if the functionality of reporting such mismatches were enabled, which it apparently is not by default at least now.
But what do they do even if it has changed over time? After all, if the idea is to render authority-signed certs unnecessary, wouldn't you expect servers to abandon them as they expire, replacing them with self-signed certs? Is that going to be flagged as risky?
Seriously, the language a person thinks or writes makes significant difference in their view of the world (and universe).
The purpose of this is not religious proselytization (consider the other contents). The purpose is providing a tool for translating a wide variety of languages which exist now, so that anyone who finds one can have a head start on deciphering anything else they find from the present day.
Slashdot Mirror
Because Google services, in order to function properly, need to copy and redistribute user-uploaded content with, in the absence of a license, could potentially be construed as a violation of copyright. The inclusion of the license in the TOS protects them against lawsuits for the normal operation of services which involve sharing material which may be protected by copyright.
If the original owner didn't provide you with a license for any rights, then you wouldn't have legal permission to copy and redistribute the works on their behalf.
It would be more accurate to say that the original Microsoft antitrust case was brought under a Democratic administration whose second term ended while the case was in progress; Microsoft was left off the hook by the Bush Administration, not as a "please everyone" move by the Clinton Administration.
One reason why it would be hard to get passed is that it is contrary to the entire theory and purpose of a criminal justice system, to wit, to provide for dealing with offenses that need to be addressed because they threaten the public, not merely the particular victims, and whose prosecution is, therefore, reserved to those who are elected to serve the public interest.
Further, because of protections against double jeopardy, it would allow real criminals to get off by being prosecuted incompetently by independents that were either hyperzealous amateurs or secret coconspirators.
For things where you are harmed and want to sue, we have the civil justice system, and most criminal acts which cause harm to individuals can also be pursued as civil matters.
And I'd rather get whatever I'm doing done quicker so I can put the computer back in hibernation and turn the monitor off, and not waste anything.
Yes, the Model-View-Controller model was invented to deal with problems identified in PHP-based webapps. The amazing part of this is that MVC was first described in 1979, and PHP wasn't invented until 1995, so clearly there was considerable time travel involved.
I've spent more than a few hours learning Python. I like most things about Python (though, in most areas, I like Ruby -- which I started learning later -- more than Python), except the indentation thing.
There are things that provide or reflect EM radiation from beyond the orbit of satellites in the sky at night; the most obvious being the moon and stars.
As, of course, was the preceding 4010 standard (the same "third party" that developed the 5010); early on, the Department of Health and Human Services subsidized the publication of the standards documents, and they were consequently available free of charge (in electronic format). But they stopped doing so, so you have to shell out a pretty penny to get them (either the 4010 or the 5010.)
The language is JavaScript. AppJet's founders did not create it. They provide a hosting environment and some libraries.
A JavaScript engine 10x faster than current versions of Firefox and Safari, and 56x faster than the current version of IE, at least according to the Wired article on Chrome.
Like most areas of basic research, any particular avenue of embryonic stem cell research has a very low probability of leading to marketable product in any reasonable time frame (but potentially a very strong upside if it succeeds). Further, the benefit to be realized if it does succeed will be over a very long period of time, far exceeding the amount of time those benefits would be exclusive to the discoverer under patent laws. So, there are a number of reasons why. even if investing in a wide range of basic research including multiple different research avenues in the embryonic stem cell world are, on balance, expected to produce an overall positive result when taken together, individual corporations have very little incentive to undertake that research on their own.
In dynamic languages, variables often don't have types, so talking about changing the type of a variable doesn't even have any meaning. In some languages, values don't really have types beyond "object" (classes in OOP are not the same things as types in general, though the concepts may be conflated in certain languages) so talking about changing the type of values wouldn't make sense, either.
Further, the use of profanity does not mask the absence of either evidence or reasoning offered to support your position.
I've never, ever seen a live collosal squid, nevertheless, I'm quite aware that they exist. Similarly, while I've never seen non-demonstration desktop or server-side JavaScript usage, I'm well aware that that exists.
The current lack of widespread browser support (combined with widespread browser support of JavaScript) does keep that from happening much, though there are a number of efforts to host those in a browser environment to allow them to be used that way (Microsoft, IIRC, is pushing technology that lets you run anything that runs on .Net in a browser, including IronRuby, IronPython, etc.; Mozilla has a project to build support for non-JS scripting languages on top of their new VM used in their JS engine; there is the HotRuby VM, which is a VM executing Ruby 1.9 bytecode that is written in JS to allow pre-compiled Ruby to run in a browser or other JS environment; and so on.)
Ruby's going through its own somewhat painful transition right now, what with 1.8.7 and 1.9. Hopefully that'll work itself out fairly soon, though.
No, its not, though Web browsers are the most well-known JavaScript environments.
That's not true of the main, stable version of Ruby (MRI 1.8.x), though its true of Ruby 1.9 and some alternative implementations.
If it were more dynamic, and newer, they might; the distinction does seem pretty arbitrary and not all that useful.
Not so much because of the labs (which are often supported, to some degree, by the companies that pay to use them), but because the VC money that goes to those startups is, exactly, "private funding for fundamental research", so if it dried up, those startups wouldn't get the capital to exist in the first place.
Of course, if you posit the elimination of "government and private financing" for any industry, it is equivalent to assuming the elimination of the industry. So what?
Startups that you never see except in highly-specialized media (or if you happen to know someone who works there), because they either fail, or about the time they'd make news big enough to put them in the mainstream press (and for the very accomplishment that would put them there), they are bought out by one of the big players who wants to take the IP and commercialize it, and its usually just as cheap (and far less risk of disputes down the road) to buy the company as to license the technology.
Lots of science startups don't own all of their own lab facilities, they make arrangements to use university labs or those owned by other firms. At least, that's been the case in every industry related to the sciences I've seen, I would imagine that nanotech and materials science aren't completely different than everything else.
A primary key is both a constraint and an index, at least in every RDBMS I've ever seen (it is, IIRC, in the standard semantically equivalent to UNIQUE NOT NULL, which is an index that implies a constraint and a second constraint, though SQLite, again IIRC, treats it only as UNIQUE.)
A poorly indexed table may or may not have a PK (it could be poorly indexed and still have a PK), but not having a PK would be one example of a poorly-indexed table.
Actually, once you have the stats on what needs optimized, if you reach the wall of optimization within Ruby and genuinely need further optimization, you use the well-defined C interface, and optimize by rewriting the portions that need optimization in C. Same with Python. You get working, correct software, and then you optimize what you need with the right tool for the optimization needed. Programming languages aren't exclusive choices.
Because the whole idea is that the web sites never initiate contact with notaries; the notaries check the web sites current credentials on client demand and store history.
But then, a MITM close (by network topology) to the server may succeed rather easily, since it will be appear to a change on the same date.
Surprise, surprise.
Maybe their overall vision was too ambitious, maybe the whole central hub idea was never going to work, maybe not. But if you can't focus and prioritize tasks so that you actually deliver real concrete value, rather than building pieces of lots of different features, you aren't going to have anything that's worth anything, no matter how acheivable your goal is.
But its easier to say the whole idea was "too ambitious" than to say "the execution was completely fouled up", especially when you are the one with management responsibility for the execution, but certainly people above you that weren't involved in the execution were involved in (or at least bought off on) the broad concept.
No, it would need to be in place before the moment that the self-signed cert is first reported to the notaries, if the functionality of reporting such mismatches were enabled, which it apparently is not by default at least now.
But what do they do even if it has changed over time? After all, if the idea is to render authority-signed certs unnecessary, wouldn't you expect servers to abandon them as they expire, replacing them with self-signed certs? Is that going to be flagged as risky?
1500 different ones.
We don't now have the original Hebrew version.
The purpose of this is not religious proselytization (consider the other contents). The purpose is providing a tool for translating a wide variety of languages which exist now, so that anyone who finds one can have a head start on deciphering anything else they find from the present day.