timmyd

Happy to be downvoted for this one.

So a person dies, and robert scoble is concerned about noise filters in Google+? Literally 1-2 hours after their death ?

Please - show some respect for a person and choose a time to post a more adequate title. Amazing that tech pundits have reduced themselves "oh, she's dead BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY! Lets focus on noise filters!"

Sorry. Don't think it's cool.

yep +1 - [clickable - http://www.backupify.com/]

p.s - "Backups for your Google Apps Domain users' Gmail, Google Docs, Google Calendar, Google Contacts and Google Sites data. - $3 per user per month"

For

tl;dr - http://i52.tinypic.com/2hpjg5v.jpg

;)

Edit: Disable right click ? Surely not .... http://i54.tinypic.com/2mzjcl3.jpg

What's better ?

HeadJS [per the link above] - [only a little dev in recent days]

LabJS - http://labjs.com/ [seems litte more active dev]

RequireJS - http://requirejs.org/ [most active dev]

HeadJS dev seems a little on the light side [ala none - see GitHub for each] ? Anyone have any experience with Lab or Require ?

Mr "Pascazi" - refer to http://bit.ly/pEgrbE.

Notably 5.8 in this case - i'll keep a watch but if anyone notices a filing in Australia - let me know and i'm happy to write and object :) Also, incase this fool didn't realize - the evidence trail he is leaving across the web implying that he intends to use it in bad faith is well ... amateur at best.

Also - perhaps Pascazi needs to understand technology a bit more. Notably, learning how bitcoin works.

Let's Pascazi a lesson in law and take him ..... Puts on sunglasses ..... to bits .... YEEEAAAHHHHHHHHH

@wladimir - yeah I get that but it gets a bit tiring when every medium is the "next email" and now he's "quiting email" and then he'll "return to email" ... blah blah

i'm going to be the one to say it - get over yourself MG.

twitter was the "end of email". facebook was the "end of email". IM was the "end of email". SMS was email "end of email". Google+ is now the "end of email". no no ... wait wait wait Apple iMessage is now the "end of email".

yet so email lives on and is still the best communication medium we have on the planet that works and is as universally understood as SMS.

good luck writing interesting stories over the next month. or alternatively - be prepared for G+ spam, twitter+ spam and all the rest. you're just offsetting one advanced SPAM medium for ones which aren't as advanced in SPAM filtering [outrageous generalization :) but true]

Let me clarify ....

TL;DR - it's hyperbole. answer the negative. if they didn't get this permission from you - you could sue them for copyright infringement. every service does it. don't freak.

Long Version:

The key to the text is "non-exclusive" - generally this grants the nonexclusive rights to display the material on a Web site. It also allows the licensee (ala DropBox) let their company use, manage, display [etc] your files.

It's a fairly standard contractual term now days - for example see

http://www.youtube.com/t/terms at 6 C OR even your Gmail Terms ... [http://www.google.com/accounts/TOS?hl=en at 11.]

Youtube - "For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your Content. However, by submitting Content to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, publish, adapt, make available online or electronically transmit, and perform the Content in connection with the Service ...."

Gmail - "By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services."

Generally, the language uses "non-exclusive" in its context which is OK. It basically allows internet services to be internet services

i.e. if they didn't have a non-exclusive licence, how could they use your files - which contain copyright content you own - in their services ? - they couldn't :) By asking for a non-exclusive licence, it means you are permitting DropBox to use it for the purposes of

"worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable rights to use, copy, distribute, prepare derivative works (such as translations or format conversions) of, perform, or publicly display that stuff to the extent we think it necessary for the Service."

If you're uncomfortable with this term, then unfortunately you'll be uncomfortable using any service on the Internet as it's generally required to provide a service :) The terms agreement incorporates their Privacy Agreement - thus meaning they still owe you the obligations outlined in their privacy clause. They cannot distribute your content without your permission.

"But, but, but .... they should have to identify copyright not me"

Again, you are giving them to non-exclusive right. If you have MP3 music [legally obtained for example] - you have ownership for that file. You are provided with the right to store that file for personal use just as you have the right to share that file with your friends. The rights associated with this file are governed by the terms of service when you purchased that file [i.e. iTunes]. Go and read your rights regarding MP3 Music purchased from iTunes.

You are providing DropBox with a non-exclusive right - not an "exclusive right" which would be just that "exclusive" and therefore you have licensed it only to DropBox per see - to be able to storage, transform ... etc that file. The Privacy policy is incorporated within the Terms agreement - thereby inferring they cannot "distribute your content without your consent".

Dropbox do NOT "know" where you purchased the file or the terms surrounding every single file they store on your behalf [how could they?] - it's your responsibility - not theirs - hence the point of the term.

"You must ensure you have the rights you need to grant us that permission."

Dropbox is fine. Use it. Or stop using Gmail and most other services ....

thanks - haven't got an invite yet however ? will let you know if I get one :) [otherwise won't update] thanks ;)

I think we all need to appreciate the fact most people use Facebook and/or Twitter because they are agnostic - that is, are not tied or linked to any singular email account. I have a Gmail account - albeit "lay persons" in the tech world - use Yahoo or Hotmail, and sure, some use Gmail [shocking generalization :)]. Most, in some capacity, usually check FB and/or Twitter on their mobiles and website daily. Many do not even "log into Google" to use the search engine [why would they?]

Facebook works. Twitter works. All their friends already exist on it - FB friends list are closed, Twitter's are open. Both do everything they could possibly want it to do "connect to their friends" and "find what's happening in the world". In my mind - it's "Google and Bing" all over. For example, Bing is arguably just as good as Google now yet everyone continues to use Google. Why will Google+ bring about such a "rapid shift" that it will lead to a hemorrhaging of users from Twitter and/or Facebook ?

Google+ - great for technology people who want to "control their data". My friends don't even understand what "exporting data for portability" even means. They use Facebook, see their friends posts, upload photos, check-in to places and they love that. Those that use Twitter do so to find out instant real-time updates and news from around the world. Twitter focus on this and this only - not building and trying to be "everything to everyone".

Facebook will improve their "groups" feature to something similar to Circles and continue to innovative. Twitter will continue to expand as the real-time news service because it is so ingrained in modern culture now. People "tweet" it just like people "Google it" [in the verb sense]. Google+ - is great for "forcing" FB to continue to innovate - but I am still a cynic in relation to it's ability to have such a high incentive draw that users leave FB or leave Twitter "exclusively" - or even "in addition to" - Google+.

[that said, any chance of invite :) email in profile]

edit: Thanks to those that sent an invite. Seems that Google's disabled them :( i.e. there are no links in the sign up emails so there is no way to join. Awesome effort though! Thanks again +1 [pun intended]

While I haven't used it yet - my biggest difficutly with the service seems to be that Circles actually act as "silos" and are mutually exclusive.

That is, you cannot add "Robert Scoble" to different circles such as "friends" and "Tech feed" - you must choose EITHER "friends" OR "tech feed".

This draws difficulties [and again I haven't used it so please someone clarify if I'm wrong] - if I have a friend who is both a work college and a friend ? Where do I place this user ? I'm assuming "lay tech" people will want the ability to overlap contacts ?

Edit: great thanks for clarifying! :)

any chance of an invite ? [timodav]

Agree completely. Was a business or rather "non-tech" guy - taught myself HTML4-5/CSS2-3/jQuery + basic C# - coded the entire design, UI etc [and still do it] - and do basically every server install, git, software setup etc etc. This effort was enough to find me my other technical co-founders who wanted to be involved. You've got to put in the effort otherwise you don't get respect in my opinion.

I've always held the view that any business venture you go in - you need to understand it from the ground up. If you're in tech - learn tech. If you're in construction - learn how to build 'something' [house etc]. If you're in finance - learn finance. Understand that "build a twitter script for me" - can't happen in 2 days [I think this comment is on "par" with the original poster's question. I smile now when "non-tech" people say to me they are building a web startup "exactly like twitter in scale in 5 days using NoSQL and the latest caching techniques" .... right ... haha]

I find the concept "strange" of "i have an idea but I don't have technical skills - but because of this idea that gives me the right to own 99.9% of the company". There isn't an " i " in the word "team". If you're a co-founder - it's an inherent facet of the word that you "co-found". The only exception I can see is that unless someones invested a whole heap of cash and others haven't - this is what changes the equity split. But that's up to the team to figure out.

Call me old fashioned - but thanks Henry Ford

"Coming together is a beginning. Keeping together is progress. Working together is success."

And thanks Thomas Alva

"Genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration."

The list goes on. You get the gist.

I agree also. I also think we all need to appreciate the fact that 99% of the world uses Facebook BECAUSE it is a agnostic platform. I have a Gmail account - most of friends "lay persons" in the tech world - use Yahoo or Hotmail, and sure, some use Gmail. They check Facebook on their mobiles and website daily - they don't particularly care about [or even know really] the "wars of technology companies"

Facebook works. All their friends exist on it - it does everything they could possibly want it to do "connect to their friends". In my mind - it's "Google and Bing" all over. Bing works and is arguably just as good as Google these days yet everyone continues to use Google.

Google+ - great for technology people who want to "control their data". Most of my friends don't even understand what "exporting data for portability" even means. They use Facebook, see their friends posts, upload photos, check-in to places and they love that.

It's going to take a LOT MORE "innovation" to move them across to another platform because "it's new, pretty and contains some nifty features that Facebook already contains or will contain in the next 3 months of 'lock-down' in response to Google+". I'm not on Google+ [outrageous request for invite via my profile :D] - but I just can't see my friends moving to it - particularly when they don't even login to Google anyway when they are searching.

Facebook will "win" in my mind - because they are agnostic to email and that's where your "connections" lie and the reason you use Google "mostly" [outrageous generalization again] is because you host your email on Gmail.

love an invite - email is in profile

:)

Dang none left ?

love one too if anyone can assist ?

timodav [at] gmail

Can you use this microdata with your own CSS/HTML markup or you can't include your own classes ? i.e. your formats must look identical to these ?

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_security

My understanding was that some global intelligence organisations can request decryption and that China is doing this actively [see above link].

I also recall reading some time ago that organisations that work exclusively with skype to provide some add-ons can be given access to decrypt.

Further, there was also that techcrunch article - http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/08/skypes-innermost-security-l... - which spoke about this

"The difference between what you pay for a domain name ($10) and what you sell it for ($6,000,000) is taxable income.

Hilarity ensued."

Huge problem that most startups don't realise from the get-go. IP transfer is a huge issue and it needs to be right from the beginning - that's why seperate holding companies for IP [ala Skype] are typically a good organisational alternative.

+1 totally agree. think this is the biggest oversight of an otherwise cool service.

needs to include your personal website/blog & company site/blog as options

I'd agree - it's merely the risk-return equation that needs to be considered at a higher level once your over the "tween" period. There is absolutely nothing stopping you go forth and conquer - however, the probability that you have an inordinate number of external commitments [social and financial] are where the ability to be nimbal become more apparent.

Stopping work and having what ajg1977 states - "Mortgage, day care, insurance, kid commitments etc" - is the battle. Many successful startups have an average "age" of around 26 which seem to be [from some Y-Combinator article I read] the age when startups succeed for a whole raft of factors [age, martial status, flexibility, financial security, maturity etc etc] - there's always an exception to the rule however.

If you >30 - nothing's stopping you but yourself. The question often answers itself however - most >30 stop themselves due to externalities.

*but best of luck :P

I'd have to agree. Our tiny startup is interested in adding some HTML5 structure using Modenizer etc but the main problem is the associated effort for not much return yet. It's really a balancing act for time - unfortunately IE7 and IE8 [and gasp IE6] are still hugely prevelant - so it's still 'the same old same old' by having to detect browsers and support multiple scenarios for HTML4 or HTML5. At this stage, until IE7 and IE8 die out "more" - which we certainly hope is in Q4 by end of this year - we will seriously look at integrating HTML5.

It's a real - "improve existing server-side code / optimisation and feature bundle" vs. "add HTML5 support where needed". For us, and this is only IMHO, the former is currently winning. By Q4 or even Q1-Q2 2012 - we'll look at this.

Thoughts?

"Fool me once - shame on you. Fool me twice - shame on me."

Sure officially. Unofficially - it's with Microsoft.

While I agree that it may very much amount is 'miscommunication'. You would think - that a company which proud itself on having the 'best, brightest and smartest' would do its own due diligence before openly starting a significant legal battle with Microsoft - a company renown for suing everyone in existence - and complaining to the government that it's basically being anti-competitive.

It's not about rational intent - it's about suing the government over alleged anti-competitive behavior only to not have certification in the first place. Whether it's a miscommunication or something else - the fact that it appears - prima facie - a complete ass up by Google is humorous.

I say humorous only in the sense that it loathes Microsoft with all it's being - and currently it's eating straight up fail cake.

yeah - >$5K - hot upwards or cold downwards ? :)

expensive ? seems it would be to get them to produce a video ? are you able to share the cost ?

No, by the logic of my argument we should seek to ensure that anti-competitive behavior does not simply trump competitors who offer services of a nature which is just as good if not better "but for" the entrenchment that Google has in consumer web.

The problem is that Google have so effectively cross-marketed their products through their search engine that you have no reason to switch. They have all your data, everything about you and you actively now "refuse" to use alternative services EVEN IF better services exist. Bing returns results which are just as good - sometimes better - but no one actively uses it ? "Google is better" --> that's the 10 years entrenchment Google has over everyone.

Your suggestion - "That the problem with Bing, what's the point of it?" - is exactly why anti-trust cases begin in the first place. "Why bother with competition?" --> I think your statement has just answered itself.