134 karma · joined March 7, 2012
From the white paper, some of the problems Hello aims to solve are (1) Repeated re-coding of the same distributed primitives; (2) Challenging development process due to the combination of a programming language and extraneous library; and (3) Inefficient and unreliable distributed code.
Here is the white paper and reference guide if anybody is curious:
White Paper: https://docsend.com/view/zfcz7sh Reference Guide: https://docsend.com/view/65tbeht
Edit: Thank you omg.lame.dont.dotis@wtf.example.com (email edited) for the feedback. We have email capture by default because we use DocSend for sales collateral, but we've turned it off for these white papers. They're downloadable too, if you just want the PDFs.
From US v. Nosal, 676 F. 3d 854 (9th Cir.):
"The government assures us that, whatever the scope of the CFAA, it won't prosecute minor violations. But we shouldn't have to live at the mercy of our local prosecutor. Cf. United States v. Stevens, ___ U.S. ___, 130 S.Ct. 1577, 1591, 176 L.Ed.2d 435 (2010) ("We would not uphold an unconstitutional statute merely because the Government promised to use it responsibly."). And it's not clear we can trust the government when a tempting target comes along. Take the case of the mom who posed as a 17-year-old boy and cyber-bullied her daughter's classmate. The Justice Department prosecuted her under 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2)(C) for violating MySpace's terms of service, which prohibited lying about identifying information, including age. See United States v. Drew, 259 F.R.D. 449 (C.D.Cal.2009). Lying on social media websites is common: People shave years off their age, add inches to their height and drop pounds from their weight. The difference between puffery and prosecution may depend on whether you happen to be someone an AUSA has reason to go after.
In United States v. Kozminski, 487 U.S. 931, 108 S.Ct. 2751, 101 L.Ed.2d 788 (1988), the Supreme Court refused to adopt the government's broad interpretation of a statute because it would "criminalize a broad range of day-to-day activity." Id. at 949, 108 S.Ct. 2751. Applying the rule of lenity, the Court warned that the broader statutory interpretation would "delegate to prosecutors and juries the inherently legislative task of determining what type of ... activities are so morally reprehensible that they should be punished as crimes" and would "subject individuals to the risk of arbitrary or discriminatory prosecution and conviction." Id. By giving that much power to prosecutors, we're inviting discriminatory and arbitrary enforcement."
*disclaimer: I am not a lawyer
The video feed is here: http://ammsweb.scu.edu/webcasts/mmedia1/20111014-083613-1e_o...
Wired op-ed series based on the conference presenters: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/14cb0c/im_snoop_lion_a...
I usually just look at yelp/chowhound on my phone for pictures and recommendations while checking out the menu.
The problem is, I can't imagine playing video games on any screen but a TV or in any setting but the couch. I could probably build a PC box and hook it up to the TV on my own, but I'd much rather just buy something ready to go out of the box. A console with current hardware and a PC-like gaming experience is just what the doctor ordered!
It sounds like the people you know may have gotten lucky pursuing a high-risk gamble, whether they knew it or not.
[1] http://insidethelawschoolscam.blogspot.com/2012/10/five-stag...
[2] http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legalwhiteboard/2012/07/a-p...
[3] http://www.law.com/jsp/llf/PubArticleLLF.jsp?id=119494824709...
http://insidethelawschoolscam.blogspot.com/2012/12/applicati...