1. 12:43 28th May 2014

    Notes: 4

    Reblogged from yahoopolicy

    yahoopolicy:

    By Patricia Moll Kriese, Advisor to the CEO

    At Yahoo, social responsibility is more than just a tagline. Through Yahoo for Good, we strive to make doing good a daily habit both for our employees and our users. We take pride in the fact that we are an active partner in the communities in…

     
  2. How does copyright relate to open source licenses?

    Answer by Gil Yehuda:

    I’ll add a little color to the excellent answers here which could explain the strange but understandable relationship between how copyright law is designed to work, and how it applies to open source code. Moreover, I’ll explain why we are in the situation we are in with code, copyrights, and open source licenses

    Imagine you were a freelance writer working in Hollywood who wrote movie scripts. You spent hours writing what you thought was a fantastic movie with great dialogue. You pitched it to a movie executive who rejected the story, crushing your dreams of stardom. Somehow, someone got hold of your movie script and thought it was quite good, so she pitched it to a different producer, and landed a great deal for her, using your script (maybe she modified it, or not). You’d probably be upset.

    Copyright law protects your creative works (not ideas in your head, but the script you record on paper, a picture you take on film, a story you record on tape — or code you write on your computer), so that only you have the right to copy that work (right to copy = copyright). Someone else who finds your work cannot make a copy of it without your permission, nor can she display or perform your work without your permission. And she can’t present it to her favorite movie executive — even if she admits that she did not write the script; even if she says you wrote it. It’s not hers to share, it’s yours. The copyright protects you from someone taking your stuff without your permission. Of course, since you have the right to your movie script you also have the right to allow this other person to pitch it to a different movie executive — but she’d need permission from you — a license. You might pay her to pitch the script for you, you might ask her for money to have the rights to pitch the script. Or you might just share the script with her as a collaborator. You get to decide.

    When developers started to write source code in the 70’s, lawmakers felt that source code was similar to movie scripts. They involve creative effort and people are willing pay,  therefore they should be given the protection that other works of literature would get. Eventually, the Open Source movement began to inspire many developers to think about their code differently; that sharing their code permissively with other developers was worth more than keeping the code under copyright protection. Open Source projects demonstrated that opening code has significant value to the code quality, to the original author, and to the community of developers. Now, many developers would rather open their code so that others could use it and add to it. But the copyright-by-default laws creates the situation that if another developer takes your code (even if you were OK with it conceptually), you could decide to sue that developer (much like in the movie script case). Open Source licenses were created to enable authors to give explicit permission to others developers to use the code — protecting the intent of sharing from unintended legal consequences.

    As others have said in response to this question, the copyright is a statement that expresses the legal fact that you (or your company) owns the copyright on the code. You have a right to copy the code, and you have the right to grant others the right to use the code. The license is an expression of the right you grant others to use that code. You cannot grant rights to use code if you don’t have the rights in the first place. So you need the copyright (and it’s very helpful to add it explicitly), and then you can add the license on the code. If you just have code with no license, other people do not have the right to use the code (even if you don’t mind, you need to be explicit so that they know you are giving them permission). Open Source licenses grant broad permissions with (usually) very few conditions of use. Most common is that you have to give credit to the original author. Under some licenses, you have to be explicit about the changes you made to the code so that others can tell what you added. Other licenses require that changes you make to the code be publicized under certain conditions. So the specific open source license you use does matter.

    Back to being the movie script writer: lets say you wanted to write a script and publish it so that anyone could use it, could modify it, and could perform it (in other words, you’d rather build your reputation by giving your script for free, and getting feedback on it, instead of the all or nothing pitch to a movie executive). You could “open source” the script, but you would not use an Open Source license, rather an Open Content license (like the Creative Commons licenses which are designed for content). You’d still have the copyright on the script, and then you’d add the permissive license telling people they could use it (under the specific terms you select based on the license type you choose).

    Note: I am not a lawyer. Corrections to the above are invited.
    View Answer on Quora
     
  3. 06:40 20th Apr 2014

    Notes: 332190

    Reblogged from thatyamperson

    After a week of nonstop eating.

    After a week of nonstop eating.

     
  4. Is Open source more secure?

    Interesting article on GigaOm today about the OpenSSL bug and the implications to Open Source.

    I commented that Open Source is not fundamentally more secure, but it is fundamentally easier to become more secure.

    http://gigaom.com/2014/04/11/open-source-software-is-more-secure-right-so-what-happened-with-openssl/#comment-1456457 

     
  5. Enjoying the idea of Beethoven Barbershop during work.

    (Source: Spotify)

     
  6. In a striking example of poetic justice, a Massachusetts teenager who says she was fired from 7-Eleven for giving a cup of coffee to a homeless man has landed a new job within days—at a homeless-services organization. More on Yahoo Shine: How Going Undercover as Homeless Changed These Men “My lesson learned is that good deeds pay off,” Ava Lins, 19, tells Yahoo Shine.

     
  7. 14:19 11th Feb 2014

    Notes: 3859

    Reblogged from demand-progress

    image: Download

    demand-progress:

The NSA “is gathering nearly 5 billion records a day on the whereabouts of cellphones around the world.” (Washington Post)
Join us in protesting the National Security Agency’s wide-ranging invasion of privacy.
Take action →

    demand-progress:

    The NSA “is gathering nearly 5 billion records a day on the whereabouts of cellphones around the world.” (Washington Post)

    Join us in protesting the National Security Agency’s wide-ranging invasion of privacy.

    Take action →

     
  8. Listening and relaxing.

    (Source: Spotify)

     
  9.  
  10.  
  11. 12:36 30th Jan 2014

    Notes: 6

    Reblogged from yahooeng

    yahooeng:

    The YUI team at Yahoo is serious about automated testing. YUI is a foundational part of Yahoo websites, so it’s very important that we keep quality high. Our test automation system has ran over 31 million tests in the last 6 months across over a dozen challenging browser environments, with an…

    Awesome. Tested code is better code.

     
  12. Reliving the bad play with a yahoo sports loop.

     
  13. 18:51 16th Jan 2014

    Notes: 7

    Reblogged from yahoolabs

    yahoolabs:

    image

    By Daniele Quercia


    Cities are attracting considerable research interest. In Computer Science circles, the agenda behind smart cities has gained traction: new monitoring technologies promise to allocate urban resources (e.g., electricity, clean water, car traffic) more…

    Cities and happiness. Research.

     
  14. 16:47 12th Jan 2014

    Notes: 399446

    Reblogged from jeremyjohnstone

    jeremyjohnstone:

    foreverdigital:

    cool.

    Internet, please show me where I can buy this!

    I’ve found many articles on it, but the company behind it doesn’t list it on their site and I can’t seem to find anywhere selling it.

    This is something I would enjoy. I would remember you every day.

    (Source: cjwho)

     
  15. 20:11 21st Dec 2013

    Notes: 4

    Reblogged from blorpy

    An Offer He Couldn’t Refuse

    blorpy:

             

    Gil Yehuda, of Quora, is made an offer he just couldn’t refuse.

    In response to a job offer, I said no. As a result, I got the job.

    This goes back a few years: I was interested in a particular job, and read the description carefully. I saw it had 5 job specifications, covering a wide range of skills in my field. I thought they might need two people to do the job they described. After some good phone interviews, I was invited to a full day of on-site interviews. I first met with the hiring manager, and then with a few people related to the group. The last interview was with the recruiter.

    First interview with the hiring manager (CTO-ish role) went well, but it had a strange moment near the end. We spoke about the job and then he asked if I had questions. I asked about the five items; they were diverse, so which was the most important part of the job? He looked at the job spec sheet and answered that #5 was the essential job, the other four were much less relevant. I asked, why is the most important part of the job listed last? Usually a list like this would have the most important item listed first. Moreover, #1 and #5 implied a very different skill profile. He seemed annoyed at me for asking the question, and reiterated that #5 was the job, the rest was not as important.

    Read More

    Look what I found.