On Wed, 06 Feb 2002 22:10:48 +0100, Fernando Rodr�guez
<···@ThouShallNotSpam.EasyJob.NET> wrote:
Ooops... Apparently you have to code in C++. :-P
>
>I have some free time, it might be fun:
>
>http://www.google.com/programming-contest/
>
>
>
>
>
>----
>Fernando Rodr�guez
>frr at wanadoo dot es
>-------
----
Fernando Rodr�guez
frr at wanadoo dot es
-------
In article <··································@4ax.com>, Fernando
Rodr�guez <···@ThouShallNotSpam.EasyJob.NET> wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Feb 2002 22:10:48 +0100, Fernando Rodr�guez
> <···@ThouShallNotSpam.EasyJob.NET> wrote:
>
> Ooops... Apparently you have to code in C++. :-P
Their existing code is in C++. If everything else you use is free and
can interface to the C++ then you appear to be able to use anything you
want.
-- Bruce
From: Eric Moss
Subject: Re: Impress the pagans at Google with the True Faith ;-)
Date:
Message-ID: <3C62E6FA.D2BDD33B@alltel.net>
Bruce Hoult wrote:
>
> In article <··································@4ax.com>, Fernando
> Rodr�guez <···@ThouShallNotSpam.EasyJob.NET> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 06 Feb 2002 22:10:48 +0100, Fernando Rodr�guez
> > <···@ThouShallNotSpam.EasyJob.NET> wrote:
> >
> > Ooops... Apparently you have to code in C++. :-P
>
> Their existing code is in C++. If everything else you use is free and
> can interface to the C++ then you appear to be able to use anything you
> want.
Then try Lisp Plus Plus. It's still C++, but with symbols and lists and
so on.
Eric
On Wed, 06 Feb 2002 22:10:48 +0100, Fernando Rodriguez
<···@ThouShallNotSpam.EasyJob.NET> wrote:
>
>
>I have some free time, it might be fun:
>
>http://www.google.com/programming-contest/
>
>
>
Does anyone realize this is a rip-off?
Any serious entry will well be worth more than the prize
money, and you give up virtually all rights.
From the web page:
> With regard to an entry you submit as part of the Contest, you grant Google a worldwide, perpetual, fully paid-up, non-exclusive license
> to make, sell, or use the technology related thereto, including but not limited to the software, algorithms, techniques, concepts, etc., associated
> with the entry.
On top of that you may be giving up something like Yahoo!Stores
( or at least the idea ), and may never even win anything!!!
It looks like Google is trolling for ideas for new software to shore
up their business at the expense of developers.
Frankly I will be calling my State Attourney General about this.
"Thaddeus L Olczyk" <······@interaccess.com> wrote in message
······················@nntp.interaccess.com...
> On Wed, 06 Feb 2002 22:10:48 +0100, Fernando Rodriguez
> <···@ThouShallNotSpam.EasyJob.NET> wrote:
>
> >
> >http://www.google.com/programming-contest/
> >
> Does anyone realize this is a rip-off?
> Any serious entry will well be worth more than the prize
> money, and you give up virtually all rights.
>
> From the web page:
> > With regard to an entry you submit as part of the Contest, you grant
Google a worldwide, perpetual, fully paid-up, non-exclusive license
> > to make, sell, or use the technology related thereto, including
but not limited to the software, algorithms, techniques, concepts, etc.,
associated
> > with the entry.
>
Yes, I noticed that too and it didn't make me very comfortable. That is
certainly alot more than protecting themselves from any liability or other
conceivable risk. I hate "agreements" that are completely one-sided. *At
best* it indicates poor faith...
I was just very badly burned by a small company in Tampa, Florida because of
no written guarantees. I was contracting and for months was supposed to go
permanent, told it was just a formality, I was part of the company etc
etc... Well, after asking me for documentation for a patent process for the
component I analyzed, designed and developed I was dismissed with no notice,
no severance and no explanation. I thought I was a better judge of people
than that.....live and learn.
My only consolation is that the docs are not nearly detailed enough and they
are going to try to reimplement it in Java. Considering the core of it is
generating and compiling code at runtime I don't see them succeeding.
--
Coby Beck
(remove #\Space "coby 101 @ bigpond . com")
In article <······················@news2.calgary.shaw.ca>, Coby Beck wrote:
> "Thaddeus L Olczyk" <······@interaccess.com> wrote in message
> ······················@nntp.interaccess.com...
>> On Wed, 06 Feb 2002 22:10:48 +0100, Fernando Rodriguez
>> <···@ThouShallNotSpam.EasyJob.NET> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >http://www.google.com/programming-contest/
>> >
>> Does anyone realize this is a rip-off?
>> Any serious entry will well be worth more than the prize
>> money, and you give up virtually all rights.
>>
>> From the web page:
>> > With regard to an entry you submit as part of the Contest, you grant
> Google a worldwide, perpetual, fully paid-up, non-exclusive license
>> > to make, sell, or use the technology related thereto, including
> but not limited to the software, algorithms, techniques, concepts, etc.,
> associated
>> > with the entry.
>>
>
> Yes, I noticed that too and it didn't make me very comfortable. That is
> certainly alot more than protecting themselves from any liability or other
> conceivable risk. I hate "agreements" that are completely one-sided. *At
> best* it indicates poor faith...
>
Well it is an interesting problem and from my quick reading of the
rules you only give up rights when you submit something to be judged.
So if you were interested in the problem or had some ideas you wanted
to play with joining the contest would be a good way to get a bunch of
tools and a dataset to bootstrap your research. Then if you come up
with the next great thing you can contact google or someone else and
set up a demo/meeting for your product.
> I was just very badly burned by a small company in Tampa, Florida because of
> no written guarantees. I was contracting and for months was supposed to go
> permanent, told it was just a formality, I was part of the company etc
> etc... Well, after asking me for documentation for a patent process for the
> component I analyzed, designed and developed I was dismissed with no notice,
> no severance and no explanation. I thought I was a better judge of people
> than that.....live and learn.
>
It has been my experience that in business honest people write it down
and sign it, got burned also. People who are willing to sign it
generally are willing to do it.
> My only consolation is that the docs are not nearly detailed enough and they
> are going to try to reimplement it in Java. Considering the core of it is
> generating and compiling code at runtime I don't see them succeeding.
Well they may be coming back to you to fix it, then advantage Coby.
And get it in writing this time, with nasty penalty clauses if they
play any games. Or let them sink.
marc
>
> --
> Coby Beck
> (remove #\Space "coby 101 @ bigpond . com")
>
>
>