Slashdot Mirror

From the cnet article: The software is said to support up to four TV tuners.

Most of the current crop of netbooks seem to have settled on WSVGA resolution (1024x600). IMO this is just a little bit too small for serious work. WXGA (1280x768 or 800) would be so much nicer. And it's not like it can't be done; my several-year-old Fujitsu P2120 fits 1280x768 pixels into 10 inches. If only it didn't have a crappy 933 MHz Crusoe, and had more up-to-date wireless (802.11b only with no WPA support), and some more memory (1GB or so vs. the 256MB it came with), it would be the perfect netbook. And with the 6-cell main battery and the media bay battery installed, it literally will run all day long.

Because more patents are not necessarily better.

Additionally, certain patent acquirement strategies significantly increasethe risk of being the target of patent lawsuits, because they paint a bullseye on your company's strategic development, enabling patent trolls to predict it, patent "alongside" your development and sue you based on that.

And then there's still this whole patent bubble that's still forming, fairly similar to how the whole credit crisis came to be. In time, the value of patents is going to come crashing down just as spectacularly, regardless of how many times you repeat the holy yet hollow mantra "but our intellectual property must be protected!"

Not amazing, but the irony is still lost on me that a lawyer decided somebody else's documentation was bad.

It wasn't a lawyer, it was a court-appointed technical committee.

Falcon

this banal argument crops up in _every_ single /. article about cellphones.

and the answer is the same every single time. as icydog and countless others have replied, there are tons of cheap phones with minimal features.

the only reason camera phones are so visible and common is because they're popular with consumers. it's useful having a camera on your person at all times, and most people don't need a $3000 DSLR for their uses. with point and shoot cameras becoming smaller and cheaper, it's simply more convenient to incorporate this feature into a device that people carry with them most of the time, such as a cellphone.

if you work somewhere where camera-phones aren't allowed (like a court house) then just select a phone without a camera. how hard is that? certain handset makers, such as Nokia, even have models that have a no-camera option. this CNET article even compares 5 popular big brand phones that are camera-free (or have the option of being so). so stop complaining.

Actually - it can be quite hard to get a phone without a camera - at least in the U.S. I've tried; and complained to managers. It's one of the reasons I haven't upgraded my original phone to a newer on.

Oh, and the store (it's manager) I was at just said they didn't have any control over the phones the stocked - that was decided by the service provide.

Supposedly it was tied to supply+demand, but I think it really is more that the camera phones are more expensive, and make it easy for them to charge more money in the monthly bill - either for a data plan, or when people use something and then get the bill and realize that they had to pay for it...

So I think it's more about greed on behalf of the company's than it is actual desire by people to have such featured phones.

That's why my next phone won't be from the service provider, but from a 3rd party - so I can get the phone I want, with the features I want, and be able to use the entire phone.

this banal argument crops up in _every_ single /. article about cellphones.

and the answer is the same every single time. as icydog and countless others have replied, there are tons of cheap phones with minimal features.

the only reason camera phones are so visible and common is because they're popular with consumers. it's useful having a camera on your person at all times, and most people don't need a $3000 DSLR for their uses. with point and shoot cameras becoming smaller and cheaper, it's simply more convenient to incorporate this feature into a device that people carry with them most of the time, such as a cellphone.

if you work somewhere where camera-phones aren't allowed (like a court house) then just select a phone without a camera. how hard is that? certain handset makers, such as Nokia, even have models that have a no-camera option. this CNET article even compares 5 popular big brand phones that are camera-free (or have the option of being so). so stop complaining.

Partly right. Microsoft didn't get prosecuted for merely being a monopoly or for bundling apps with their OS.

What planet are you from? The EU Commission's primary arguments were: 1) Bundled Media player hurts competition and 2) the monopoly of Windows on the desktop requires full documentation of proprietary server protocols, regardless of server market share.

In other words, bundling and monopoly position are precisely why they've been prosecuted recently!

Now you can't fully uninstall QuickTime as some of the basic libraries of QuickTime are used in their Quartz rendering engine. But nothing stops you from using another movie player.

Oh, the irony. You do realize you just summarized Microsoft's losing 1998 argument about IE, right?

"the G1 does not allow tethering as a modem" so one of the previously mentioned needs is not available. Hmm.. a music store but no support for stereo Bluetooth? I keep seeing mention of no stereo Bluetooth, so at least that implies mono Bluetooth is supported.

I'm sure Comcast loves to be able to cut services without cutting revenue, but the thing that pushed them over the edge on this was law enforcement. State attorneys general have been pushing ISPs away from Usenet as a way to curb kiddie porn. Here's an article.

Who tagged this "technology"? This is 100% art.

I disagree -- this is definitely Technology as well as Art. There's no reason it has to be only one or the other. Besides, the ancient Greeks felt all technology was art. The word "technology" itself comes from the Greek root "techne" which means art or skill.

Not all technology is computers and transistors. Technology has existed and improved throughout the ages, from the ability to make fire and work with tools to the creation of the wheel. Clocks and geared mechanisms certainly make for interesting technology from large computers such as Babbage's Difference Engine to portable devices such as the Antikythera mechanism.

It would be possible to even have "modern" technology without transistors although perhaps it wouldn't be the same as the high tech steam powered science of the Steampunk Genre.

The recent note on the avalanche effect and work on bringing light to the edges of windows and putting cells only on the edge have given promise that the watts per dollar will be going up, even if the watt per area figure does not rise as fast as hoped. Another new direction is printing cheap low efficiency cells on windows and possibly even clothing.

1. All the talk about "tracking" is nonsense. An RFID anything has a range measured in inches normally. Stuff it in your wallet sandwiched in between more cards and it pretty much won't work.

Until the next technology comes along -- then you can be tracked with all the range they want. But by then it will be too late to argue about it and you would just look like one those "tinfoil hat" types or a "conspiracy kook" if you questioned it. All Americans want to be tracked to help their government fight "terrorism", don't they?

There are limits on the signal to noise ratio and distance, and you can greatly reduce the readability with a commercially available sleeve. Or a piece of tinfoil. Like the kind you currently use for your hats ;). They can keep adding more and more expensive and sensitive technology, you just need to keep adding sheets of aluminum foil to your shield. It would be the stupidest arms race ever.

3. What's the application though? If it is just border crossings, then do border crossings have the infrastructure to process a contactless card?

The application is -- you guessed it -- remote tracking. The newest U.S. Passports as of July of this year all have RFID chips in them as well. It's not perfect, but yet another baby step on the way to "total information awareness" on citizens, just like the East Germans had but without all the fancy technology. It's a pilot program, testing the waters regarding citizen resistance, and inching it into general acceptance. There was a huge revolt against the REAL ID program, so think of this as a "reboot" of that program.

The passports are including a chip so that we can retain our visa-waiver status with European countries. They don't trust paper travel documents anymore, and they require anyone traveling there to either have a secure Schengen visa or a document from your home country that they think is secure enough. If you ever get concerned about the "remote tracking," wrap more layers of aluminum foil around your passport and ID.

4. Accidentally leaving the card inside a microwave oven while you are warming coffee would harm the chip, so don't ever do that.

That's right. As soon as they get enough of these things in circulation, you will need them to get on airlines, go in government buildings, or maybe pass "illegal immigrant checkpoints". If your RFID chip was disabled, that might mean that you are an illegal immigrant, or a terrorist, or that you just like standing in long lines and being searched thoroughly.

The REAL ID program would have gone into effect on May 11 of this year, except that it was such a tremendous threat against the rights of our citizens that many states openly revolted against it. The REAL ID was an "enhanced drivers license" and you would have needed it to get on airplanes or enter government buildings nationwide by now. The Department of Homeland Security had a deadline of May 13 of this year, and yes, they were planning to put an RFID chip in the REAL ID card as well. Google it -- it's everything that you are arguing that this identical program is not, and it was a planned nationwide program before it got derailed.

I have no problem with a secure document that proves my identity, as long as I can shield it when not in active use. If I don't trust the shielding that the government provides, I can use my own. I have no problem with biometric authentication on the document, as long as the enrollment data is a token on the card and not in a central government database. Both of those are covered in the new passports, so I don't have a problem with it.

Where I do have a problem is that the breeder documents AREN'T as secure. We can't trust biometri

account recognizes
b-day 2/11/64
ZIP code 99687
for password change.

The zip code is of course that of Wasilla, Alaska.

It would seem that the republican VP candidate is at least twice as security aware as Paris Hilton. Paris' had just one security question, the name of her dog (Tinkerbell), while Palin had two extremely obvious security questions.

Of course, two times "nothing much" is not a lot at all..

1. All the talk about "tracking" is nonsense. An RFID anything has a range measured in inches normally. Stuff it in your wallet sandwiched in between more cards and it pretty much won't work.

Until the next technology comes along -- then you can be tracked with all the range they want. But by then it will be too late to argue about it and you would just look like one those "tinfoil hat" types or a "conspiracy kook" if you questioned it. All Americans want to be tracked to help their government fight "terrorism", don't they?

3. What's the application though? If it is just border crossings, then do border crossings have the infrastructure to process a contactless card?

The application is -- you guessed it -- remote tracking. The newest U.S. Passports as of July of this year all have RFID chips in them as well. It's not perfect, but yet another baby step on the way to "total information awareness" on citizens, just like the East Germans had but without all the fancy technology. It's a pilot program, testing the waters regarding citizen resistance, and inching it into general acceptance. There was a huge revolt against the REAL ID program, so think of this as a "reboot" of that program.

4. Accidentally leaving the card inside a microwave oven while you are warming coffee would harm the chip, so don't ever do that.

That's right. As soon as they get enough of these things in circulation, you will need them to get on airlines, go in government buildings, or maybe pass "illegal immigrant checkpoints". If your RFID chip was disabled, that might mean that you are an illegal immigrant, or a terrorist, or that you just like standing in long lines and being searched thoroughly.

The REAL ID program would have gone into effect on May 11 of this year, except that it was such a tremendous threat against the rights of our citizens that many states openly revolted against it. The REAL ID was an "enhanced drivers license" and you would have needed it to get on airplanes or enter government buildings nationwide by now. The Department of Homeland Security had a deadline of May 13 of this year, and yes, they were planning to put an RFID chip in the REAL ID card as well. Google it -- it's everything that you are arguing that this identical program is not, and it was a planned nationwide program before it got derailed.

Never happened.

A quick google shows that the bill does indeed not prohibit MS software entirely, but it sounds like it does prohibit a pro-MS preference:

http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2005/09/29/peru-rejects-microsoft-windows
http://www.smh.com.au/news/breaking/perus-green-light-to-opensource-software/2005/09/28/1127804508352.html
http://news.cnet.com/Perus-president-approves-open-source-bill/2110-7344_3-5907226.html

And some older articles that sound a bit more extreme (like I remembered it):
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2002/07/54141
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/05/19/ms_in_peruvian_opensource_nightmare/

Isn't this what the CoS tried a number of years ago? How did that turn out? The Church of Scientology has lost a courtroom battle to compel a Dutch writer and her Internet service provider to remove postings from a Web site, in a ruling that keeps hyperlinks to copyrighted material legal. this is from 2003...

Hmm, I don't believe its fair to tie the Democrats to the entertainment industry.

Uhm, with all due respect, what planet are you f-ing from?!

Both the recently deceased Jack Valenti and the current MPAA chairman Dan Glickman are loyal Democrats.

This is the point, where an honest man in your shoes either commits suicide or promises to vote for a Republican as a penance...

Since Tim-Burners Lee supports network neutrality I wonder if this foundation will assist in that cause.

The digital ecosystem does not need the middle-man, the printing press or recording studio of days gone by.

This whole "middle-man" meme is a red herring. Even if all writers and musicians start selling directly — rather than through publishers and studios — they will still be concerned about people, enjoying (or otherwise benefiting from) their creations without paying for it.

From TA:

• "The Cupertino, Calif.-based company apologized on its Web site for the problem, but also used the opportunity to jab at Microsoft, its operating system rival.

  "As you might imagine, we are upset at Windows for not being more hardy against such viruses, and even more upset with ourselves for not catching it," Apple said on its site. "

Sure, Apple was scolded by non-Microsoft security experts, but I'm sure Apple fanboys ate the bullshit all up.

On the typing front this seems much better than anything Apple offers.

Like this?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9982898-7.html

or this?

http://government.zdnet.com/?p=3885

That's just from the first page of my first search.

The risk lies in the ability of [??] to remotely activate the phone and eavesdrop on the microphone. This wasn't a joke, several people believe the capability already exists.

They believe the capability exists?!?

If the FBI can do it, who else can do it? The Ruskies? Your insurance company? Coca Cola's marketing department? Your neighbor?

I, for one, look forward to owning an auditable open source phone some day.

Around 1969 I could go to a matinee, snag a soda pop, popcorn and a candy bar and still had change left over from the 50 cent piece I got for that weeks allowance. Mind you that was at the theater on the base where my father was stationed. Inflation started getting pretty hectic shortly after that, heck in just the next 3 years new Mavericks and Volkswagons went from $1400 to $1700! Then from '72 on inflation has been absurd.

More on topic, the government seems to be taking an interest in Google. They might just have to stop spreading so widely.

Tm

videos' submitters now to file counternotices

Do the lawyers from the CoS get the info from those counter-notices, and do said notices contain personal info on the YouTube users?

If so, this may be an elaborate ruse to get 4,000 names of the "enemies" of the so called church....

If "Anonymous" posted the videos, I see no reason why "Anonymous" cant submit the counternotices. Citing privacy issues, the court should honor such notice provided the source of the notice matches equally with the source of the removed videos.

As to consequences for abusing the DMCA, Uri Geller found out the hard way, via settling with the EFF. Basically, fines and loss of copyright privileges on the work claimed being infringed. Im sure the CoS would love their works to lose their copyright protections, since thats been the basis for a majority of their threats and litigation (not to mention sole reason their "religion" hasnt been more fully exposed as the fraud/cult/pyramid scheme it is).

Tm

I'm kind of surprised. It doesn't look like NZ has any major bandwidth, compared to the rest of the world. Maybe they can get Google to hook them up to the pan-Asian cable going in soon. ;-)

There are certain politicians who would love to have even more control over the Internet.

I know nothing about this phone,

http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/samsung-jitterbug-dial-sph/4505-6454_7-32115117.html

but see it recommended often for older folks and those with poor eyesight. A real barebones phone, with limited features, big keys, and decent battery life.

hth,
jeff

O-ho! You thought you were just being funny, eh big guy?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10034476-93.html

That launch was today.

It looks like it might actually be possible to connect to ISS wifi from earth. The ISS is around 350km above the surface, and current records for surface to surface links are a little bit larger than that.

The surface to surface number is for two custom endpoints, not one standard, one custom, doesn't have to deal with the ionosphere, and was between two stationary locations; but it suggests that the challenge isn't insurmountable. A radio astronomer could probably eat this one for breakfast.

She appears to have the web skills to edit her own wikipedia entry.

(That or her new baby is a savant)

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10029598-38.html

Actually TFA says Google doesn't want people to use, say "googling" as a term for generic searches. As it says, there are serious, by business standards, concerns with using the term. It dilutes the trademark. Xerox had the same problem when people started using "xerox" to mean copying or duplicating. You only xerox on a Xerox machine. I skate with inline skates, the skates are Roller Blades, so when I use them I say roller blading. If the skate were not Roller Blades I wouldn't use the term "roller blading".

Falcon

Google doesn't want you to say Google.

Plenty of people worked on ReiserFS under the Namesys company, but that is now closed

So there is no commercial support of the FS, only enthusast which is not that much of a problem unless they have decided to work on other things, possibly because of Reiser's actions.

http://reviews.cnet.com/game-accessories/sony-playstation-3-blu/4505-10110_7-32327368.html TaDaaaaaaaaahhhh!

So how is the GP offtopic?

My whole post was a joke; note that I linked the word "redundant" to the GP? And linked uncyclopedia of all places?

Thanks for clarifying that because a moderator obviously thought you were serious or came to that mistaken conclusion on their own. Maybe now they will read our posts and consider posting in this article to clear their mistake, if they haven't already.

BTW in regards to one of your other posts there is already a robot in use by a telecommuter, not extremely highly advanced but he can talk to the other employees with it as well as move it about the office building. With such robots in more common use it might reduce objections to people doing telecommuting. Using such to go to school would prove interesting in the medical field on research of it cutting down on communicable diseases and in contrast, its effects on immune system development. It might change all the violence in schools to robot wars. Would have put the link there but being a true AC am severely limited on number of posts by timed restrictions from Slashdot.

Perhaps my original post was a bit too salty? :)

At any rate I do find it troubling to see this on the horizon.

I do not really care for my web browser to do anything other than display useful information and be efficient at doing it.

I also do not want my browser to be a flashing billboard on the information super highway. :)

Whether it's on my desktop or on my smart phone. I would prefer that be executed as quickly and quietly as possible without any crashes, hangs, or complaints.

Perhaps I am showing my age, but once upon a time browsers did that you know, before they became something like the those annoying billboards in, "Minority Report".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQbVD5hlddk

Also, but not to start a flame here, I cite the following sources as to where things appear to be going for the average consumer.

http://www.healthcareitnews.com/story.cms?id=9575

http://news.cnet.com/Mozilla-aims-for-mobile-browser-market/2100-1032_3-5483683.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2006/aug/21/business.newmedia

I honestly think IE should have stopped at 6.X, 7.X has been constant trouble for me.

Thank you for the discussion!
Joe

Except that a Vermont judge recently ruled that password(s) contained in one's head are protected under the 5th Amendment to the United States Constitution. just like any other information in your head. It was discussed right here on Slashdot.

As for threatening law enforcement officers: say nothing, know your rights, and keep your cool. The law enforcement officer is NOT your friend and you shouldn't speak to them or answer their questions. You have a right to remain silent and you should use it. BTW every attorney that I have ever heard opine on the subject has said that it is better to say nothing than to answer some of the questions but not others. Don't let them scare you into giving up your rights with their Gestapo crap. Remember, if they are questioning you, especially if they are threatening, then there is NO way that you are NOT going to be held (i.e. arrested) for a while anyway until the matter either goes before a judge or they have to let you go (48 hours max w/out cause before any attorney can force them to let you out), so don't be dumb and tip your hand right at the start. Also, remember that if you ever get your equipment back then you can never use it or those passwords again (who knows what bugs they may have planted before releasing it back to you). You basically have to wipe and start over on new hardware.

Disclaimer: IANAL so if you find yourself in a situation like the one above find yourself one that you can trust and let them do the talking, but remember that the police are NOT your friends.

yeah right but its not 48hours in the uk anymore.....you try keeping quiet for 42DAYS

Except that a Vermont judge recently ruled that password(s) contained in one's head are protected under the 5th Amendment to the United States Constitution. just like any other information in your head. It was discussed right here on Slashdot.

As for threatening law enforcement officers: say nothing, know your rights, and keep your cool. The law enforcement officer is NOT your friend and you shouldn't speak to them or answer their questions. You have a right to remain silent and you should use it. BTW every attorney that I have ever heard opine on the subject has said that it is better to say nothing than to answer some of the questions but not others. Don't let them scare you into giving up your rights with their Gestapo crap. Remember, if they are questioning you, especially if they are threatening, then there is NO way that you are NOT going to be held (i.e. arrested) for a while anyway until the matter either goes before a judge or they have to let you go (48 hours max w/out cause before any attorney can force them to let you out), so don't be dumb and tip your hand right at the start. Also, remember that if you ever get your equipment back then you can never use it or those passwords again (who knows what bugs they may have planted before releasing it back to you). You basically have to wipe and start over on new hardware.

Disclaimer: IANAL so if you find yourself in a situation like the one above find yourself one that you can trust and let them do the talking, but remember that the police are NOT your friends.

And look where that gets them.

Well, good for them. At least someone has principles. Whatever they can do to force the brokenness to be fixed is a good thing.

In this case it must have worked, as MSN is working fine for me in Opera right now.

And look where that gets them.

"do you think we will start to see similar (overt) activities from US and European governments?"

"We" already have ...
(Don't let the premise fool you)

Adding to the other replies, the copyright statement at the beginning of the source files refers to the 2006-2008 period so Google have been developing it for about two years. They didn't start coding it this summer.

ACID 3: 78/100

It certainly does not appear in any licence associated with Chrome. It is not only completely fictional (note that the article does not actually link or provide any reference to an actual EULA), it is active shilling. For reference, here is a list of some articles written by Ina Fried for CNET:

• Be sure to read Chrome's fine print (2/9/08)
• What Chrome means for Microsoft (2/9/08)
• Microsoft yanks Money off retail shelves (8/8/08)
• Windows Home Server update released (21/7/08)
• Site created to share [Microsoft's] Live Mesh invites (29/4/08)
• What's in Ray Ozzie's Mesh? (18/4/08)
• Microsoft buys airfare predictor Farecast (17/4/08)
• Does Microsoft need a value menu? (26/3/08)
• Microsoft looking for a Silverlight bullet (5/3/08)
• NBC looks to win Silverlight medal (5/3/08)
• At Redmond, Wikipedia becomes Micropedia (5/3/08)

There are a few other non-Microsoft-shilling articles, but precious few.

It certainly does not appear in any licence associated with Chrome. It is not only completely fictional (note that the article does not actually link or provide any reference to an actual EULA), it is active shilling. For reference, here is a list of some articles written by Ina Fried for CNET:

• Be sure to read Chrome's fine print (2/9/08)
• What Chrome means for Microsoft (2/9/08)
• Microsoft yanks Money off retail shelves (8/8/08)
• Windows Home Server update released (21/7/08)
• Site created to share [Microsoft's] Live Mesh invites (29/4/08)
• What's in Ray Ozzie's Mesh? (18/4/08)
• Microsoft buys airfare predictor Farecast (17/4/08)
• Does Microsoft need a value menu? (26/3/08)
• Microsoft looking for a Silverlight bullet (5/3/08)
• NBC looks to win Silverlight medal (5/3/08)
• At Redmond, Wikipedia becomes Micropedia (5/3/08)

There are a few other non-Microsoft-shilling articles, but precious few.

It certainly does not appear in any licence associated with Chrome. It is not only completely fictional (note that the article does not actually link or provide any reference to an actual EULA), it is active shilling. For reference, here is a list of some articles written by Ina Fried for CNET:

• Be sure to read Chrome's fine print (2/9/08)
• What Chrome means for Microsoft (2/9/08)
• Microsoft yanks Money off retail shelves (8/8/08)
• Windows Home Server update released (21/7/08)
• Site created to share [Microsoft's] Live Mesh invites (29/4/08)
• What's in Ray Ozzie's Mesh? (18/4/08)
• Microsoft buys airfare predictor Farecast (17/4/08)
• Does Microsoft need a value menu? (26/3/08)
• Microsoft looking for a Silverlight bullet (5/3/08)
• NBC looks to win Silverlight medal (5/3/08)
• At Redmond, Wikipedia becomes Micropedia (5/3/08)

There are a few other non-Microsoft-shilling articles, but precious few.

It certainly does not appear in any licence associated with Chrome. It is not only completely fictional (note that the article does not actually link or provide any reference to an actual EULA), it is active shilling. For reference, here is a list of some articles written by Ina Fried for CNET:

• Be sure to read Chrome's fine print (2/9/08)
• What Chrome means for Microsoft (2/9/08)
• Microsoft yanks Money off retail shelves (8/8/08)
• Windows Home Server update released (21/7/08)
• Site created to share [Microsoft's] Live Mesh invites (29/4/08)
• What's in Ray Ozzie's Mesh? (18/4/08)
• Microsoft buys airfare predictor Farecast (17/4/08)
• Does Microsoft need a value menu? (26/3/08)
• Microsoft looking for a Silverlight bullet (5/3/08)
• NBC looks to win Silverlight medal (5/3/08)
• At Redmond, Wikipedia becomes Micropedia (5/3/08)

There are a few other non-Microsoft-shilling articles, but precious few.

It certainly does not appear in any licence associated with Chrome. It is not only completely fictional (note that the article does not actually link or provide any reference to an actual EULA), it is active shilling. For reference, here is a list of some articles written by Ina Fried for CNET:

• Be sure to read Chrome's fine print (2/9/08)
• What Chrome means for Microsoft (2/9/08)
• Microsoft yanks Money off retail shelves (8/8/08)
• Windows Home Server update released (21/7/08)
• Site created to share [Microsoft's] Live Mesh invites (29/4/08)
• What's in Ray Ozzie's Mesh? (18/4/08)
• Microsoft buys airfare predictor Farecast (17/4/08)
• Does Microsoft need a value menu? (26/3/08)
• Microsoft looking for a Silverlight bullet (5/3/08)
• NBC looks to win Silverlight medal (5/3/08)
• At Redmond, Wikipedia becomes Micropedia (5/3/08)

There are a few other non-Microsoft-shilling articles, but precious few.

It certainly does not appear in any licence associated with Chrome. It is not only completely fictional (note that the article does not actually link or provide any reference to an actual EULA), it is active shilling. For reference, here is a list of some articles written by Ina Fried for CNET:

• Be sure to read Chrome's fine print (2/9/08)
• What Chrome means for Microsoft (2/9/08)
• Microsoft yanks Money off retail shelves (8/8/08)
• Windows Home Server update released (21/7/08)
• Site created to share [Microsoft's] Live Mesh invites (29/4/08)
• What's in Ray Ozzie's Mesh? (18/4/08)
• Microsoft buys airfare predictor Farecast (17/4/08)
• Does Microsoft need a value menu? (26/3/08)
• Microsoft looking for a Silverlight bullet (5/3/08)
• NBC looks to win Silverlight medal (5/3/08)
• At Redmond, Wikipedia becomes Micropedia (5/3/08)

There are a few other non-Microsoft-shilling articles, but precious few.