Slashdot Mirror

And finally, I'm not trying to troll here, but I can't help but wonder how all of this would be playing out if Google had patented every trivial feature of their map and navigation software like Apple does for all of its apps. That would certainly have made this scenario a hell of a lot more interesting.

You can tell what a company finds important from what they patent. Google has a lots of patents regarding maps like a patent on ad technology that inserts ads in its Street View mapping images and a patent to use location data in ads. Those are the things Google wants access to, those were probably on the demand side in the Google v. Apple map negotiations. Now in the short term iOS users might be worse off in some cases, in the long term it might be worth it.

Facebook did turn a profit last year, earlier than predicted:

http://www.marketingvox.com/facebook-sees-profit-on-target-for-500m-year-045281/

Amazingly, there remain people, who would argue, that the US is either "the same" or "not much better", and deny, that China's human rights record is particularly bad.

I mean, just imagine, the US government shutting down Twitter or any Leftist web-site at around, say, Iraq-invasion anniversary...

Repeat after me - "In terms of fundamental human behavior, the internet has not, and will not, change JACK SHIT."

Is there a ruling by a court of law that states that Apple is a monopoly?

It's only a matter of time, my friend. And don't think Apple isn't scared right now.

-Eric

Looks like he's spitting the dummy now that he is out of the loop. MS are not a search company

http://www.live.com/?searchonly=true&mkt=en-US

MS dont want to be a search company

• The Battle For Better Search (April 2005)
• New Microsoft Browser Raises Google's Hackles (May 1 2006)
• Microsoft Wants More Search Share (October 27 2006)
• Microsoft puts Live services into the Labs (January 26 2006)

but as is the way when you are a perceived are the dominant IT player you must be seen to 'compete' with all the 'upstarts' to keep the share holders happy

• Online Search Hits All-Time High; Google Dominant
• (March 3 2006)
• Yahoo! gives up quest for search dominance (January 24 2006)
• Does search engine's power threaten Web's independence? (October 31 2002)

so your business heads gob off about how stupid the opposition business heads are.

Right. That's why google has to be "fucking kill"ed instead of just being allowed to die on its own.

I think most people are going to be very surprised when they realise where MS see their future and while they are currently getting slaughtered in many sections of the press over Vista they are quietly laying the ground work for the next phase, which is largely why there has been so little reaction from Redmond to the adverse press.

Vista IS the groundwork for the next phase. Everything Microsoft does is intended to extend their control over the market. Not a surprise, but still true.

Keyhole became Google Earth.

Deja News (Deja.com) became Google Groups.

Urchin Log Analyzer became Google Analytics . (More on this change)

Sprinks became wholly subsumed into Google AdWords, not even as its own sub-brand.

There are nowhere near as many Googles as there are Yahoo!s, but Google's making a clear move toward matching Yahoo! as far as brands go.

Yahoo must be insane to have allowed this to happen, especially when their main competitor has a published philosophy including the statement: "You can make money without doing evil".

I'm sorry, but Google is one of the biggest contributors of the Chinese Censorship System.

This: http://www.marketingvox.com/archives/2005/04/15/ch ina_censorship_working_google_workers_happy/

and

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_zdewk/is _200409/ai_n7184506

...are just small examples of this. Google can say "Do no evil" whenever they want, but it'll not change reality: the real world is about what you really do, not about what you say you would do.

Why not contiue this "advertising when you already paid" trend everywhere? I have a great idea! If only there was a way they could print advertisments on my Food Then I would be happy.

It may not be in this case. Google has recently filed a patent application for this technology.

You probably won't hear it on Slashdot, but Google's Censorship in China Worked, Wins Favor

...But I like the way google advertises. Whether it be in Gmail, in search results, or on Froogle. RSS is just another medium to explore. If they continue to stay unobtrusive, I wish them the best of luck.

This is not about how they advertise, but about software PATENTS, which before Google started doing it was regarded an evil thing around here..

With this and other stories (like China censorship) - I wonder how evil Google really can be and get away with it..

First off, let's be realistic: the current US Congress wouldn't let the UN run the internet. After all, our own Al Gore invented it... But seriously, there's a lot of mistrust of the UN, much of it for good reasons.

The lack of accountability and responsibility that led to the Oil-for-Food scandal is hardly encouraging. Can we really expect the UN to be more responsive to internet users' needs than ICANN, as bad as ICANN is?

There are also some really twisted jokes to be made about how effective the UN would be in fighting child porn, considering the actions of some of its employees and peacekeepers in the Congo.

In essence, we're talking about replacing a large, corrupt bureaucracy with an even larger corrupt bureaucracy. Doesn't sound good, does it? I'd much rather see ICANN's functions assumed by a diverse group of private companies, with oversight from democratically-elected governments. In particular, the Chinese government and other repressive regimes can stay the hell away from internet regulation. Even good companies can be pressured into making bad decisions when China gets involved.

I *KNOW* I've just opened the flood gates of Bush jokes, DMCA rants, and PATRIOT Act tirades, but please, before you post, think about whether you're (1) on-topic (this is about the UN replacing ICANN), and (2) saying something new that hasn't been said in the numerous slashdot stories on the DMCA, etc. I'm all for a good joke, but please let it be something more original than "Bush is really stupid, and Americans are fat and stupid for voting for him". I live in one of the bluest areas of a very blue state, and I've heard them all.

By firing everyone there.

Last I heard that piece of junk was hacked.

Do yourself a favour Google.
Stop supporting lame programmers ffs !!

I hate to be a cynic, but I think the whole point of news reporting is to attract your attention to those crucial 8 minutes every half hour... the commerical sponsors.

What happens inbetween commercials only exists to get you to turn to their channel... after all thats why (1) products like TIVO scare the crap out of them for its ability to hide commercials, and (2) product placement in the shows themselves allows commercial time to blend with content time. Hell, CBS was running programs about books that the parent company published, and calling it news... And after all, why are the news readers so pretty... so you'll tune in.

This is also why I believe news reporters tend to become politically biased over time towards their local markets... it is their job to retain viewers/customers, and so you preach to your local markets. The political landscape is strongly correllated with urban concentrations, as are the "big" markets. The "old" big 3 broadcast media meets the needs of the cities, with its liberal leanings. Those living away from urban areas have to rely on cable and satelite, which "new" big media promptly cornered the market, and tilted their content towards their libertarian/conservative consumers. The people like like Jennings's leanings will tend to flip on ABC, and ABC gets viewers to watch its commercials, and those of the other leanings will flip on Fox, and Fox gets viewers for its commercials. Companies win, educating citizens loses.