Slashdot Mirror

Like this https://www.webpronews.com/facebook-listens-2015-02/, you mean?

Another counterpoint: My cable is ~$140/month. That includes lowest tier cable (130 or so non-premium channels), internet (60mb), and phone, plus hardware rentals of two boxes (IIRC, first free, second $10/month) and cable/phone modem ($5/month). I have my own cable modem, but it doesn't provide phone, so I have to rent the cable company's modem. I suppose you might suggest dropping phone, but that actually costs $10 to $12 more per month, even without the modem rental. It seems they really want to be able to sell large phone lists to telemarketers. But the joke is on them - we don't even have a landline phone.

The OP probably has a premium package or added premium channels, else he cannot watch Game of Thrones (from HBO, a premium channel) on TV. Maybe he also rents the cable company's DVR system, has the maximum number of set-top boxes, or perhaps his company charges exorbitant rental fees for the hardware. I've heard of some companies charging $10/month for each cable-card, which is much more than the $2/month I would pay here, so it wouldn't surprise me if the box/DVR rental fees are similarly ridiculous in some locations.

In short, yes, here in the US all cable subscribers are being screwed hard by the cable companies, but some of us aren't even getting any lube... Part of that is due to the so-called "Disney/ESPN tax" being forced on nearly all customers regardless of whether they want ESPN (or any Disney-owned channels), but not all of it.

I've looked at the cost of going internet-only plus Hulu (2 streams) and Netflix (middle tier w/ 2 streams), and we would save money, but we'd have to buy a couple of Roku boxes or similar, so there's an upfront cost my wife will dislike. Further, Hulu doesn't provide any of the current shows my wife watches (that's a deal breaker right there) nor the live TV I want (news channels mostly), and Netflix simply doesn't tell anyone without an account the full set of available TV programs. So, that's still not an option for us.

- T

1. A white kid walking around at night in a hoodie looks like a thug also. He does not look like a tech billionaire.

Yes, this man is frightening indeed. Certainly not a tech billionaire.

PC gaming is a larger market than all other platforms... COMBINED.

What are you drinking because I want some!

PC Gaming is expected to see worldwide revenue of $27 billion in 2017.

As you can see, PC Gaming and Console revenue worldwide is pretty comparable in 2015. Both pull in a bit under $25 billion.

According to Gartner, the Gaming industry was projected to be $111 billion in 2015.

So, if Gartner's projection was roughly right, and PC Gaming & Console Gaming's worldwide revenues are about $25 billion each, who is grabbing the remaining $61 billion? Well, according to Digital-Capital, a game investment bank, the future is mobile gaming.

No, fuckwit.
http://www.webpronews.com/how-...

MS paid 1 billion dollars to developers so they would keep their game exclusive to the Xbox.

You're a retard. Go off and die somewhere.

I think the argument goes...when you look at the fact that damn near all mass murders happen in gun free zones when we are speaking about the USA

Cite please. Or please list the "near all mass murders" you are referring to. Your statement (about nearly all mass murders happening in gun free zones) is definitely not true. Tucson is not a gun free zone and a legally owned gun did the damage there. The ex cop doing the Wesley Chapel, Florida theater shooting had a legal gun too. Where did you get your "fact"?

Medical devices are huge threats. "Hey lets slap WiFi on this heart rate monitor and give it to a hospital" - how about an insulin pump?

Recall the story of using bluetooth to kill someone with a pacemaker?

Simple fact is people have no idea what they are doing security wise and are designing this stuff to be web enabled.

And that's why Yahoo's email is such a hit. Like this: http://www.webpronews.com/even...

A year ago there was also an interesting situation when Vietnam was claimed to have the highest Windows 8 adoption rate.

This fee system seems like an elegant way to run a business....

Yes lets have our regulations carried out by the lowest bidder. There is a reason cops should be paid above what the market may decide on (not just most people not wanting to be in that line of work).

Do you really want regulators of nuclear power plants looking to pad their income?

Worse their is no democratic representation in a company (not likely to be much competition in the nuclear regulation market, this isn't something just anyone can do) so who is going to regulate the regulators? Politicians can and do get voted out for corruption and other scandals.

So you had tech support issues? Welcome to technology, that's annoying as hell but not really relevant unless you think things always run 100% smoothly everywhere else in the world...

As for options - that's mostly stupid Baltimore politicians making exclusive agreements with Comcast, not companies not *interested* in competition...

http://www.webpronews.com/baltimore-working-to-bring-more-internet-options-to-its-businesses-and-residents-2013-08

I was not looking for a word.

You seem confused on how the big picture works. Legalities are being figured out, and it is probable that existing, mounting public pressure will make the legislative branch take on the executive branch, and determine what actually is legal. Meanwhile, more information is coming from FISC and other decisions and policies, so the people who say what's legal can see what other people who say what's legal based their decisions on. The entirety of case law which resulted in a win for the prosecution was stuff that was legal until a court said it wasn't. And I can't see a flawless victory when 2 of 3 branches disagree with the Executive. So we still don't know. Oh, you didn't want opinion, you wanted something more substantial, like the FISA court finding the NSA to be in violation of the fourth amendment. So no, just because someone says it's legal doesn't mean it is.

And I spent THE REST OF THE PARAGRAPH explaining what is wrong with that single chair. In a nutshell: More than one person should have an unobstructed view of a 22 foot screen, and I count reflection off the chrome as obstruction.

No one yet has mentioned that the PDF lists the completion date as 1999 - well in time to have had some effect two years later but failing to do so. According the the Foreign Policy Article, "On Aug. 1, 2005, Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander reported for duty as the 16th director of the National Security Agency". If that is the right document, planning would have been under Lt Gen Kenneth A. Minihan (February 1996 - March 1999) or if they were super fast, Lt Gen Michael V. Hayden.

The chronology is wrong, or the documents are wrong, or the story is wrong. And you expect people to "Let the NSA geek feel like he's Captain Picard"? It is not going to happen, because people don't work that way. They are already outraged at something that, one way or another, isn't even a story.

Care to defend the "doors that made a 'whoosh' sound when they slid open and closed"? Because I'm sure people will start listening to reason now. Or, do you instead realize the answers to all your "Why" questions above?

There is really no point in arguing about this since there will be no more NCAA games. http://www.webpronews.com/ncaa-will-not-renew-ea-contract-ncaa-football-2014-to-be-the-last-ncaa-game-2013-07

And Clapper actually spoke the truth, as it is understood things.

WHAT!?!?! LOL!!! They must be paying you a lot for "coding" if it prompts you to defend their actions with this kind of BS. Clapper has admitted to lying, about the best he has done is claim that he used the least untruthful statement he could come up with. Those of us not lawyers or politicians call that "lying."

You HAVE to be kidding me. You do not think that AQ or taliban is a threat to America? You do not think that 9/11 occurred? And the fact that the Chinese, Iranian, North Koreans, and even Russians (quasi issue here) are spying on us with a full court press is not an issue? Seriously? If you think that they are not a threat, then you have an issue with your logic. Or should I be asking, what nation you are from?

Al Queida? Really? There are plenty of "threats" to national security. As I said, protecting from those threats must not compromise the rule of law, and the rights of American citizens. This level of domestic spying does just that. And since it's not even effective enough to prevent things like the Boston Marathon bombing, there is no reason to violate people's rights for it. In fact, there is no justification for violating the Constitutional restrictions on the Federal government's authority, even for the claimed purpose of "protecting the American people."

And you claim that the constitution has been violated, yet, you provide ZERO proof of it. All you have is a bunch of accusations, with no proof.

Apparently, you haven't read it. There is ample evidence that the Fourth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, the First Amendment, and the Enumerated Powers in Article 1 have all been violated.

The Fourth Amendment obliges the government to demonstrate probable cause before conducting invasive surveillance. The government has made a mockery of that protection by relying on select Supreme Court cases, decided before the era of the public Internet and cellphones, to argue that citizens have no expectation of privacy in either phone metadata or in e-mails or other private electronic messages that it stores with third parties. This hairsplitting is inimical to privacy and contrary to what at least five justices ruled just last year in a case called United States v. Jones. One of the most conservative justices on the Court, Samuel A. Alito Jr., wrote that where even public information about individuals is monitored over the long term, at some point, government crosses a line and must comply with the protections of the Fourth Amendment. That principle is, if anything, even more true for Americans’ sensitive nonpublic information like phone metadata and social networking activity.

BTW, I asked how YOU would safeguard this, and yet, you come up with NOTHING? Why not?

Safeguard what? America? That's up to the Americans, not secret spy networks. You know what it really takes to prevent another 9/11? Do it once. That's it. As soon as word got out on 9/11 of planes being flown into buildings, the fourth plane could not be used the same way. The so-called "shoe bomber" was stopped by citizens on the plane. Same thing for the underwear bomber. Secret spying and TSA didn't do anything to stop that, the People did. You should trust them, not the liars, thieves, and elitist bullies in the Federal government.

"Could A Yahoo-Apple Deal Spell Trouble For Google?" http://www.webpronews.com/iphones-and-ipads-could-soon-get-a-big-dose-of-yahoo-2013-04 its a great article, about Yahoo! (Who share there data with Microsoft) and Apple, but from the Article...although its common news "An analyst at Macquarie Capital estimated that Google was making $1.3 billion annually in paid search revenue from iOS devices. Macquarie speculated that Google returned about $1 billion of that to Apple as part of the agreement that made Google the default search engine on the Safari browser.Another financial analyst has come up with a similar annual estimate of the value of Google’s default iOS search deal with Apple: $1 billion. Morgan Stanley’s Scott Devitt is responsible for the new estimateDevitt disagreed with Macquarie, arguing that the structure of the relationship is probably not a “revenue sharing” deal but instead a straight fee-per-device payment from Google to Apple. Devitt believes that Google pays Apple roughly $3.20 per iOS device, which would avoid the accounting issues arising from a revenue sharing agreement."

Chrome OS bug:
The CVE-2013-0913 hack was was a buffer overflow in the GPU for Chrome OS / Linux.
http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2013-0913

Chrome browser bug:
Last year's PinkiePie hack chained multiple Chrome (browser) bugs together to be able to get to the GPU.
http://www.webpronews.com/google-chrome-cracked-by-six-bug-combo-2012-05

They didn't release details yet, but odds are since it's the same person he probably used a similar method to hack the browser and get access to the GPU of the OS.

This week, Stephanie Perotti, Ubisoft’s worldwide director for online games, confirmed in an interview with Rock, Paper, Shotgun that Ubisoft has ditched always-on DRM. In fact, the company hasn’t implemented such tactics in over a year. Ubisoft’s policy is now to require only a one-time activiation when a game is first installed. In addition, the company now allows gamers to activate a game on as many PCs as they want. Perotti stated that Ubisoft changed its policy based on feedback from its customers.

"Whining" helped. "Creative protests" helped. Not buying Ubisoft's DRM-encumbered games helped.

Not going to bother posting more citations; I have decent karma already. I'll just leave this here and let you find some examples of your own.

And on an even more serious note: that this business model doesn't work, shows Amazon's posting of $274 Million loss on LivingSocial

.

Well, I suppose you could use Bing, but Bing just steals results from Google anyway.

http://www.webpronews.com/cutts-last-time-i-checked-bing-was-still-using-google-as-a-signal-2012-09

http://www.webpronews.com/google-preventing-u-s-users-from-disabling-safesearch-2012-12

http://searchengineland.com/google-updates-safesearch-filter-in-image-search-142330

Google is actively participating in the fragmentation of the global web. Their search is not fair and equal across all audiences. Its porn now. But mark my words it will be politics soon, if there isnt some subtle chilling effect already.

What happens when only governments with clones of googles accurate unfiltered search database are the only ones with access to all information. Do we start segregating people because of their views on what should and shouldnt be on the net? How do people know that its ok to do it in ways other then missionary if they can't find out all the wonderful ways we can literally screw eachother without jumping through hoops. Its an enlightening process that fundementalists need not be protected from in my opinion.

Anyway the Big point I'm trying to get at is people in sweeden who automaticly route to google.se get more accurate results then the average american who doesnt bother to check what their browser is doing. You cant get the same results through America's portal even if you set your setting to "not filter" its not the same. Its illusion. And google is helping to make the illusion that when you search for boobs on the net, thats what you get even if you set your filter low. When its not.

By creating this double standard Google is further seperating the elite from the non-elite. They are literally making people dumb by being authoritarian and permiting information to be managed in a deceptive way like this. Right now its just "sexual" content more or less but I don't think anyone with the attitude that its ok to go this far is trustworthy.

I'm seriously wondering what I will be able to google in the next 10 years. What search engine can I go to. I've tried things like Ixquick etc... I doubt they'll have that much impact though. They scrape from google, but do they scrape from unfiltered results or what.

In the mean time I'm going to be fuming mad about the general impact on peoples understanding of what is out there. People aught to be able to find out about everything and shouldnt have to circumvent google or anything else. Shit should not be this obfuscated and Orwellian.

And seriously I know you didn't have a friendly agreeing post to give back to me, but I appreciate your dialog that you even took the time to respond and tell me why you thought I was wrong.

Copyrights and trade secrets protected the software industry just fine before the USPTO opened the flood gates on software patents in the early 90's. They should stick to the original intent of the constitution, and protect the free flow of ideas by banning patents on mathematical algorithms (which includes software, IMO). They should not overturn the patents they've granted - that would harm the companies that filed them - but going forward, patents should cover something more than what can be executed in any mainstream computer language. If I can violate your patent simply by writing C code, it should not be patentable.

Software patents have resulted in:
The Open Invention Network
Peer to Patent
Oracle suing Google over Java
37 Android related patent suits
Nearly killing RIM
Linux patent suits ...

I'm afraid we're at the point where the anti-software-patent people warned we'd be. Small companies live in terror of being sued over any software they write. Big companies waste billions of dollars in court. Coders like me intentionally "code dumb", to avoid accidentally using a patented software idea. It's a terrible waste, and it makes me very sad to see America throwing away it's software innovation lead in this way. Thank God software patents weren't around when we wrote so much of the software that still powers the world. If they were, we'd all still be renting time on IBM mainframes. Just imagine a world where Donald Knuth patented all his ideas.

You're thinking of Apple:
http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/mp3s/apples-future-wont-be-brought-to-you-by-the-letter-i-20100312-q27r.html

Hey have you ever seen a "leaf"? Apple just trademarked it:
http://www.webpronews.com/apples-trademark-applications-are-getting-kind-of-ridiculous-2012-12

I would have never thought of that. Guess that's why Apple's #1

Replying to self with link to a reddit page on the variations, XKCD forum, and a very brief summary of some of the variations.

Is the total fee less than the cost of a complete retrofit minus the price you could get for the used system on eBay?

Brocious has identified a 32-bit key that identifies the hotel’s “sitecode.” The worst part is that every Onity lock has this key. By reading the key back to the lock, the lock opens. The hack is so simple that he’s surprised more people haven’t found out about it yet.

A 32-bit key... really!

After reading this, what surprises me is that Onity is still in business.

Sure...

Sue companies for using h.264 patents they hold?

http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/26/motorola-scales-back-itc-case-against-xbox/

Track everything everyone does online?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/google-tracks-consumers-across-products-users-cant-opt-out/2012/01/24/gIQArgJHOQ_story.html

Circumvent the privacy settings in safari to track people online?

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/10/business/la-fi-google-ftc-20120810

Refuse to integrate turn by turn navigation on the iDevices to try and keep android relevant?

http://www.webpronews.com/google-maps-out-of-ios-6-over-voice-navigation-dispute-sources-say-2012-09

Although there are multiple sources on the last one, some of which make varying claims. Some claim that google refused to do it, others claim that google wanted apple to include latitude (a different google product), the ability to display ads, and the ability to track iOS users. While they aren't required to provide anything at all, it is definitely bad faith since they already had the code base and back end capable of doing so, they wanted to give Android a better map. It wasn't about the code, the work, or the complexity. Apple at one point (allegedly) even offered to pay to have them do it, and it was out right refused.

Anonymous Coward is right. Dice did buy them out for $20 million.

There are already a bunch of phones that are thinner than the iP5. http://www.webpronews.com/these-phones-are-thinner-than-the-iphone-5-2012-09 Personally I'd rather have more battery. Most people will chuck on an ugly bulky bumper case anyway.

It's the fact that it's still Windows, and Microsoft is still working on the paradigm of a single code build to rule them all, that's a complete turn-off to me, and makes the chance of me ever owning such a device bordering on nonexistent.

It was trying to deal with a company issued Windows mobile 5 phone, and later a Windows mobile 6 phone, that taught me that Microsoft just doesn't get the differences between the touch and kvm paradigms. It appears that they're going to "solve" this by making everything (including kvm pcs) run a touch-friendly interface.

The thing is, Microsoft has yet to create a truly successful touch interface. (The original "surface" had some really cutting edge features but was never released.) "Windows 7 tablet edition" is unbelievably bad, being for the most part a re-branding of old accessibility resources. Windows 7 Phone never took off, despite some early moderately favorable reviews, perhaps due to it's association to other failed attempts (see paragraph one).

So now... honestly, why do I need Windows Phone 8? Compatibility with Exchange? A known solution on both iphone and android. Compatibility with Microsoft Office? My Android phone came with Quickoffice, and it appears to be working fine. I can mail myself a PPT, open it on the phone, and use the HDMI interface to display on a projector, no laptop necessary.

Tiles that update dynamically? Android has had that (widgets) for years.

That it's called Windows? That's actually a reason *not* to buy it.

So, like, what? The number of applications? Um, no. The maturity of the code base? It is to laugh. Let's see... Crush on Steve Ballmer... nope. Love the logo... nope, if anything, the new logo looks amateurish. Microsoft has done such a great job on my PC that I'll buy anything they produce? Let's see, examining feelings, um, that would be a no. I'm really reaching here, but I don't know what else might come into play. Oh wait, I know:

I work for Microsoft and they're giving me a Windows 8 phone and tablet for free? Well, that might work. At very least, it'll reduce inventory somewhat. Storage must be costly.

On the other hand, my company (which isn't Microsoft) issued me a Windows Mobile phone, and after a very frustrating three months I gave it back. (In all fairness, they also issued me an ipad, and after a week, seeing that I'd still need to carry a laptop, I gave back the ipad.) So a more correct wording might be "We're giving Microsoft employees a free Windows 8 phone and you better the hell be seen using it".

That, plus TV show prop departments heavily subsidize by Microsoft (cough-hawaii-50-cough) might be the only places you see the critters.

Oh and, if you are from Uniloc, I have one more thing for you: Don't fuck with minecraft and DON'T fuck with Mojang. It's one thing to harass microsoft (who basically everyone hates but deals with because there isn't a better solution), but to fuck with an indie game developer that everyone loves....that's like kicking a poor old lady in a wheel chair in times square in NYC, what the fuck do you think is going to happen here?

Not exactly. I assume that they aren't suing in Sweden but rather in the U.S. somewhere. The court might look at it as hard-working local innovator vs. evil foreign company. (Obviously unserious too since they resolve legal matters with computer games.)

Hell if MSFT would have given XP X64 the support they should have most folks would have probably been happy to stay on XP

IE6 would still be alive and massively deployed. Good riddance! Not to kick it while it's down, but see XP & the rise of botnets. I'm glad it wasn't adopted. Not to mention the improved display driver model first in Vista and also in Windows 7.

and now that they are gonna try to ram a stupid appstore down everyone's throat having an OS that'll run DirectX that valve can control would be a smart move.

I'm glad you mentioned this. I'd like to counter this point by saying that this appears to be what the masses want judged by the success of the Android market place (now Google Play) and the App Store. Joe Sixpack accesses the store from his phone/device, selects the desired app, and installs it. A simple process. Most phones have auto update notifications to boot (Wouldn't it be nice if Windows had this without requiring each application to run its own updater, or knowing someone has once-overed the code to the store compliance guidelines? As an example: I have updaters I'm able to name off the top of my head: Adobe Application Updater, Flash (web developer), apps with update checking: Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Steam, Malware Bytes, Nvidia, Skype). One of the biggest problems out there is people who don't patch vulnerabilities, many cases the hot fixes and patches were available before the storm hit, creating a problem for even more people.

There have been many vocal posts about how dodgy software plagues the less technical users and how the fault lies either with the OS vendor or application developer. The App Store takes this a step further by vetting code as well as requiring a developers license to submit software. It is massively popular with the masses and very successful at generating revenue for Apple and others who use the marketplace. Not to mention look at how extremely well Apple is doing. I am aware they make most of their money on the phones not just digital purchases. You may be surprised to know Apple isn't the king of devices activated though. The Android daily device activation is number staggering (~12 a second, 1 million a day) which is roughly half of all smartphones.

I've been berated on /. for "not getting it" when talking about computer use (I'm a technical user, to frame it briefly: why wouldn't you want to master a tool which is used in your life daily?). The barrier to entry is lower now than it has ever been, enabling more people to be online than ever before. Now these users are voting with their wallets. Seems like mainframes (cloud) and proprietary systems/walled gardens are all the rage in the industry's mind and the users are not at all concerned with who owns or accesses data and how. As long as they eventually get what they want.

I'd be ALL for it, but it looks like OpenGL is gonna be for the CAD guys

I'm sure games are another legitimate consideration, so is GUI compositing. Shiny sells. That giant screen is used for more than just a phone button interface. You're not thinking about the oodles of handsets that are out there; literally millions more are created daily. Millions of potential customers daily and developers cater to their customers.

OpenGL just isn't as good as DirectX, its too hacky with all the extensions and its just not been given the love like it had in the late 90s when it looked like it had a shot at the title.

Indeed. However, an (arguable) benefit of OpenGL and variants is the graphics are now largely cross platform. DirectX also succeeds because, as a developer wouldn't you be interested in (relative) ease? I'm referring specifically to complexity.

Your anecdote contradicts actual research. Android users don't surf the web as much as iOS users. - http://www.webpronews.com/ios-trounces-android-in-web-traffic-2012-04 (This was with a 5 second google search with 'iOS android internet traffic')

http://www.webpronews.com/netflix-political-action-committee-a-reality-2012-04

Both lose.

http://www.webpronews.com/netflix-political-action-committee-a-reality-2012-04

Pass on the Netflix, too.

I use them to store files I don't give a shit about. If they want to scrape my cannabutter recipes and pirated MP3's looking for something to 'monetize', they can be my guest.

The only data they can steal is the data you give them. People aren't powerless victims, here, they're making a deliberate choice to put their files in someone else's control. I don't much give a shit who that someone else is, if you don't want them to see it, don't give it to them to hold.

This is just simple common sense, but it seems like people would rather keep stamping their feet and bitching about how insecure it all is rather than just making the simple decision to not fucking upload sensitive shit to these services in the first place and moving on with their lives. Anyone looking for an impenetrable bank vault for their data via an internet connection is an idiot. The weak point in any security system is the user, and as we all know, users come up with novel ways to compromise their shit every single day. According to a recent study, the most common password in business is Password1. If that doesn't make you think twice about trusting any of these services with your data I don't know what will...

I don't care about any social media. I refuse to use any of it. I consider myself a technological hermit, and proud to be one.

Slashdot is the first and leading social media destination for technology professionals and IT decision makers. Slashdot’s highly engaged community of IT influencers share and socialize hundreds of pieces of content every day, including news, analysis, peer questions, and professional insight. Slashdot is a website of Geeknet Media, a wholly owned subsidiary of Geeknet Inc. (Nasdaq:GKNT).

link

Oh, I did say Foxconn still has skeletons in its closet. Which I firmly believe. Do you think they are lilly white? Do you believe that Foxconn no longer regards its workers as animals?

Yes, Google has been sending out notifications encouraging sites to fill more of the screen with Google ads. I'm trying to find the link where someone reported getting a notification that they should put more ads on their page, because they had less than 3 "ad units". That included the "heat map" referenced above. I haven't found that yet, but I found this Google video "Monetize your content". "Ideally, every page on your site should have some form of AdSense on it". Yes, the Google sales rep actually says that.

In related news, Google is dropping their "domain parking" business, where Google hosts ad-filled pages for parked domains. Not because domain parking is evil. They're just outsourcing the hosting. Google suggest using another domain-parking company like Sedo, which serves Google ads.

Obama signed ACTA in Janurary 2012 Mr. President, how could you?

So which is worse. That Obama signed ACTA or that Obama signed ACTA as an "executive agreement" sidestepping the Constitutional requirement that the Senate must approve all trade agreements?
--
"Well, you know, it turns out that our Founders designed a system that makes it harder to change than I would like sometimes." Barrack Obama, onetime lecturer in constitutional law at the University of Chicago, currently President of the United States.

Okay, this may have me holding my nose and filling in the oval next to Romney or Gingrich in November.... Obama signed ACTA in Janurary 2012 Mr. President, how could you?

The only people who think the Sweden extradition is some sort of grand conspiracy for the US to get its hands on Assange are... well, Assange, and a like-minded bunch of credulous simpletons

Nice ad homenim against anyone who disagrees with your view. Extra points for arrogance.

Apparently your list of "simpletons" includes your buddies at Stratfor, who claim to have specific intelligence indicating that the charges in Sweden are trumped up:

Whatâ(TM)s even more interesting is that Farnham says thereâ(TM)s nothing to the claims that Assange sexually assaulted two women in Sweden. He says that a close family friend knows one of the women involved in the case and they said that itâ(TM)s just âoeprosecutors looking to make a name for themselves.â

Ref: http://www.webpronews.com/stratfor-email-leaks-reveal-u-s-plans-to-indict-wikileaks-founder-2012-02

This may be less about extraditing Assange to the US, and more about jailing him for any offense, real or imagined, and assinating his character. Which would still be a "grand conspiracy" of sorts, just not one focused on extradition: label him a rapist and jail him for trumped up charges without us breaking any of our laws. Makes a nice example (in the Mafiosa Dom sense of the word), particularly once you throw Manning's inevitable sentence into the mix.

The sealed indictment (if real) adds another sinister bent to the whole thing. Regardless, that a very nasty game is afoot here is not in doubt, what is, is exactly what the nature of the game is.

What role a secret indictment would play is interesting to speculate about (and that's all anyone can really do). Can Assange be rendered more easily from Sweden (or points en route), or is he more vulnerable to extradition as a convicted felon and ex-con after he's served jailtime on trumped up charges and his reputation is in tatters? Or is it just an Ace the government keeps up its sleave, on the off chance Assange someday has a layover on US soil, say, on his way to a speaking engagement in Rio?

1% of the idiotic masses are going to call 911 and they are gonna be pissed off

Or drunk.

The fifth amendment has already been addressed in this case and others:
Colorado Judge Denies Fifth Amendment Applies to Encryption Passphrases.

Current laws don't address encryption specifically, so it's not that clear whether compelling a defendant to render the passphrase to unlock an encrypted devices is more analagous to compelling her to provide a key to open a safe or to give up self-incriminating information from her own mind. A situation like this has parallels to both situations. The former has precedent supporting its constitutionality and the latter has precedent supporting its unconstitutionality.

You seem to have missed the part where the Senate has to vote to accept any treaty. Clinton signed Kyoto, but the Senate unanimously rejected it anyway.

Except he may have signed it as an executive agreement and not as a treaty.

http://www.webpronews.com/president-obama-doesnt-support-sopa-but-signs-acta-2012-01

There are many issues involved with President Obama’s signing of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement — which occurred in September 2011 — and whether or not it should be treated as an executive agreement or an actual treaty between the agreeing countries. With an executive agreement, the President does not require the approval of the Senate, whereas, with a treaty, Senate approval is required. That, however, is not the issue, especially when you consider the initial zeal with which the both houses of the U.S. Government supported SOPA and PIPA.

Obama claims he is against SOPA and PIPA yet he signed ACTA last year.

http://www.webpronews.com/president-obama-doesnt-support-sopa-but-signs-acta-2012-01

No, it's actually about G+ too. Note that only +1 from G+ profiles will count.

Better than that - they're actively leveraging the search engine to collect identity profiles. Join G+ or your page falls down the search.

They're actually willing to compromise the search to collect profiles.

Yeah? Google is so very keen to get people's wallet-names in Google+ that they're going to bias their search engine toward people who sign up. Really - corrupting their search engine to try to extract more identity data.

Yes, both Apple and Microsoft are anti-choice and act in anti-competitive manners. This is nothing new, nor will anyone step in to stop it.

http://gigaom.com/video/google-forces-roku-to-take-down-its-youtube-channel/

http://www.webpronews.com/skyhook-wireless-sues-google-2010-09

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/31/google_clamps_down_on_android_partners/

http://www.businessinsider.com/eric-schmidt-tried-to-get-google-to-hide-his-political-donation-in-search-results-2011-4?op=1

Amazon is trying to speed the adoption of the Kindles. If people are slow to flock to the device the reason is the high prices the publishers cling to.

Okay, I agree e-book prices are set artificially high. But where, exactly, did the rest of this come from? The Kindle 3 is Amazon's best-selling item ever - more people bought it than bought the best-selling Harry Potter tome. And we've all read the news that Amazon's e-books are already outselling hardcover books, which isn't too shabby given the few years Kindle has even existed.

And while I am happy there are competing products out there... I see a lot of Kindles on the train, and quite a few iPads (although fewer iPads than Kindles I'd guess). If there are riders with Nooks and Sony Readers, they're keeping them well-hidden. So it seems unlikely the article was drawing a more narrow distinction, say between the Kindle and some hypothetical better-selling competitor.

... will it work? Yahoo! tried this back in 2005 and it failed miserably. Too much promised up front with too little returned. Publishers dropped it like a potato before Yahoo! could improve the contextual workings to increase the CTR. I know because I tried it, and quickly discarded it.

Lesson is, don't promise something you can't deliver, or are planning to deliver at a later date. Odds are, publishers will return to the "tried and true" and never look back.

Yahoo's problem is the glut of ads in everything. I hated it so much I left Yahoo and all their groups and stuff behind. Perhaps if they weren't so intent on cramming ads in like crazy they might succeed with only a few here and there and ditch the *&$%@ flash ads. God, how I HATE flash ads.