Slashdot Mirror
Google Draws Fire From Congress
bonch writes "Democrat Herb Kohl, the Senate's leading antitrust legislator, has vowed an antitrust probe into Google as one of his top priorities. Others in Congress are criticizing the search giant over several flubs, including scanning personal data over neighborhood WiFi, collecting Social Security information from children in a doodling contest, and sidestepping net neutrality rules through a deal with Verizon. They're also concerned over ties with the administration — Eric Schmidt is a technology adviser to President Obama, Andrew McLaughlin serves as Obama's deputy chief technology officer, and Sonal Shah leads the White House Office of Social Innovation. Google spent $5.2 million last year on federal lobbying, but critics say their increased Washington presence has made more enemies than friends."
Reader walterbyrd contributes an article that suggests this is all just a fund-raising ploy.
to Congress campaigns enough lately.
Yep, it's a shakedown. Nothing to see here, move along.
What about the Son of Acta that was posted yesterday? Or the patriot act? Or the fact that I know while driving to California tomorrow along 8 I'm going to get stopped and searched at least 2 to 3 times by border patrol in complete violation of my 4th amendment rights? I'm not going to say that all of that data mining isn't a treasure trove of information, I'd just suggest this is all a diversion, that if given the chance all those politicians creating a stink would *love* to get their hands on all of it, and that they have *much* more pressing issues at the moment.
That's why Google is being investigated, for being such cheapskates! Don't they know how to lobby properly?! Microsoft has been known to spend up to $25 million, and that isn't much compared to the really big players!
AFAYK - as far as you know.
They should do an anti trust probe into real anti trust problems. More specifically one that looks at that ever lovely comcastic company.
Yes, when I think of out-of-control industries that are stamping on the rights of ordinary people, colluding to price-gouge us and passing legislation harmful to American interests, I think Google. Not the RIAA or MPAA or union-busting industries or economy-wrecking fraudulent financial groups or small-business-annihilating megamarts or the military-industrial complex or cable and phone companies. Definitely Google. Please oh please stop them before they voluntarily collect our publicly available SSNs and information we blast out over wireless on clear unencrypted channels.
need to go jump up and down on a pole a few times he might feel a bit better then .
Disclaimer:
I am not stating here that this information is correct, but it's certainly worth a read.
So go ahead, and have a read over here.
Man, they have not thought that one through. Attacking Google is politically like attacking puppies and children.
Microsoft gave stuff away for free!
Doesn't that make them nice?! Or.....
Google is now under anti-trust investigation. I guess that makes them like Microsoft?
*I'm looking incredibly giddy with mischief pointing out Slashdot's hypocracy!*
Until Google Draws Money For Congress
They didn't give enough money to Kohl's campaign.
You pay for software that almost works 30% of the time and fails to work the other 70% of the time?
What does Microsoft have to do with Google other than that they are attempting -- and I use this word loosely -- to compete with them on their home turf?
Chrome has done more to keep people using Windows than MS would ever give credit for. You don't see Google trying to make it the default browser choice on all systems sold by, I dunno, Dell or HP, do you?
If you had said you pay for Apple products because they work and you get what you pay for, I would consider that reasonable. But all you prove in your comment is that you're some form of retarded Microsoft-bot, and that's a shame, because that bitch is finally on the way out and innovation is finally back on the way in, and it always sucks to be the last to realize that.
Next, we'll deal with the spectre of Apple evil -- even us who love their products.
That's the biggest myth in tech world, the idea that end-user payments determine whether a service is paid or not.
Here's the fact: Google doesn't give anything away for "free." With most of its services you are the product being sold to advertisers.
Nothing extra, nothing hidden? How about the tons of unnecessary shit Windows comes equipped with and you can't remove? Or the recent scandal about WP7 phones generating traffic apart from user-created stuff?
Data mining? Meh. If someone's interested in my research into nootropics, or the schedule for the Association of Diplomacy in Practice, let them be, all of it is public anyway, nothing to hide there. I only put stuff into the cloud that I wouldn't be embarrassed to put my name onto, for example in case of hacking.
Ads? I ignore them, whether they're targeted at me or not. It simply bounces off my brain.
If someone needs an antitrust probe it's the kind like Microsoft and Apple. Especially Apple needs to be investigated, even if it's not really antitrust, but for the insane amount of control they wield over their users' devices. I wouldn't be surprised if those iPhones could actually be commanded to eavesdrop...
Hyperbole: I use it liberally!
Reap what you sow!
Amerifags still dont get the lesson of that day? I hope more planes crash on building. Reap what you sow, asshole!
+1, Troll.
Herb is kind of above reproach. Having grown up in Wisconsin and actually met the man once, I can say comfortably that he isn't some kind of fundraising whore; he's a principled legislator who will probably get swept out in the next tide of teabagging. So I would be very careful in ascribing any kind of sinister motive to his investigation, or in drawing any conclusions about what the committee's findings will be.
Oh no we're not incompetent or on the take. This is a very important... thing... we need to tackle. We can't have Google plugging the pipes of the internet. The fact that you all are still loosing your homes and the banks are profiting three times off of your home each time you loose it isn't something we want you thinking about, so look at this google thing! yea! Oh thank you Mr. Bank charman for another campaign donation! Seriously... this whole thing reads exactly like the movie script.
Coffee: The lifeblood of intelligence in civilization.
Don't click - Links to goatse.
Gone!
because they're open.
open!
So it's evil when Google mines my data and makes no attempt to hide the fact that they do, but it's ok when congress creates fusion centers that create profiles of average american citizens that have never committed any crimes and places wire taps on phones without proper warrants or just cause. I'm sorry, but I actually feel much safer trusting Google with my information than I do the federal government. Google just wants to make a profit, the federal government wants to control my life.
I now see why you've been moderation bombed.
Yeah, it's called a legislative shakedown. I don't mind google being pushed around by idealistic Europeans, but once America's asshats get into the game, well it's a shakedown pure & simple.
Google would eventually turn evil once Sergey Brin dies of course, but thus far they ain't too bad. We should encourage Larry and Sergey to push positive moral aims through their company itself, rather than adopting Gate's be evil & then be nice approach.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
Wasen't it M$ that bungled Alexa with IE by default and had updates to old windows version collect a list of installed software on the system?
the karma bombing is a bitch, isn't it? I am a decade+ (so to speak) poster with a damned good karma rating; yet I was bombed a year or so ago (very unknown reasons) and I was stuck like you, with -1 for quite a long long time. nothing the developers (I emailed many times, sigh) could do would reverse it. maybe they just didn't care, don't know.
realize that its happened to others. I did not create a 2nd account and just gave up even trying to post for close to a year. yeah, it sucked; then again, I had extra free time on my hands ;)
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Except Google really doesn't try to hide anything. I like Google not just because they give stuff away for free, but because they also deliver a quality product, but, more importantly, they are very honest and transparent with their actions. Like with the incidents with the WIFI data, they came forward and admitted it without anybody investigating them. There is nothing "shady" about their business practices. You may not agree with the way they do that business, but you are completely free to use another product as you so suggest. It's not evil. It's just business
ok, Zalan Meggyesi.
I love +5 funny first posts.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
People still link to Goatse? Man, what a classic.
To distract us from what? Whatever.. the shields will hold.
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
This link is goatse.
Of course what Google is doing right now is evil in an anti-competitive sense: it is "selling" some of their products at a price point that is below the net price. For example, their free gmail service is subsidized by their search products, and these products are largely unrelated. I'm not sure about the US, but in many countries, such "dumping" of products would be considered illegal.
The dumping of products has another negative side-effect, and this is that people are giving up their rights. For example, they are giving up privacy, and they have nobody to complain to if something does not properly work, or, for example, if they lose all their data.
Google might have the slogan "do no evil", but considering the above facts, Microsoft is really not all too bad. I certainly have to agree with the parent that their business model is more honest, at least.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
Not donating enough to the various political parties.
You pay for software that almost works 30% of the time and fails to work the other 70% of the time?
I think you're exaggerating a bit. If you don't like Microsoft products then you don't like Microsoft products, but to claim that they "fail" (whatever that means... instability? functionally?) is a bit disingenuous.
Download free e-books, lectures, and tutorials at bookgoldmine.com
Recently, Google, Facebook, Twitter and other American Internet giants have participated directly in the social storm that has engulfed the Middle East. They have played a key role in manufacturing social disorder, serving a role entirely inappropriate to their status. Wael Ghonim, Google's chief representative in the Middle Eastern and North African markets even rendered assistance to Mohamed ElBaradei in driving forward the anti-government movement in Egypt, becoming the chief agent behind Egyptian demonstrations. The facts have shown that Google is not purely a company, that it seeks not only to make the money of other nations, but also meddles in the political affairs of other countries. It is not just a search engine tool - it is a tool to extend American hegemony.
In the Internet age, whoever dominates the Internet dominates the world. As the world's leading hegemonic power, America has always prioritized the Internet and sought to use the Internet as a means of promoting America's national interests around the world. Google has been very cooperative with this strategic motive of the United States government, and its cooperation has been active.
The enterprise with the world's highest online traffic, Google monopolizes the online search engine markets for the vast majority of nations and regions in the world, and it has the capacity to dominate online information, widely propagate lies and influence the information climate. When a number of countries in the Middle East experienced signs of instability due to inflation and other problems, Google immediately went on the offensive, even allowing a senior company manager to directly establish the online general headquarters of the anti-government movement, fostering successive protest movements and nakedly interfering with the internal politics of other nations. These actions of Google's are astonishing, and they lead people naturally to recall the British East India Company.
In the colonial era, the British East India Company used the monopolization of trade in the colonies to traffic opium and assist Britain in building its hegemony. In the Internet era, Google uses its monopoly of Internet information search to promote American values and assist America in building its hegemony.
At its heart, Google is quite similar to the British East India Company. But in managing its outward appearance it is far more skillful than the British East India Company ever was. Google does not burn, kill and pillage, but rather is a master of disguises. Against the modus operandi of the British East India Company, which was to "carry out trade when necessary and plunder when possible," Google's slogan is far more bewitching: "Do no evil." The problem is that no company on earth "does evil" as a matter of creed, and it is a bit hypocritical for Google to say it "does no evil." The facts show that this "Do no evil" is actually an admission of guilt through a protestation of innocence.
This company that claims to "do no evil" has cooperated with America's National Security Agency to monitor the private information of American citizens. It has been taken to court by publishing companies in France, Germany, Belgium and many countries for violations of copyright. It has been compelled by China and other countries to clean up its act because it disseminates pornographic content. And most recently it has also openly released subversive information, fomenting unrest in other countries. Before the facts, Google's creed of "Do no evil" is like a joke. Is it any wonder that Apple CEO Steve Jobs once said that Google's "Do no evil" creed was complete nonsense?
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
MS have a long history of bungling. I vote this post for best typo of the month award!
I wonder if he's had a recent conversation with Rupert Murdoch on this as part of Rupert's travelling roadshow telling everyone how his competitor for the advertising dollar is evil and how they must be restricted or jobs will be lost? Murdoch has a lot of influence and can use it without actually overtly bribing people.
Why facebook/twitter/yahoo/micro$oft/etc aren't under fire even though they do steal personal info so much.
Even the facebook privacy accident is enough to be mad at it.
For example, their free gmail service is subsidized by their search products, and these products are largely unrelated.
What are you talking about? It pays for itself the same way every other free email service does, by having ads on it.
And I hope you're not suggesting that running a division at a loss is somehow unlawful, because otherwise Microsoft's xbox and online services divisions are in deep trouble.
Chrome has done more to keep people using Windows than MS would ever give credit for. You don't see Google trying to make it the default browser choice on all systems sold by, I dunno, Dell or HP, do you?
Really? What has Chrome done to keep people on Windows? What alternatives do you have on other operating systems that you can't get on Windows?
DNA -- National Dyslexic Association
Finally the screw google campaign http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/microsofts-secret-screw-google-meetings-in-d-c/19143135/
and we are seeing what the Redmond Lobby can really do!
Why do people keep feeding the astroturfer??
Why are what they are doing evil?
They are just giving me information I want and products I want through the advertising. Doesn't sound bad to me.
Microsoft is very evil. They took advantage of Google's promise not to sell confidential keywords in gmail's email to outside parties with hotmail. Basically they promised advertisers free data on your hotmail accounts. Google's ads work on computer algorithms from its servers but that data is not directly sold to third parties.
I trust Google more.
http://saveie6.com/
Kill Google! Damn monopolists!
What's that? They have competitors in search, phones, e-mail, and video streaming?
Pfft.. Whatever.
ahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahah
ahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
oh stop, it hurts...
The "real" evil here is that the political establishment is inventing a controversy out of nothing, so they have something they can pretend to stand for while at the same time not addressing any of the real issues that plague our country but are politically unpopular to deal with. Medicare, Social Security, Gay Rights, the erosion of our fundamental civil liberties, education. All require politicians to vote for things that will make them lose votes from both Republicans and Democrats, but would benefit the general public. Instead they do nothing... and create an emergency out of thin air that makes little sense so they can pretend to be on your side. Herb Kohl is doing nothing and acting the coward. It's shameful.
So it's ok for Goldman Sachs to routinely send their CEO's to Washington to serve as Sec Treas. There's no problem with Exxon-Mobil writing energy legislation for the Vice President. But Google wants to advise the President on technology issues? Well now, we can't have that.
Why I respond to troll I cannot tell.
But we hit them with 2 motherfucking nukes, damnit! Payback's a bitch and all, but good lord, man, how much do you fucking want?
Dumping is not considered unlawful everywhere, but it certainly is anti-competitive. Ok, so maybe gmail may pay for itself by now (this definitely has not been the case when they started), youtube certainly is operating at a loss.
You might want to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy)
If you're still not convinced, let's assume that you are the owner of a game development studio. Suddenly, microsoft comes along, and with the money they earned on OSes and office software, they can afford to give away games on a large scale. And suddenly you are out of business. Under normal circumstances, when a corporation pushes another corporation out of business, this can be viewed as ''evolutionary forces at work''. But here this is definitely not the case, because these divisions of microsoft are clearly unrelated. It is an anomaly in the system, and this is exactly what governments should protect against.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
...it's for campaign funds.
Lol you think you ignore adds.
On monday, count how many times you see the word/s "coca-cola". Its probably in the range of 30-50 times.
And you think you don't notice.
You pay for software that almost works 30% of the time and fails to work the other 70% of the time?
Do people pay you go give such bullshit figures as FUD too, or are you naturally that retarded?
For most people, Windows works fine the majority of the time and using anything else would be a pain in the ass or worse.
>>>I now see why you've been moderation bombed [because we HATE c64liove and want to see someone put a bullet in his head.]
+1 insightful. The way to deal with people's whose opinions you don't like is to Silence them with censorship, just like Hillary wants to pull FOX News off the air (or maybe that was Pelosi - one of them democrats). Damn free speech. Silence the people whose opinions are "wrongthought", and if they refuse to be silent, lead them off to the Killing Fields.
FREE magazine : http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/prior/
So, if Schmidt works for the federal government as a technical advisor and retains his Google stock, that's a conflict of interest, right? (I don't know whether he'll be allowed to retain his Google stock, but I haven't read anything to the contrary yet.) I mean, I'm all for trusting someone, but clearly that's led us into disaster as regarding the financial industries.
I live in Wisconsin - I think you were just talking about "Russ Feingold" - that's the principled guy who got swept out by Tea Partiers and a guy who inherited millions and never held office before. Unfortunately, the same profile (inherited...never held office) also applies to Kohl.
The profile of Herb Kohl in the state is that he's the only white guy left who cares about professional basketball (he owns the Bucks), that he's not effective as a accumulator of federal funds, is never quoted as supporting progressive causes (he's been invisible on the state topic of collective bargaining) and he likes keeping a Senate seat because it befits his status (he owns the massive Kohls department chain).
But the lack of campaign contributions may have something to do with it - last time I checked we only had a single Google comp sci research post up here.
The only reason Kohl survives is that no one wants to go toe-to-toe in a TV battle with a billionaire in Wisconsin. But we could do better - a heck of a lot better.
Ok, so maybe gmail may pay for itself by now (this definitely has not been the case when they started), youtube certainly is operating at a loss.
YouTube has been operating at a loss since before Google bought them, and they're in the process of slowly turning that around. This is the normal way industries work -- you have to make an initial investment to create the infrastructure necessary to enter the market and the returns don't come until some time down the road.
If you're still not convinced, let's assume that you are the owner of a game development studio. Suddenly, microsoft comes along, and with the money they earned on OSes and office software, they can afford to give away games on a large scale. And suddenly you are out of business. Under normal circumstances, when a corporation pushes another corporation out of business, this can be viewed as ''evolutionary forces at work''. But here this is definitely not the case, because these divisions of microsoft are clearly unrelated. It is an anomaly in the system, and this is exactly what governments should protect against.
The logic doesn't really work for digital goods. The idea with dumping is that you sell for less than the reproduction cost. With digital goods the reproduction cost is effectively zero. It's not like Google is paying people to use its products (unlike, say, Microsoft).
If you want to call every act of giving away software dumping then you're going to have to condemn the entire industry. Microsoft is destroying the market for Windows security updates by distributing them for free. Canonical is wrongfully giving away Ubuntu. How dare Apple contribute back its improvements to Webkit and allow just anyone to run Darwin? And those guys at the FSF, it's practically a criminal enterprise! Not to mention the people at Berkeley and the NSF -- both the states and the feds are in on it. And the shareware people on top of it all.
Calling it dumping makes no sense. Especially when it's open source, because the whole problem with dumping is that when all the competitors go out of business then the last man standing has a monopoly. But if the software is open source then there is no "monopoly" -- anybody who doesn't like what you're doing can fork it and do something else and the original developer has no opportunity to charge monopoly prices because anyone can redistribute the software for free.
The harm only comes if the software is free-as-in-beer but not free-as-in-speech and once it becomes dominant the controlling developer does the sort of things Microsoft did with Internet Explorer, like discontinuing all the editions other than those that run on Windows and making it incompatible with industry standards so that people would have to use Windows to visit most websites as was the case in the early 2000s. Can you point to anything Google does along these lines? If anything they're doing the opposite, with efforts like this.
I'll trade our entire government for one run Google-style. They're better at foreign relations. They're better at having a balanced budget. They know how to treat people fairly. They know how not to waste everyone's time on ridiculous litigation that nobody (except their competitors) is calling for, especially when there's a shitton of far more pressing issues at hand. There are also corporations that behave much, much worse than google.
Are you reading this, Google? Get on it.
Looks like another Congressman is looking for the Santorum treatment...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
This is why I prefer to pay for software like Microsoft's - their business model is honest and I get what I pay for. Nothing extra, nothing hidden.
Microsoft gives away plenty of "free" software like internet explorer, visual studio express, security essentials, etc. They also have free email, search, etc. Bing has ads; hotmail has ads. What's so different from what Google does other than Google does it better?
For the most part, I believe herb Kohl funds his campaigns out of his own pocket (one of the perks of having a net worth of more than $200 million). Claiming that he's shaking down Google just doesn't fly. Unlike like our governor, Senator Kohl is an upstanding guy.
What incentives to our politicians have to act otherwise?
It appears that addressing the real issues will end their political careers, whereas posturing will not.
Honestly...what do you expect?
The answer is Skyhook, a company that war-drives our neighborhoods, collects WiFi info without permission, associates WiFi MACs or other identifying info with Lat. & Long. coordinates and sells a service that can tell WiFi receivers where they are.
So if it's evil for Google to war-drive and collect WiFi identifiers, shouldn't it also be evil for Skyhook?
Disclosure: I don't work for Google but a couple friends do...
--- Often in error; never in doubt!
Now they just have it pushed by every piece of freeware from CCleaner on with the default opt in so now I'm seeing Chrome installs all over the place from people who don't know what it is or where it came from like I saw with Safari and iTunes.
And crashes 70% of the time? you really need to let go of Windows 98 or find a better dumpster to dive in for PCs friend, because frankly I can't even remember the last time I saw a BSOD. If you are gonna use the old Windows is crash prone meme you might as well be talking about how Apple computers don't support multitasking, since both memes are about the same age.
And finally Chrome saved Windows? BWA HA HA HA HA...oh wait, you were serious? Allow me to laugh harder..BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA! Riight because it isn't the bazillion programs need for work and play that are Windows only it is a fricking Google browser that keeps them on Windows! So what's next, you gonna claim those 400 million XP sales were just a fluke, because they didn't have Google to save them?
You know to write a successful troll one really needs to make their bullshit halfway believable, yours is so bad the only people posting will be the ones laughing at you...well like me.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
But most people do not give a shit because it literally doesn't matter to my life if that info is being used for ad targetting. They're just presenting me more stuff I might like. What's wrong with that?
I happen to think it is morally wrong but do not particularly care, and most of the planet doesn't care at all (and shouldn't). For all of us, Google does give away email for free, search for free, and everything for free.
That Google is a marketing and advertising company really seems to escape the minds of many. They're often branded a benevolent open source company, when their core business--the search and advertising platform--is as closed source and proprietary as Windows. Google takes advantage of open source to support a closed source product.
This is God's will at work. He never forgets. Arabs are in progress. Where's your Muhamid now? Halleluuuuuyah!
I actually stopped using Windows when I observed some of the stuff Vista was sending to Microsoft. I actually thought it was a virus initially.
If a piece of software is commercial, then it's most likely written by someone who wants to make a profit. In other words, they want maximal returns for minimal effort. Personally, this makes me think the quality is generally lower. Regardless, why would you trust such an entity to *not* sell the information they can covertly collect? At least Google is fairly open about being noisy. (Obviously open source software is the best solution, but Microsoft and Google products have advantages that some users benefit from.)
Just for fun, try running a packet sniffer to see if/when Microsoft products phone home. That's a decent way to test your theory that their software doesn't contain hidden extras that invade privacy. Another interesting test is to use something like Privacy Inspector for Android to see if commercial software is more or less likely to invade privacy than non-commercial or adware type software.
Google might have the slogan "do no evil", but considering the above facts, Microsoft is really not all too bad. I certainly have to agree with the parent that their business model is more honest, at least.
Hotmail does all the same things. Microsoft product. Next riddle?
Oh come now. This isn't about anything as crass as money. It's about fear. Fear drives the political machine and Google makes a really good target. Besides - the telecom / cable / media boys aren't thrilled with Google so who's going to be upset? Whoops. Money rears its ugly head after all.
I look at it this way... if Google is slowly trying to take over the Government, I say go for it. I remember the early days "oh, Google will never profit.. they don't DO anything to make money". Then came "Oh, they'll never stay profitable, they have no real 'market'"... well look at where they are, doing a lot better with "nothing" than our government can with "something" (our taxes, etc). All praise our Google Government!
My last BSOD: Windows 7 Home Premium. October, 2011. And I had to reformat. It would not boot, even in safe mode. I installed Linux.
You can discover more about a person in an hour of play than in a year of conversation. -Plato
It's spelled Hallelujah, dude. Can't you read the hymnals you sing out of in church?
You can discover more about a person in an hour of play than in a year of conversation. -Plato
Holy cow. October 2011? You're FROM THE FUTURE!!!
lol 2010* I guess I shouldn't post on /. when I've been drinking... [gets back in his 'time traveling' phone booth]
You can discover more about a person in an hour of play than in a year of conversation. -Plato
I think they don't drive around
but use end user devices with gps to collect the data
(So this may make it more heinous)
i.e. if your phone has GPS & Wifi on, it uses end user equipment to build the database
they aren't always 'driving & collecting'.
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Others in Congress are criticizing the search giant over several flubs, including ... sidestepping net neutrality rules through a deal with Verizon.
What? Haven't we been reading in the past few days about Congress discarding the proposed net neutrality rules, the courts tossing out what the FCC had done on the subject, and so on? How can google be "sidestepping" rules that Congress themselves say don't exist?
Did I miss some news on a recent vote? If so, google news doesn't know about it, either. Asking news.google.com about "net neutrality" gets the story dated Mar 11 about "the House Subcommittee on Communications and Technology rejecting the FCC's open-internet regulations". The rest of the hits all seem to be about various government agencies either rejecting or doing nothing on the topic.
So what regulations are the Congress people accusing Google of sidestepping?
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Tea Party senator presses for 'vigorous' oversight of Google
By Jordan Fabian - 03/11/11 03:12 PM ET
Utah Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) wants a congressional hearing to examine whether Google has run afoul of antitrust laws.
In a letter to Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), the chairman of a Senate antitrust panel, Lee said that Google's dominance of the Internet search arena prompts the "need for vigorous antitrust oversight and enforcement in this area."
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/149039-tea-party-senator-wants-google-oversight-hearings
So google is an abusive monopolist, and microsoft isn't? How could that be? Oh wait . . .
In his election campaign, the freshman Utah Republican took $5,000 each from executives of Microsoft and AT&T, two of Google’s biggest competitors; executives at 1-800 CONTACTS gave Lee $7,500 in donations last year.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/51414450-76/1-800-anti-company-contacts.html.csp
Ummm, the market price for webmail is free. There are exceptions and the "free" services are generally fremium, but that doesn't change the fact that consumers expect the service to be free. It's not dumping if ad revenue covers the cost.
Put identity in the browser.
Nothing extra, nothing hidden? Geezus, you're young and naive. Nothing extra? How about requiring your installation of windows to "validate" before allowing updates? Nothing hidden? How about that ancient bit of code that forbade Windows from installing on any version of DOS other than MSDOS?
Anyone who cared to enumerate all the little "extra" and "hidden" shit in Windows could go on for hours - maybe even days.
Nothing extra, nothing hidden. Somehow, you've confused Windows with open source software, Bubba.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
From my point of view, every single time that Windows is brought to it's knees with spyware, trojans, viruses, or whatever malware - then Microsoft has failed.
I'll probably come close to agreeing with you in one respect. Many of Windows "failures" are probably due to third party software failures. But, I hold Microsoft entirely responsible for their shoddy security and permissions scheme. Someone will respond with "blah blah market share blah blah" - to which I would respond, "prove that little bit of nonsense". If Microsoft could and would adopt the restrictive security and permissions of any *nix, then Windows would fail far less often. Not only that, but they would save businesses and the average Joe Sixpack customer billions of dollars annually because they wouldn't have to pay for Norton, McAfee, or whatever other poor excuse for a security system.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
You're right - everyone notices advertisements. That's why I have a massive HOSTS list, and use AdBlock Plus, along with several other tools. I don't see very many advertisements on the internet. And, because I'm such a disagreeable asshole, those advertisements that I DO SEE help to ensure that I DO NOT buy those products. So, yes, you're right, Mr. Anonymous Coward.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
I'm not a Karma banker, but Japan's debt to America was paid back long ago. If I had to guess, this was payback for the atrocities in China and elsewhere in that region. But a little late don't you think?
Life is not for the lazy.
Microsoft gives away plenty of "free" software like internet explorer, visual studio express, security essentials, etc. They also have free email, search, etc. Bing has ads; hotmail has ads. What's so different from what Google does other than Google does it better?
Whoa, nobody said Microsoft isn't dumping. Look at the PC software market over the last twenty years.
There's what, a computer or two in damn near every household now, and I don't have numbers, but think to yourself how much money each household spends on software to run on said computers. Subtract money paid to Apple and Microsoft. This is pure speculation.. I don't think there's very much money moving around for home PC software. Probably a rather large part of that is in games, and we know how that compares to other markets the same games are available in.
Home PC software has been dumped on - to death! FOSS isn't exactly contributing to a healthy market either...
Don't be so quick to point fingers at any one group, everyone has had a turn at this.
Well that just shows you don't know what the fuck you're doing or you were using the "razor1911 Ultimate LOL Edition" since you can boot from the Windows 7 install disc and it has all kinds of free tools to correct errors, like a memory checker and the option to repair install.
Nope I have to vote bullshit or clueless, because if you would have simply left in the disc than by fricking default it would have come up with the repair option in big letters right in front of you.
Now you know MSFT has done a damned good job when I leave a new quad core and a copy of Windows 7 HP with a "I'll come out to install this weekend" note on it and my 67 year old dad, who don't know jack shit about IT or computers, installs it himself rather than wait and everything is perfect and I DO mean everything, as in it downloaded and installed the drivers, the hardest question it asked him was "Are you at home or at work?" and even pointed out on first install he didn't have an AV and took him to a page with free and pay ones so he didn't even need Google.
I'll admit when I heard and went out there I thought I was gonna see a big mess but nope, no problems at all. Everything "just worked", it detected and installed his printer and auto setup his USB HDD for weekly backups. The ONLY thing I had to do was show him where to get Firefox from.
So if you installed Linux and it isn't bitching about whatever caused your Windows to fail maybe you better check it pronto. I've found that often failing hardware doesn't really get a heads up in Linux it just "kinda goes" unless you spend your evenings checking wherever it stores log files at. Meanwhile one of my customers had a stick go bad and Windows popped up and said 'I think you may have bad memory, do you want me to check it for you?' and went the test failed it popped up 'You have a bad memory error, please have a professional check this" which took me all of 10 minutes to fix.
So if you actually threw a BSOD and yet Linux didn't say a single word about hardware? Yeah, wouldn't want to be trusting that machine buddy.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
"sidestepping net neutrality rules through a deal with Verizon"
what. what. what. I mean, it's been over before, but Google *proposed* a different set of net neutrality rules with Verizon. There IS no net neutrality in the law currently. I always find it sublimely ridiculous that Google is accused of "attacking net neutrality" when they tried to get a weaker version of net neutrality passed while there was still a Democratic Congress - which failed partially due to attacks from alleged NN supporters. Now we have nothing.
Why do you call it fund-raising ? It is called extortion.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
Really ? That's like saying every time someone steals an Escort, Ford has failed. Even if 50% of the time it's because the owner left the keys in the ignition and 40% of the time it's because the installer of the aftermarket alarm and immobilizer got it wrong..
"Shoddy" in what respect ? What capabilties does Windows lack ?
Windows has a security and permissions model more comprehensive than - and equally restrictive as - traditional/typical UNIX systems, and has had for the better part of two decades now. Even the consumer versions have had it for ten years.
Commonplace in commercial software. To say nothing of why you believe you should be entitled to ongoing updates for free in the first place.
I challenge you to find a commercially released version of Windows that won't install on a non-MSDOS system.
Woah. Over reaction, dude. I never said Win7 didn't 'just work'. I said I got a BSOD recently. And I installed Linux on a different machine. That's a lot of hate you got stored up there. Glad you got some of it out. I'm not a microsoft hater. I just decided it wasn't for me anymore. I'm liking Linux a lot more than I did Windows 7. My preference, not yours. I don't push my OS on other people, I was just saying Windows still gives the BSOD. Great story though, bro.
You can discover more about a person in an hour of play than in a year of conversation. -Plato
Meanwhile Apple is actively exploiting their App store monopoly to crowd out competitors in other markets such as digital books and music. It's a fucking textbook case for antitrust. Wake up FTC!
"Amazingly we still have preserved the freedom of speech a lot more than places like the UK, Germany, and Australia."
You don't know what you're talking about, Aussies are much less restricted than any country I've ever been in.
Really we do need this. It's such an insightful troll that it shouldn't be lost, but it really needs to be moved to the bottom of the discussion since the whole aim here is to make sure nobody gets down to the discussion about congressional corruption and/or we find out more about the way that MS triggered Google's anti-trust problems by making complaints through various front organisations.
=~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
The Wiki errs when it implies that the code was present only in Microsoft's beta software. Unless, of course, every single copy of Windows 3.1 and 3.11 that I have ever worked with were actually betas!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code
AARD code
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The AARD code was a segment of obfuscated machine code that is included in several executables, including the installer and WIN.COM, in a beta release of Microsoft Windows 3.1. The code ran several functional tests on the underlying DOS that succeeded on MS-DOS and PC-DOS, but resulted in a technical support message on competing disk operating systems such as DR-DOS. The name was derived from Microsoft programmer Aaron R. Reynolds (1955–2008), who used "AARD" to sign his work. ("AARD" was found in the machine code of the installer.)[1][2] Microsoft disabled the AARD code for the final release of Windows 3.1.
The rationale for the AARD code came to light when internal memos were released during the United States Microsoft antitrust case. Internal memos released by Microsoft revealed that the specific focus of these tests was DR-DOS. At one point, Microsoft CEO Bill Gates sent a memo to a number of employees, reading "You never sent me a response on the question of what things an app would do that would make it run with MSDOS and not run with DR-DOS. Is there [sic] feature they have that might get in our way?"[3] Microsoft Senior Vice President Brad Silverberg later sent another memo, stating: "What the [user] is supposed to do is feel uncomfortable, and when he has bugs, suspect that the problem is DR-DOS and then go out to buy MS-DOS."[3]
Following the purchase of DR-DOS by Novell and its renaming to "Novell DOS", Microsoft Co-President Jim Allchin stated in a memo, "If you're going to kill someone there isn't much reason to get all worked up about it and angry. Any discussions beforehand are a waste of time. We need to smile at Novell while we pull the trigger."[3]
Digital Research released a patch to enable the AARD tests to pass on DR-DOS in 1992.[4]
What had been DR-DOS changed hands again. The new owner, Caldera Systems, began a lawsuit against Microsoft over the AARD code, Caldera v. Microsoft, which was later settled.[3][5] It was believed that the settlement ran in the order of $150m,[6] but was revealed in November 2009 with the release of the Settlement Agreement to be $280m.[citation needed]
So, in the days when we just watched the country most ill-favored communication network grab hold of a significant media presence and remove the people they didnt like, its Google we should go after? No. We should go after the illegal monopolies of Comcast and other media giants. Google is not doing very good things, this is true. But it does not represent the immediate threat that groups like Comcast pose to free speech.
Caught red-handed again. 3 times in a row -
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2033736&cid=35459768
Do you have a script that polls ./ every 60 seconds?
:. Ultimate Control Dedicated/VM Servers
Google is smart. They're playing the nice little guy who give everything for free. Even slashdotters love them because it's free. People fail to see the evil behind all that seemingly nice stuff. All the data mining, selling to advertisers, everything. This is why I prefer to pay for software like Microsoft's - their business model is honest and I get what I pay for. Nothing extra, nothing hidden.
Nuts to that. Google is what it is, but claiming that Microsoft is less evil is ... well, hilarious, really. If you're going to pick a counterexample I can't imagine a more ridiculous one than that. And please let me know when you start paying for the likes of Hotmail and Bing, will you? "Honest Steve" would like to talk to you about about the billing arrangements.
Nice shill, anyway.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Woah. Over reaction, dude. I never said Win7 didn't 'just work'. I said I got a BSOD recently. And I installed Linux on a different machine. That's a lot of hate you got stored up there. Glad you got some of it out. I'm not a microsoft hater. I just decided it wasn't for me anymore. I'm liking Linux a lot more than I did Windows 7. My preference, not yours. I don't push my OS on other people, I was just saying Windows still gives the BSOD. Great story though, bro.
Yes ... you don't usually see people defend Microsoft with such vehemence. I use Windows XP, Windows 7 and Linux (various flavors) daily, and I will say this: Windows 7 has come a long way. It's a resource hog of Biblical proportions, true, but stability-wise it's not bad on decent hardware. Not bad at all, and the GUI has some pluses. I still prefer my Linux/Unix machines for a lot of things, and I don't imagine my servers are likely to ever run Windows.
But you're right: Windows still BSODs now and then. Not often, but it does. As a developer I've managed to take down my Win 7 box on several occasions, but then again, I'm not a typical user.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
You're right - everyone notices advertisements. That's why I have a massive HOSTS list, and use AdBlock Plus, along with several other tools. I don't see very many advertisements on the internet. And, because I'm such a disagreeable asshole, those advertisements that I DO SEE help to ensure that I DO NOT buy those products. So, yes, you're right, Mr. Anonymous Coward.
Yep. For some unaccountable reason, some people feel that not viewing advertisements is, somehow, amoral. Or they worry that the Web will no longer be "free" if we don't view the advertising that is pushed on us. Oh well.
.... well, that's okay too. You'll notice, however, that very few sites do that.
Me, on the other hand, feel the same way about it as I do telemarketing: I'm paying for the communications medium, I get to decide how it's used. Now, if a particular Web site wants to get testy about that and deny me access if I don't view its ads
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
I wasn't pointing fingers for the sake of it. I was merely marveling at the hypocrisy of the OP.
The reason Microsoft attracts criticism and Google doesn't is because for the most part you don't have to use Google. They have obscene market shares in a very small number of fields, which require people do business with them in an even smaller number, but there's no evidence (I've seen) they're abusing their positions in those fields.
"Data mining" and "selling to advertisers" are not, by themselves, bad things. I have no objection to seeing ads beside the things I read, and Google's ads are unobtrusive and well designed. Data mining is only a concern if others can easily identify you and the information associated with you, rather than see you purely as a statistic. While Google's search engine has had its problems in that regard (as will any, from Bing to Altavista), there's no evidence its general ad-driven products have caused any problems.
So I don't think the two are exactly comparable. Microsoft did some unquestionably evil things in terms of how it kept its monopoly, and how it leveraged it. We're not seeing the same behavior from Google. And, to top it all, we're seeing an enormous amount of positive innovation, donated for free to the public, coming out of that organization.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Probably several reasons. Just see who Google's primary competitors are, then crosstab that with a list of Republican donors. In addition, Google has announced that they will be hiring in 2011. That just doesn't kosher with the Republicans' plans to squash the economy in order to help their election chances in 2012.
Which version of DR-DOS will Windows 3.1 or 3.11 not install and run on ?
Really ? That's like saying every time someone steals an Escort, Ford has failed.
That's idiotic even for a car analogy.
It's more like we suddenly see thousands of accidents due to people recharging their new iPad 2. Ford's not responsible for protecting your property, only for making it function properly.
Then perhaps you shouldn't be trying to spread FUD, which frankly nobody can stand from ANYBODY which is why it is so hated?
Your EXACT words, and I quote "My last BSOD: Windows 7 Home Premium. October, 2011. And I had to reformat. It would not boot, even in safe mode. I installed Linux."
Which to anyone reading that would NOT sound like you installed onto a different machine, it would logically read as "Windows 7 failed on my machine and Linux magically worked" which now that you say it wasn't even the same machine that you installed Linux on therefor it had nothing to do with the OS in the first place clearly labels your previous post as FUD, since it was designed to show that Windows fails while Linux "just works" while leaving out the fact you are talking totally different machines that have nothing to do with each other that you conveniently leave out of the previous post.
One thing I hate more than anything in the world is FUD and trolls. I hate Nichols and his WinFUD, I hate Thurott and his LinFUD, and since your post had nothing to do with anything since you left out the relevant facts to make Windows look bad and Linux look good I will label you as spreading FUD as well. A spade is a spade, FUD is FUD. Don't like the label don't spread the bullshit.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
So, google is getting investigated for doing what they want with a service they provide for free? Since when were they under any obligation not to discriminate in their search results? This is like saying that if I create my own search website on my own server that I'm also automatically required to treat all results the same. That is entirely ridiculous.
If google were to discriminate in advertising prices, then yes, go ahead and investigate. But please, you can't force a company to do ANYTHING with a service they offer for free.