But you'll be buying these 2 people gifts anyway. Now you're just buying them what YOU want, rather then what THEY want. I certainly wouldn't do it to my friends, but it takes all types I guess.
Could you post how it was meant because all I'm doing is misreading it (and I realize I'm misreading it, I just can't work out the proper reading of it).
Anyway, many people will think it is an amazing achievement and that it is possible like in many movies, to get a very fine, detailed image from an out-of-focus, low-res picture. I saw it done in CSI so it must be true, because CSI isn't a movie!
After Windowws is unbundled, someone will. You know this, how? Are you psychic? Are you John Titor? Its possible someone will, its also possible someone will and will fail miserably or its possible that no-one will.
"Unfortunately" (and this is a highly strange use of unfortunately) those that pay to have their crapware installed onto Windows (and I do consider it crapware as the customer isn't warned beforehand they're getting it) typically don't have linux versions of their software.
I just bought a computer. The salespeople had print-outs of all of the computers they sell and on it was the computer along with additional software on the bottom that I could buy with the computer at a discounted price (Vista, XP, Office). They went through the list with me and made sure I didn't want to make any changes, I did in fact want to make a couple of changes (my mother whose computer illiterate suggested I change the casing because they upgraded her computer to have a better casing which had better fans to keep it cooler. I kid you not, she actually said that). So I changed that. And she wrote down the price difference on the paper (yup, female store clerk) and then we came to the software and I said I didn't want any of it and then hit finish) and she was fine with that. No hard sell, just wanted to know what I wanted.
However I didn't go to a dell store but instead went to a local store. I guess that makes all the difference.
They did. When the big controversy blew up they quietly changed the Hotmail EULA to exempt North American users from the "we own everything you see and do through hotmail" policy as it was blatantly illegal and was likely to provoke more anti-trust issues. That is hilarious. Thank god I'm migrating away from this company so that I no longer support their activities.
If either of those things were happening, I'd care. The thing is, no-one knows if they're happening because Google doesn't say. My post here pulls out quotes from their privacy policy that certainly hints at them storing the information gleaned as part of their profile about you, with the original person who put me onto this lack of denying over here.
Google's Privacy Policy
We may combine the information you submit under your account with information from other Google services or third parties That certainly suggests they're mining data. It doesn't say outright it won't mine, given the concerns of Google's policies you think they'd make that fairly explicit if they didn't mine. Also:
We review our data collection, storage and processing practices to ensure that we only collect, store and process the personal information needed to provide or improve our services. Considering Google believes that targeted ads with an increase in how targeted they are is part of its services it provides, I'd say they certainly leave themselves open to the ability to mine data.
b) people voluntarily chose to allow google to do such when they signed up for gmail. dont like it? dont use gmail. And don't send any e-mails that might be sent or even received without your knowledge by a gmail account. Good luck in that quest.
If you don't wish to send postcard email, encrypt it. So are you saying you would be perfectly happy if a router somewhere on the internet forwarded your e-mail to a computer in addition to you and read your e-mail and from it created a profile and then used this profile to call you on your phone, or to send salesmen to your door or to send you snail mail? Because by your logic, this is perfectly acceptable to do to non-encrypted e-mails. I imagine most people would disagree.
These are special cases involving the extensions of copyright. If a book is copyrighted for 1,000 years in England, that doesn't mean it will remain copyrighted for 1,000 years in America.
a bot collecting statistics from your email (which you knowingly agreed to if your using gmail) is not a criminal offence. It isn't a criminal offence. However it is something people should be made aware of time and time again. Despite the frequent claims of Gmail infringing on the user's privacy I did not think they did it. I now know exactly how much of my e-mails they investigate and I'll be migrating away from Google as a result (keeping it as a search engine only with me not accepting any of their cookies).
Actually, thankyou. I'll be migrating away from Google due to this information. I did some searching of my own on the privacy policies and I saw that it did in fact not expressly prohibit (and even suggests) that information gleaned from e-mails may be kept and attached to your profile.
It isn't my choice if I send the e-mail to a JohnDoe@somedomain.com and they forward it to their gmail account and have their gmail account setup so the address from their e-mails always appear as JohnDoe@somedomain.com
E-mails are sent through the internet in fully readable plain text. You don't want anyone to read your email ? Then encrypt it. Period. Can you then post the entire contents of your inbox please? After all, you don't care do you?
Slashdot Mirror
But you'll be buying these 2 people gifts anyway. Now you're just buying them what YOU want, rather then what THEY want. I certainly wouldn't do it to my friends, but it takes all types I guess.
Wouldn't that allow Microsoft to leverage its software monopoly into a hardware one?
That sentence seems to be more about keeping Apple from changing its business practices then allowing more consumer choice.
Could you post how it was meant because all I'm doing is misreading it (and I realize I'm misreading it, I just can't work out the proper reading of it).
You know that fellow looks strangely familiar. Wait a minute, its me o.O
I don't think its anymore retarded for using the term virus on a non-biological object.
"Unfortunately" (and this is a highly strange use of unfortunately) those that pay to have their crapware installed onto Windows (and I do consider it crapware as the customer isn't warned beforehand they're getting it) typically don't have linux versions of their software.
I just bought a computer. The salespeople had print-outs of all of the computers they sell and on it was the computer along with additional software on the bottom that I could buy with the computer at a discounted price (Vista, XP, Office). They went through the list with me and made sure I didn't want to make any changes, I did in fact want to make a couple of changes (my mother whose computer illiterate suggested I change the casing because they upgraded her computer to have a better casing which had better fans to keep it cooler. I kid you not, she actually said that). So I changed that. And she wrote down the price difference on the paper (yup, female store clerk) and then we came to the software and I said I didn't want any of it and then hit finish) and she was fine with that. No hard sell, just wanted to know what I wanted.
However I didn't go to a dell store but instead went to a local store. I guess that makes all the difference.
I don't understand. You say no you wouldn't be fine with someone doing what I described, and then said its your own fault if it happens.
Given the failure that Microsoft Server is, could it be migrating to an OSS alternative?
Thanks very much, and I'll be sure to use POP3 instead of IMAP.
These are special cases involving the extensions of copyright. If a book is copyrighted for 1,000 years in England, that doesn't mean it will remain copyrighted for 1,000 years in America.
Actually, thankyou. I'll be migrating away from Google due to this information. I did some searching of my own on the privacy policies and I saw that it did in fact not expressly prohibit (and even suggests) that information gleaned from e-mails may be kept and attached to your profile.
The law doesn't differentiate between American or non-American works (except for works surrounding the period of when the extensions are granted).
70 years on and The Hobbit isn't in the public domain. It truly is a shame to see our constitution thwarted in this manner.
It isn't my choice if I send the e-mail to a JohnDoe@somedomain.com and they forward it to their gmail account and have their gmail account setup so the address from their e-mails always appear as JohnDoe@somedomain.com
You don't want anyone to read your email ? Then encrypt it. Period. Can you then post the entire contents of your inbox please? After all, you don't care do you?
However Opera didn't inspire it in IE7. It did inspire it in Firefox though.