Have you actually read the guide? I did. Go read it and then tell me if InfoWorld draws the right conclusions. And that story you're linking to is from 11 years ago. Did it happen or was it prevented?
It's just the continuation of web 2.0. Like it or not, there IS a distinction between traditional sites and web apps and I think it's a good idea to have some sort of standard or guidelines of how web apps should feel and behave. That's all Google did. The guide talks about using existing and new standards like HTML5, CSS3 and Javascript, being consistent and providing a good user experience. Nowhere does it say anything about Chrome-only or Google-only features. The InfoWorld article is just sensationalism.
I agree. They look legit to me. I was just pointing out the error in gp's reasoning. If the documents are indeed altered (and that's a big if), they're not authentic.
FWIW, I don't believe them, as they could easily have verified the documents by now. Select all, copy, paste in new text document, diff with the original files, done.
They claim at least one document has been faked (the climate strategy memo) and others may have been altered. If this is indeed the case, the documents aren't authentic.
What's different from trusting the browser to store your passwords? All major browsers have been doing this for years. It's really not much different. If they wanted your passwords, they'd already have them (with or without storage.)
This is about encouraging people to use different passwords for different sites. Yes, it is a security risk to trust your browser with your passwords. But I think using the same password for every site is a much bigger risk.
I'd have to agree. I only use my hotmail account for msn and only my msn contacts have the address. Still I get 1-2 spam mails a month. On gmail, only 2 spam mails got through the filter since 2005 and I've been using that address heavily.
I agree. Let's just shield schools from the whole EM spectrum, including light. On top of the safety, think of the energy they'll save! Well, in Canada anyway...
On the contrary, they're scared as hell (pun intended). They fear death so much that they invented heaven.
You will go through life wondering what the point of it all is
Nope, why wonder about such a question? Why should there be a point? And more importantly, why would you rather believe an invented one than accepting it's about as silly as wondering about the smell of an inch?
Even after reading an article about Christians pushing tech that will benefit everyone, all you can do is insult them.
The reason xians are being mocked and insulted here is that they're not doing it for the benefit of everyone, but to shove their propaganda down our throats.
The Galaxy Nexus will continue to work just fine on CDMA. For future models, well, that's another story...
Google forces the industry to either open up their firmware or move on to GSM. Good thing, IMO.
If you like candy, you may be a terrorist, if you can ride a bike you may be a terrorist, if you keep your food in the fridge you may be a terrorist... Hell, we may all be terrorists!
Slashdot Mirror
Well played :)
Hi, how YOU doin'?
Have you actually read the guide? I did. Go read it and then tell me if InfoWorld draws the right conclusions. And that story you're linking to is from 11 years ago. Did it happen or was it prevented?
It's just the continuation of web 2.0. Like it or not, there IS a distinction between traditional sites and web apps and I think it's a good idea to have some sort of standard or guidelines of how web apps should feel and behave. That's all Google did. The guide talks about using existing and new standards like HTML5, CSS3 and Javascript, being consistent and providing a good user experience. Nowhere does it say anything about Chrome-only or Google-only features. The InfoWorld article is just sensationalism.
+1 insightful. We could make an entire OS in 140 bytes this way.
I agree. They look legit to me. I was just pointing out the error in gp's reasoning. If the documents are indeed altered (and that's a big if), they're not authentic. FWIW, I don't believe them, as they could easily have verified the documents by now. Select all, copy, paste in new text document, diff with the original files, done.
They claim at least one document has been faked (the climate strategy memo) and others may have been altered. If this is indeed the case, the documents aren't authentic.
Ehm, 2^11 = 2048...
Well, either you didn't RTFA that well, or you're just pulling sentences out of context to suit your views. You should run for senate.
What's different from trusting the browser to store your passwords? All major browsers have been doing this for years. It's really not much different. If they wanted your passwords, they'd already have them (with or without storage.) This is about encouraging people to use different passwords for different sites. Yes, it is a security risk to trust your browser with your passwords. But I think using the same password for every site is a much bigger risk.
I am not Google's product. Google did not produce me. Hell, I'm even older than both of the founders!
America, land of the free and home of the brave
I meant Windows Live Messenger. D'oh! :-)
I'd have to agree. I only use my hotmail account for msn and only my msn contacts have the address. Still I get 1-2 spam mails a month. On gmail, only 2 spam mails got through the filter since 2005 and I've been using that address heavily.
I agree. Let's just shield schools from the whole EM spectrum, including light. On top of the safety, think of the energy they'll save! Well, in Canada anyway...
They do not fear death and instead, welcome it.
On the contrary, they're scared as hell (pun intended). They fear death so much that they invented heaven.
You will go through life wondering what the point of it all is
Nope, why wonder about such a question? Why should there be a point? And more importantly, why would you rather believe an invented one than accepting it's about as silly as wondering about the smell of an inch?
Even after reading an article about Christians pushing tech that will benefit everyone, all you can do is insult them.
The reason xians are being mocked and insulted here is that they're not doing it for the benefit of everyone, but to shove their propaganda down our throats.
The Galaxy Nexus will continue to work just fine on CDMA. For future models, well, that's another story... Google forces the industry to either open up their firmware or move on to GSM. Good thing, IMO.
If you like candy, you may be a terrorist, if you can ride a bike you may be a terrorist, if you keep your food in the fridge you may be a terrorist... Hell, we may all be terrorists!
Thanks, I signed it. Unbelievable, people are signing at a rate of about 500 a minute!
I guess that'll be the end of RIM. Last year it was REM. What's next? RAM? ROM?
You mean the US and Canada are the only ones with industries worth protecting?
I guess 25 is almost 35.
That's the European Commission, not the European Union. There's a difference. But I'm sure the EU decision making process is equally complex.
Will I be able to rip out pages and use them as tinder?
The patent on aspartame has expired. I wouldn't at all be surprised if Monsanto is spreading FUD about it, to push their new sweetener.