Zhou: I love living in China, our government is the best!
Lee: I love living in China, our government is the best!
Lian: I love living in China.
Official Chinese Moderator: @Lian, you will get the glorious opportunity to learn that our government is the best in our new re-education camp!
Oh no, its a real screen shot. The blogger signed up a new google account with google priority inbox which automatically places messages from google as part of the important stuff. so all the other spamvertisements in the inbox Google doesn't see as important, seeing as how there is no history of that google account ever opening any of those mails.
To sum up
1. new account w/ no history
2. mail from google is considered important by default
3. there are no other email addresses considered important by the algorithm because there is no history on the account.
Result: The google mail is the only email the algorithm treated as important!
Yes, but can business make free use of the Apple trademark to boost their own business at the expense of Apple?
NO
Its not "drinking the Kool-Aid". (To quote Inigo Mantoya, "I do not think it means what you think it means")
There are circumstances in which Apple does not want to be associated with that business. For example, A topless bar, online casino, porn website, etc. It would be better for Apple to make a blanket refusal for all businesses to use Apple's name in marketing without Apple's express approval.
Apple doesn't have the right to say "you can't give one of their products away", but it does have the right to say, "don't drag our name through your mud".
I voted for Obama, and even I rolled my eyes at the "Hope" and "Change" They were more or less just words used to propel the campaign forward. Its no different than when whoever the Republican candidate for President in 2012 shows up and uses the "Family Values" and "Make America Strong" slogans. They don't actually say anything. Any Republican coming after a Democrat is going to "Change" things. The same is true for any Democrat following a Republican.
Didn't you hear? The rapture already passed us all by. I guess that means that I will have to share hell with all the freaking right wing christians. How fucked up is that?
Fool you into getting what you don't really need. That is incorrect.
We are adults. That means we have the awesome responsibility for making decisions about our own lives. They aren't tricking us into anything. WE decide we want to buy something. WE decide to spend the money. If Google or Apple or any other company shows us a product, WE have the option to say "no thank you."
I seem to be defending Google a lot on this topic but really, this is like blaming McDonalds because I chose to eat supersized Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese meals every day and ended up getting fat. All Google is doing is finding out what we like and saying, "Hey, you might like this too!"
Google isn't fooling anyone about anything. What's happening is that we are fooling ourselves into thinking that we HAVE to buy this, or NEED to buy that. Google doesn't need to fool us because we are already fools of our own making.
So what you are saying is Google wouldn't be violating your privacy any more than you are already allowing it to be violated. Your problem seems to be that Google is doing the same thing Sam Walton did. By cutting out the middle man, only one company is making money on your information rather than two or three. Actually seems like a pretty good idea on Google's part.
We are basically giving our information away for free anyway, why shouldn't Google get a chance to profit off of it?
Are you kidding? Now that AT&T has bandwidth caps in place, nothing short of the second coming of Jesus will get them to move them. Its Cha-Ching time and they know it.
Slashdot Mirror
only decent thing to do. Be***um is, after all, the most obscene word in the universe.
Nope, the US definitely has the most guns.
So the Chinese Twitter would say:
Zhou: I love living in China, our government is the best!
Lee: I love living in China, our government is the best!
Lian: I love living in China.
Official Chinese Moderator: @Lian, you will get the glorious opportunity to learn that our government is the best in our new re-education camp!
Oh no, its a real screen shot. The blogger signed up a new google account with google priority inbox which automatically places messages from google as part of the important stuff. so all the other spamvertisements in the inbox Google doesn't see as important, seeing as how there is no history of that google account ever opening any of those mails.
To sum up
1. new account w/ no history
2. mail from google is considered important by default
3. there are no other email addresses considered important by the algorithm because there is no history on the account.
Result: The google mail is the only email the algorithm treated as important!
Obviously, it must be an act of evil by Google.
but I thought 2 girls 1 cup was educational...
I've been to Arkansas, thought this had been done already.
hey that's not fair at all. Apple has been diligent in offering their customers freedom from choice for years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use
but the difference is Google WANTS everyone using an android device.
[ Re:The CD Companies tried to do this(Score:5, Troll) ]
LOL, your score on this post. I guess you get +5 troll points.
No, it isn't
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use
nah its easy to tell the difference. The mob pays better. The government has a better retirement plan.
how about Trademark laws?
Yes, but can business make free use of the Apple trademark to boost their own business at the expense of Apple?
NO
Its not "drinking the Kool-Aid". (To quote Inigo Mantoya, "I do not think it means what you think it means")
There are circumstances in which Apple does not want to be associated with that business. For example, A topless bar, online casino, porn website, etc. It would be better for Apple to make a blanket refusal for all businesses to use Apple's name in marketing without Apple's express approval.
Apple doesn't have the right to say "you can't give one of their products away", but it does have the right to say, "don't drag our name through your mud".
I voted for Obama, and even I rolled my eyes at the "Hope" and "Change" They were more or less just words used to propel the campaign forward. Its no different than when whoever the Republican candidate for President in 2012 shows up and uses the "Family Values" and "Make America Strong" slogans. They don't actually say anything. Any Republican coming after a Democrat is going to "Change" things. The same is true for any Democrat following a Republican.
Amazingly, it took this long for someone to make it. I wonder if company policy will allow capes?
Mandatory xkcd reference
Didn't you hear? The rapture already passed us all by. I guess that means that I will have to share hell with all the freaking right wing christians. How fucked up is that?
Fool you into getting what you don't really need. That is incorrect.
We are adults. That means we have the awesome responsibility for making decisions about our own lives. They aren't tricking us into anything. WE decide we want to buy something. WE decide to spend the money. If Google or Apple or any other company shows us a product, WE have the option to say "no thank you."
I seem to be defending Google a lot on this topic but really, this is like blaming McDonalds because I chose to eat supersized Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese meals every day and ended up getting fat. All Google is doing is finding out what we like and saying, "Hey, you might like this too!"
Google isn't fooling anyone about anything. What's happening is that we are fooling ourselves into thinking that we HAVE to buy this, or NEED to buy that. Google doesn't need to fool us because we are already fools of our own making.
So what you are saying is Google wouldn't be violating your privacy any more than you are already allowing it to be violated. Your problem seems to be that Google is doing the same thing Sam Walton did. By cutting out the middle man, only one company is making money on your information rather than two or three. Actually seems like a pretty good idea on Google's part.
We are basically giving our information away for free anyway, why shouldn't Google get a chance to profit off of it?
Hmm, having my money protected against fraud. You know, that sound like a pretty damned good excuse. Yup, I like that, sign me up.
Eyjafjallajokull ???
...you made that up by slamming your forehead into the keyboard.
Sgt. Grumpy loves demolition work
Are you kidding? Now that AT&T has bandwidth caps in place, nothing short of the second coming of Jesus will get them to move them. Its Cha-Ching time and they know it.
And they are charging 1800 dollars for a shoddy example of this computer