So you asked to not have your name near them yet you are pretty much the main source of posting these ad videos? I'd love to believe you but your public actions speak more loudly...
Acknowledging that gay people exist is not promoting homoseuality.
The funny part is that I can reword all your points in some way towards your religion. And do you know what you'd call me? Anti-christian like a good little hypocrite.
So you guys couldn't even go a full 4 months before backing down on the fact that you were going to explicitly mark when you were going to be posting company paid-for slashvertisements...err "sponsored stories"? Wow, fucking disgraceful.
It's also about protecting your works from being outright copied without your consent which is what they were going to do. But let's ignore that part since it's inconvenient to your point. How horrible that they now have to come up with their own ideas rather than outright copy what is someone else's. The horror!
Actually they are better than the other manufacturers. How many of the other firms who use Foxconn are doing even a fraction of what Apple is doing for the betterment of the people making their products? Oh right, none of them are.
I'm guessing you've never done a copy-and-paste on, say, Google Books because the OCRed text quite frequently contains typos, random inserted spaces and completely wrong words. And since reCapatcha is used to supplement the OCR on Google Books, it would appear they aren't as smart as you would like them to seem.
Except that many proprietary drivers contain 3rd party licensed code (usually something covered by that company's atents as well) and they will most likely not see enough ROI in open sourcing and rewriting those swaths of 3rd party code especially if their drivers suffer in performance due to it. That and the fact that many companies see their drivers as containing valuable trade secrets the don't want to divulge. It's going to take way more than you state to convince them.
Why would it stand a chance? Their slides do nothing but repeat the same talking points that have been said for years that have been mostly unpersuasive. Unless they have some way to force this, it'll mostly be nothing but preaching to the choir.
What is the security risk? All Gawker gets is whether you were authenticated or not. They don't get access to your account or any of the nonsense FUD being spread around.
They aren't spoofing anything and they are doing nothing shady. These is just using the authentication services provided by ?google, Facebook, etc. it's not giving them access to your account. That is unfounded FUD. And if they were spoofing things it would be easy to spot since you would notice you aren't being directed t the proper login page. Stop falling for FUD.
They are wording it incorrectly. What is done is that you login to your Facebook, Google, etc. account and then those sites pass back to the system whether the user was authenticated or not. You aren't giving Gawker access to your account or account details. The summary is written mostly as FUD.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey now... That sounds a little gay... :-p
So you asked to not have your name near them yet you are pretty much the main source of posting these ad videos? I'd love to believe you but your public actions speak more loudly...
Since when did Katz have either integrity or a brain?
Acknowledging that gay people exist is not promoting homoseuality.
The funny part is that I can reword all your points in some way towards your religion. And do you know what you'd call me? Anti-christian like a good little hypocrite.
The court system is funded by taxpayer money, moron.
So you guys couldn't even go a full 4 months before backing down on the fact that you were going to explicitly mark when you were going to be posting company paid-for slashvertisements...err "sponsored stories"? Wow, fucking disgraceful.
No, because in retaliation samzenpus just started posting idle stories outside of idle.
Yes, but Slashdot doesn't overtly run paid-for ads for Symantec like these Slashvertisement TV segments.
With the solution being....'Buy our product!'
And? Qt Labs is part of Nokia hence why you scroll to the bottom and see all the mentions about Nokia and its copyrights.
Or, you know, these peole could come up with their own original idea or an episode? Nooo. That would be silly...
It's also about protecting your works from being outright copied without your consent which is what they were going to do. But let's ignore that part since it's inconvenient to your point. How horrible that they now have to come up with their own ideas rather than outright copy what is someone else's. The horror!
Actually they are better than the other manufacturers. How many of the other firms who use Foxconn are doing even a fraction of what Apple is doing for the betterment of the people making their products? Oh right, none of them are.
I'm guessing you've never done a copy-and-paste on, say, Google Books because the OCRed text quite frequently contains typos, random inserted spaces and completely wrong words. And since reCapatcha is used to supplement the OCR on Google Books, it would appear they aren't as smart as you would like them to seem.
Baziiiing!
Wow that site is so terrible looking that it makes Geocities and myspace look decent. The only thing it's missing is cosmic cursors.
Except that many proprietary drivers contain 3rd party licensed code (usually something covered by that company's atents as well) and they will most likely not see enough ROI in open sourcing and rewriting those swaths of 3rd party code especially if their drivers suffer in performance due to it. That and the fact that many companies see their drivers as containing valuable trade secrets the don't want to divulge. It's going to take way more than you state to convince them.
Why would it stand a chance? Their slides do nothing but repeat the same talking points that have been said for years that have been mostly unpersuasive. Unless they have some way to force this, it'll mostly be nothing but preaching to the choir.
What exactly in my post was trolling? Since when is providing facts and calling out FUD considered 'trolling'?
What is the security risk? All Gawker gets is whether you were authenticated or not. They don't get access to your account or any of the nonsense FUD being spread around.
They aren't spoofing anything and they are doing nothing shady. These is just using the authentication services provided by ?google, Facebook, etc. it's not giving them access to your account. That is unfounded FUD. And if they were spoofing things it would be easy to spot since you would notice you aren't being directed t the proper login page. Stop falling for FUD.
They are wording it incorrectly. What is done is that you login to your Facebook, Google, etc. account and then those sites pass back to the system whether the user was authenticated or not. You aren't giving Gawker access to your account or account details. The summary is written mostly as FUD.
Because you get directed to Google's login page.
Then your just ignorant. Comment systems like Discus, for example, have used the same system as well for ages.
No, it's not what they assume. It's what actually happens.