5) I doubt their demographic is THAT much different from the rest of the world, so there is no doubt there would be a demand for such files by their users.
Actually, all the linux users I know are with Internode. It seems that anyone who has heard of a linux mirror has also heard of better ISPs.
The Government has not paid Telstra a cent. They have agreed to make payments progressively as the network is built.
and (believe it or not) to compensate them for the future loss of customers. That's right.
No, it is not right. The payment is to convince them to migrate their customers onto the new network. They don't lose any customers - they will still be the retailer for anyone who chooses to stay with them.
I hate Telstra and can't wait to leave them, but the government is actually using my tax dollars to compensate a company for losing my business through their own sheer ineptitude.
It doesn't surprise me that you're angry, considering that you don't understand the situation at all.
The Government is using your tax dollars to build a superior network. Buying Telstra's support makes it more cost effective. If you're happy being stuck on copper forever, then good for you. The rest of us actually want to see some progress.
They determined that the sole purpose of the app was something other than what it said. I'm glad that Google had the balls to remove it automatically.
For those that want this app still, there is nothing to stop you installing it manually, where it will be beyond the power of Google to remove.
Look at it this way. Let's say that someone published a report saying that Google KNEW that 50000 people had malware on their phone, and chose not to remove it despite having the power to do so. This would make a lot of users very unhappy. Google's Market represents a middle ground between no control (which is still available through manual installs) and unfair over-the-top restrictions (such as on the iPhone).
It is in Google's best interest to use this power responsibly. For that reason, it is not unreasonable to trust them with it - for now.
Yes, it was foolish to log all data without filtering it for just what they need, because even members of Slashdot are too stupid to realise what they actually use it for. It is arguably the most brilliant use of Wi-Fi technology ever, and yet, thanks to all of you, it will quickly become useless.
What confuses me is that Google never seemed to announce very loudly what their intentions were (fast, accurate locations), or alternatively, all the journalists disregarded this and cherry-picked quotes that make Google look bad.
Gotta give some props to Google and their "Don't be Evil".
I don't see how providing a "My Location" button in Google Maps is evil.
Yes, that's all they used the data for. Ignorant people like you blindly assume that Google wants to spy on what you're doing, when really they're just trying to make it easier for you when you get lost. Perhaps you haven't realised, but they already know what you search for on the web. What could they possibly gain from sniffing Wi-Fi data?
While you're streaming TV to your phone for little reason, I have to put up with web pages taking longer to load.
I'm willing to pay for that; why aren't they willing to offer the bandwidth to do it?
The required bandwidth is not available.
You're basically asking to have half of the tower all to yourself. Assuming they want a 5 year return, you would be expected to pay off half a tower over that period of time. If you're happy paying $1000 per month for a service with just a couple of mbits then good for you. When other users leave the network due to the low speeds that you have caused, they will bill you for more and more.
The idea is not silly at all. When I did a Networking Fundamentals subject, we used Cisco Packet Tracer to do most of what you mentioned above.
Unfortunately, it isn't exactly FOSS.
Correct me if I am mistaken, but not a single journalist seems to have picked up on why Google has been collecting the data. I thought that it was obvious, yet many of the above posters don't seem to get it either.
Slashdot Mirror
5) I doubt their demographic is THAT much different from the rest of the world, so there is no doubt there would be a demand for such files by their users.
Actually, all the linux users I know are with Internode. It seems that anyone who has heard of a linux mirror has also heard of better ISPs.
A few days ago the government paid Telstra $11B
The Government has not paid Telstra a cent. They have agreed to make payments progressively as the network is built.
and (believe it or not) to compensate them for the future loss of customers. That's right.
No, it is not right. The payment is to convince them to migrate their customers onto the new network. They don't lose any customers - they will still be the retailer for anyone who chooses to stay with them.
I hate Telstra and can't wait to leave them, but the government is actually using my tax dollars to compensate a company for losing my business through their own sheer ineptitude.
It doesn't surprise me that you're angry, considering that you don't understand the situation at all.
The Government is using your tax dollars to build a superior network. Buying Telstra's support makes it more cost effective. If you're happy being stuck on copper forever, then good for you. The rest of us actually want to see some progress.
Switching ISP does not fix physical layer problems.
What I don't want is malicious apps on my phone.
They determined that the sole purpose of the app was something other than what it said. I'm glad that Google had the balls to remove it automatically.
For those that want this app still, there is nothing to stop you installing it manually, where it will be beyond the power of Google to remove.
Look at it this way. Let's say that someone published a report saying that Google KNEW that 50000 people had malware on their phone, and chose not to remove it despite having the power to do so. This would make a lot of users very unhappy. Google's Market represents a middle ground between no control (which is still available through manual installs) and unfair over-the-top restrictions (such as on the iPhone).
It is in Google's best interest to use this power responsibly. For that reason, it is not unreasonable to trust them with it - for now.
security vendor SMobile Systems published a report saying that 20% of Android apps are malicious.
This is even more misleading than the average Slashdot post.
Yes, it was foolish to log all data without filtering it for just what they need, because even members of Slashdot are too stupid to realise what they actually use it for. It is arguably the most brilliant use of Wi-Fi technology ever, and yet, thanks to all of you, it will quickly become useless.
What confuses me is that Google never seemed to announce very loudly what their intentions were (fast, accurate locations), or alternatively, all the journalists disregarded this and cherry-picked quotes that make Google look bad.
They put more effort into hunting down the "addicts" than the "dealers". This does not work.
I'd rather have these freaks inside on their computers than outside hunting down my kids.
Gotta give some props to Google and their "Don't be Evil".
I don't see how providing a "My Location" button in Google Maps is evil.
Yes, that's all they used the data for. Ignorant people like you blindly assume that Google wants to spy on what you're doing, when really they're just trying to make it easier for you when you get lost. Perhaps you haven't realised, but they already know what you search for on the web. What could they possibly gain from sniffing Wi-Fi data?
I want to stream MythTV to my smartphone
While you're streaming TV to your phone for little reason, I have to put up with web pages taking longer to load.
I'm willing to pay for that; why aren't they willing to offer the bandwidth to do it?
The required bandwidth is not available. You're basically asking to have half of the tower all to yourself. Assuming they want a 5 year return, you would be expected to pay off half a tower over that period of time. If you're happy paying $1000 per month for a service with just a couple of mbits then good for you. When other users leave the network due to the low speeds that you have caused, they will bill you for more and more.
The idea is not silly at all. When I did a Networking Fundamentals subject, we used Cisco Packet Tracer to do most of what you mentioned above. Unfortunately, it isn't exactly FOSS.
Correct me if I am mistaken, but not a single journalist seems to have picked up on why Google has been collecting the data. I thought that it was obvious, yet many of the above posters don't seem to get it either.