Yeah, but we can be pretty sure that MS-Office will be around for awhile. Even if MS abandoned Office (which I can't see happening anytime soon) we would still have the software, and our files.
Maybe everybody abandons software projects, but Google is crazy about it. I can't even begin to keep up with all the projects Google abandons.
Google does not make any real money on their apps. About 97% of Google's income is from advertising. So I think it's fair to say that Google apps are a lot more likely to be abandoned than Office.
BTW I see you constantly defending Google even when they don't deserve it.. are you getting paid to do that? Google is a mega advertising company. I don't see why they would want to ever have a good privacy policy. It would ruin their own business model.
For the record, MS has been caught, red handed, astroturfing - and they were caught more than one. As far as I know, Google does not do that.
But P3P allows that. You can jump right past P3P is you care to do so. So when you decide to "protect yourself" with that joke of a standard, you implicitly accept the limitations of that standard.
If anybody is being evil, it's MS for making you think their silly standard meant something.
User: "I don't wish to be tracked. I've opted out using this P3P setting." Microsoft: "Haha our browser is insecure, out of date, and broken. Be sure to blame Google for our crappy browser. Maybe Google will fix our browser too, just like Google had to do for Apple's insecure browser."
Wow... Experienced web developer here... They tried so hard to make that article accessible for non web developers that it was almost harder for me to understand that way. My "OMG nefarious" meter isn't even going off at all. This is a misleading headline. Google is circumventing "is" implies "still is" - which they are not. "circumventing" implies intentionally skirting around a bug - which NOTHING in this article says they are or were.
Cross domain security should be built in to all browsers, and all Google was doing was passing cookies when people hit a button in an iFrame, and google's normal tracking activities if you're logged in to google continued. All that happened here was that a bug in Safari meant that google's stuff kept working even when it wasn't supposed to. There's no indication that this code was specially geared toward Safari. It sounds like their tracking was meant to automatically continue on as usual, and Safari failed to prevent 3rd party cookies from being sent.
This headline is sensationalist bullshit.
If you want to argue that google does too much tracking in general that's a different story. But there is not one tiny iota of information in this article that suggests google was "exploiting a bug in Safari" -- these iFrame based buttons and the cookies that follow them are standard operating procedure for ad networks. EDIT: Also credit to/u/powerje, who points out that it was 2 google engineers who fixed the problem in webkit/Safari
You have to pay the BSA's legal expenses, even if the BSA has no case against you; and you are entirely in the right. That is why everybody settles. Greatest extortion racket ever.
You are not even making sense. " they do NOT have the right to demand and receive others work for free" who is asking for that? Why should FOSS not be given the same rights as proprietary? Really, give me a good reason for that.
Also, who is asking for other's work for free? I think you may things exactly backwards. Last I heard, Apple's OS is built on BSD. I think Windows also uses BSD for TCP/IP stack. For that matter, where would the internet be if not for F/OSS, and especially open standards?
Let us not forget that Google is _the_ corporation that makes its money by knowing as much as possible of what ANONYMOUS users (and that includes you) do on the Web. It is their business model.
So what if google knows that x number of users went to site y? So what if Google uses your search information to put innocuous text ads by side of page?
Really, how is that a privacy violation? Unlike Facebook, you don't even have to login to use Google.
Slashdot Mirror
One of the reasons that the iPad is so strong is that it used in health care, and law enforcement. I think the military may be using iPhones.
Worrying about google "reading" your email is like worry about ms-word "reading" your word docs.
Maybe some people just aren't ready for computers.
If you were emailed enough 2010 files, you would be essentially forced to upgrade. Isn't that nice of Microsoft?
Yeah, but we can be pretty sure that MS-Office will be around for awhile. Even if MS abandoned Office (which I can't see happening anytime soon) we would still have the software, and our files.
Maybe everybody abandons software projects, but Google is crazy about it. I can't even begin to keep up with all the projects Google abandons.
Google does not make any real money on their apps. About 97% of Google's income is from advertising. So I think it's fair to say that Google apps are a lot more likely to be abandoned than Office.
Microsoft plays that game like mad. MS always has.
But, as far as I know, Google does not do that. Even Dart is open source.
Yeah, which would be a tiny fraction of the current Windows apps?
True, but MS has long been known as being hyper-paranoid. Baby-stabbing in a long established MS tradition.
Consider the way that MS completely freaked out over the minor threat of Netscape.
MS prefers that the competition never gets started.
BTW I see you constantly defending Google even when they don't deserve it.. are you getting paid to do that? Google is a mega advertising company. I don't see why they would want to ever have a good privacy policy. It would ruin their own business model.
For the record, MS has been caught, red handed, astroturfing - and they were caught more than one. As far as I know, Google does not do that.
Unless you are worried about an algorithm "knowing" your data. No person at Google, or elsewhere is looking at your ever-so-personal email.
The algorithm used in MS-Word probably "knows" as much of your personal data.
And who can say what other inanimate objects "know" about you.
If you are a person, then yes I would care. If you are a spell checker program, then no I would not care.
If you are upset about the idea of a computer reading your mail, then how can you justify using email at all?
Does the MS-Word spelling checker "read" your Word documents?
Apple and MS are scared to death of Google. And neither company has ever liked fair competition.
I've gotten to the point in my Internet life where I rarely use Google anymore. There are better options out there
Like what? Please remember that MS, and Facebook, do the same things that the are so desperately trying to smear Google about.
But P3P allows that. You can jump right past P3P is you care to do so. So when you decide to "protect yourself" with that joke of a standard, you implicitly accept the limitations of that standard.
If anybody is being evil, it's MS for making you think their silly standard meant something.
What's the big deal? P3P openly let's you decide to bypass it if you care to do so. So Google decided to do so.
What is evil is Microsoft using a broken implementation of a non-used standard to try and score points over something that shouldn't even be an issue.
If anything it should be an issue against Microsoft, not Google.
Microsoft smear campaign seems to be working very well, thanks to ignorant people.
User: "I don't wish to be tracked. I've opted out using this P3P setting."
Microsoft: "Haha our browser is insecure, out of date, and broken. Be sure to blame Google for our crappy browser. Maybe Google will fix our browser too, just like Google had to do for Apple's insecure browser."
Other browsers just have broken security.
Google did not target Safari. Safari's security was just not working until Google fixed it.
All that happened here was that a bug in Safari meant that google's stuff kept working even when it wasn't supposed to
I like the way this poster from reddit put it:
Wow... Experienced web developer here... They tried so hard to make that article accessible for non web developers that it was almost harder for me to understand that way.
My "OMG nefarious" meter isn't even going off at all.
This is a misleading headline.
Google is circumventing
"is" implies "still is" - which they are not.
"circumventing" implies intentionally skirting around a bug - which NOTHING in this article says they are or were.
Cross domain security should be built in to all browsers, and all Google was doing was passing cookies when people hit a button in an iFrame, and google's normal tracking activities if you're logged in to google continued.
All that happened here was that a bug in Safari meant that google's stuff kept working even when it wasn't supposed to. There's no indication that this code was specially geared toward Safari. It sounds like their tracking was meant to automatically continue on as usual, and Safari failed to prevent 3rd party cookies from being sent.
This headline is sensationalist bullshit.
If you want to argue that google does too much tracking in general that's a different story. But there is not one tiny iota of information in this article that suggests google was "exploiting a bug in Safari" -- these iFrame based buttons and the cookies that follow them are standard operating procedure for ad networks. /u/powerje, who points out that it was 2 google engineers who fixed the problem in webkit/Safari
EDIT: Also credit to
http://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/ptoez/google_is_circumventing_safari_privacy_settings/
You have to pay the BSA's legal expenses, even if the BSA has no case against you; and you are entirely in the right. That is why everybody settles. Greatest extortion racket ever.
The business software alliance (aka Microsoft) are a group of extortionist thugs. They have all sorts of special laws writen just for them.
You are not even making sense. " they do NOT have the right to demand and receive others work for free" who is asking for that? Why should FOSS not be given the same rights as proprietary? Really, give me a good reason for that.
Also, who is asking for other's work for free? I think you may things exactly backwards. Last I heard, Apple's OS is built on BSD. I think Windows also uses BSD for TCP/IP stack. For that matter, where would the internet be if not for F/OSS, and especially open standards?
The Business Software Alliance is just a lobbyist group for Microsoft. Politicians know who pays their campaign contributions.
I suppose missals that could detect the other vessel, and guide themselves there, would make the most sense.
Let us not forget that Google is _the_ corporation that makes its money by knowing as much as possible of what ANONYMOUS users (and that includes you) do on the Web. It is their business model.
So what if google knows that x number of users went to site y? So what if Google uses your search information to put innocuous text ads by side of page?
Really, how is that a privacy violation? Unlike Facebook, you don't even have to login to use Google.