Departing Google CEO Eric Schmidt was known for some of his bumbling public statements -- like saying that privacy didn't matter -- but apparently he made some internal blunders as well.
One of the biggest: asking Google's search team to remove information about a political donation from its search results. According to a new book about Google by Steven Levy, Schmidt's request was shot down by Google exec Sheryl Sandberg, who is now COO of Facebook. The book was reviewed this morning by the New York Times, which got an advance copy.
The fact he would make such a request at all is pretty amazing -- especially since Google's lawyers have said that the company never promotes or eliminates particular sites from search results, even when trying to fight spam. Earlier this month, Google engineer Matt Cutts contradicted this stance, basically admitting that Google can use "whitelists" to exclude certain sites from changes to the algorithm.
Microsoft reportedly receives $5 every time HTC sells an Android phone, leading some observers to conclude that Microsoft makes more money from Android than its own Windows Phone 7 platform.
Not related, just an excuse to post trollish comments on how social darwinism is freedom and everything else is nazi-communislam.
Is it me, or is that what 98% of the Neo-Neo-Libertarians advocate now, Social Darwinism... which is closer to Nazism (in ideology) than anything else I know.
2) Be real poor. This will usually qualify you for Medicaid--which sucks, but is also better than nothing.
Except this doesn't apply in most states. You can't just be poor to get Medicaid - you also have to show that you are disabled or suffer from a long term illness. Specifically you have to be below the poverty level. In my state, for example, they then refer your claim to the Social Security Administration which can take up to three years to get approved. It wasn't always like this, ten years ago it wasn't, but it's now in place, essentially, to keep people off of Medicaid because state revenues are down (Medicaid is paid half by the Fed, half by the state). The basic point is this varies by state. Which to some sounds wonderful. States rights and so forth - but if you live in a state that isn't doing well or has elected those who want to roll the usage back then they have shot themselves in the foot. They don't have the scale anymore of other states and thus drive out doctors (less Medicaid receipts to take in) and drive up costs (demand on doctors drive up asking prices, and thus doctors feel less of a need to supplement their income with Medicaid patients).
Anecdotal; My buddy is in full on doctor-mode and left his practice after two years because the partner didn't want to take Medicaid patients. Being an OB he said it only makes sense to have 10-25% of your clients be from Medicaid as it pays, it's guaranteed and they collect slightly less. The partner was just old fashioned and against the Medicaid program. He left because looking at their cash flow he realized they'd be broke in 5 years.
3) Be a child. There are usually programs for providing healthcare for kids.
I'm not sure anymore, but I do believe this isn't in all states either. It's sort-of like Medicaid and states could refuse to implement the SCHIP/CHIP (children's health insurance) programs if they wanted to and get a payout later from the Fed... George W. Bush in Texas was a great example. The pro-life man, who found Jesus, oversaw a record number of executions but didn't implement a SCHIP plan in their state.
Add to that - don't already be sick. At all. Nothing. Because you will be an automatic decline.
Otherwise, thanks to "Obamacare" you can get in on your state's high risk health pool... which is the only other real option for most people, who have something and thus are trying to find coverage. That's what capitalistic medicine produces - a system where you can never be sick.
This is the best argument against any of these types of labor practices. It's not about wage or commodore64 there not being able to find a job - it's that his kids will certainly not want to pursue his career and eventually schools will start dropping the programs from their options. It is like a reverse brain-drain. We may get the good Indian workers, for a while, but then we will be stuck when they are bigger than us (and we've fed them info and life experience) and we have nothing to come back with.
It's not about the jobs, it is about our position as a nation and sadly multi-national corporations are simply going to do what works best for them. It doesn't matter if they started here, their stock can be listed on foreign exchanges and other countries have banks.
I'm sorry, but as a Linux guy, it's really hard to watch a Windows guy get a chuckle at somebody else given their chosen OS's inferiority and not have a chuckle about it myself.
What most people tend to forgot is that ironically the first version of Excel was actually released for the Mac in 1985 before making its debut on the PC...
What I really don't understand is why people are in such support of capitalism run-wild, that a mining town that buys and sells everything from coal to soap to workers themselves is such a good thing. If corporations are people, by law, why do we want to give them more rights.
When it gets to the point that a company is taking advantage of the workforce - the the point that Microsoft won't pay you double your salary, though you are qualified and they have it, because your actual employer made a deal with them not to. People will come here and say that is a good thing, and that the rights of the company supersede the rights of the worker.
How is that American? How is that anything close to human rights?
If we are going to be scared, as a people, by who they pick as their uplinks, it should be Pakistan more than anyone. Pakistan hates the US and likely the west a lot more than Iran (of the two, which has the terrorists we are looking for?).
But it's just packets, I don't know if I am that worried. Redundancy is best, for political and technical reasons - maybe I'd like to see a new Wifi distance record set and have Afghanistan beam their bits to a router on top of Mt. Everest? I would hope that the landmass they are on would prompt them to come up with something, idk, new?
Eventually they will offer censorship services or a level of 'Islam-friendly' censorship and they will be the dominate player. I don't mean political censorship, 'omg dont let people read the Constitution' - but block porn, etc.
"Look, you get your internet from us already, get your clean internets from us too!"
I only am thinking this because I'm learning of these religious-friendly search engines. A niche market, but I get it because people want to protect their delicate minds (or just avoid that 'hate' speak or whatever... should have been Bing's business angle). I think the region would be happy with that. I imagine a great firewall, just not for politics (as the primary driver).
Wasn't this the idea (roughly) around trusted computing? Are kernel devs going to pay for the signing? Only MS et. al. would and thus kill free software.
I think modding consoles is only illegal as your intention is to circumvent the copyright protections. You can mod all you want to run homebrew software. That's the tricky part - are you turning on software on the chip (microcode, instructions) that are protected by this upgrade feature? Hacking the software to perform the unlock is certainly illegal, you must develop a standalone version.
Of course it would be wrong for the VP of a company who probably has done more deals with Microsoft on interoperability to know something about their software. Netware of the past was *the* directory service for Windows.
For those who don't "repsect" Novell any more because they act like a corporate player doesn't get it. They came in and fought the SCO fight a bit and at the same time did some questionable deals with MS, it's all just business to them. They have stood on principle quite a few times but they are still just trying to provide software solutions for a few bucks that they can later divide up and spend on new cars.
No they don't. Anonymous political speech is one thing, but hiding to insult or call for violence is not (i.e., the 'they should just hang that guy' or 'all of them' type of comments). If you wouldn't express it to friends or family then why express it online behind a name like MickeyMouse123?
I am appalled at some of the comments I read on local stories. And in these cases people are coming out with information in regards to a case, yet no one can ever be found to testify (for the prosecution!).
Yes, and: He's a dirty [enter race here] that is ruining [state/country/city name] and [if black Obama will let them go / if other insert sky falling conspiracy / if white say name of residing neighborhood should be burned down].
I thought this was just my city. A woman was in a bad accident and it became a forum to discuss which race was the superior race... Makes me cringe and also makes me wonder how much the police do watch these boards. Some of the calls for violence and vigilantism are truly illegal.
Slashdot Mirror
You provide a well connected, sane and non-paranoid point of view. You are clearly helping the real debate going on about privacy.
They are deleting nothing, it doesn't apply to you - and probably most people here. It's hardly even news at all to be honest.
Completely OT, and totally trollish to say the least. Even Bing doesn't show any results to back up such a claim.
Please elaborate on this...
Because I think even the CEO couldn't get Google to remove results.
But hey, it is their search engine and all.
Also, the submitter is the article writer... dipshit.
You didn't read the article....
So I can stop looking for the hidden message?
YOUIDIOTDOWUXNOOWITAYHIRY means nothing to me... but I am a network guy, not a coder.
Not related, just an excuse to post trollish comments on how social darwinism is freedom and everything else is nazi-communislam.
Is it me, or is that what 98% of the Neo-Neo-Libertarians advocate now, Social Darwinism... which is closer to Nazism (in ideology) than anything else I know.
Except this doesn't apply in most states. You can't just be poor to get Medicaid - you also have to show that you are disabled or suffer from a long term illness. Specifically you have to be below the poverty level. In my state, for example, they then refer your claim to the Social Security Administration which can take up to three years to get approved. It wasn't always like this, ten years ago it wasn't, but it's now in place, essentially, to keep people off of Medicaid because state revenues are down (Medicaid is paid half by the Fed, half by the state). The basic point is this varies by state. Which to some sounds wonderful. States rights and so forth - but if you live in a state that isn't doing well or has elected those who want to roll the usage back then they have shot themselves in the foot. They don't have the scale anymore of other states and thus drive out doctors (less Medicaid receipts to take in) and drive up costs (demand on doctors drive up asking prices, and thus doctors feel less of a need to supplement their income with Medicaid patients).
Anecdotal; My buddy is in full on doctor-mode and left his practice after two years because the partner didn't want to take Medicaid patients. Being an OB he said it only makes sense to have 10-25% of your clients be from Medicaid as it pays, it's guaranteed and they collect slightly less. The partner was just old fashioned and against the Medicaid program. He left because looking at their cash flow he realized they'd be broke in 5 years.
I'm not sure anymore, but I do believe this isn't in all states either. It's sort-of like Medicaid and states could refuse to implement the SCHIP/CHIP (children's health insurance) programs if they wanted to and get a payout later from the Fed... George W. Bush in Texas was a great example. The pro-life man, who found Jesus, oversaw a record number of executions but didn't implement a SCHIP plan in their state.
Add to that - don't already be sick. At all. Nothing. Because you will be an automatic decline.
Otherwise, thanks to "Obamacare" you can get in on your state's high risk health pool... which is the only other real option for most people, who have something and thus are trying to find coverage. That's what capitalistic medicine produces - a system where you can never be sick.
Troll? Isn't this Slashdot? I've not commented in almost a year, but geezol
This is the best argument against any of these types of labor practices. It's not about wage or commodore64 there not being able to find a job - it's that his kids will certainly not want to pursue his career and eventually schools will start dropping the programs from their options. It is like a reverse brain-drain. We may get the good Indian workers, for a while, but then we will be stuck when they are bigger than us (and we've fed them info and life experience) and we have nothing to come back with.
It's not about the jobs, it is about our position as a nation and sadly multi-national corporations are simply going to do what works best for them. It doesn't matter if they started here, their stock can be listed on foreign exchanges and other countries have banks.
I'm sorry, but as a Linux guy, it's really hard to watch a Windows guy get a chuckle at somebody else given their chosen OS's inferiority and not have a chuckle about it myself.
What most people tend to forgot is that ironically the first version of Excel was actually released for the Mac in 1985 before making its debut on the PC...
You have to go where the users are.
What I really don't understand is why people are in such support of capitalism run-wild, that a mining town that buys and sells everything from coal to soap to workers themselves is such a good thing. If corporations are people, by law, why do we want to give them more rights.
When it gets to the point that a company is taking advantage of the workforce - the the point that Microsoft won't pay you double your salary, though you are qualified and they have it, because your actual employer made a deal with them not to. People will come here and say that is a good thing, and that the rights of the company supersede the rights of the worker.
How is that American? How is that anything close to human rights?
If we are going to be scared, as a people, by who they pick as their uplinks, it should be Pakistan more than anyone. Pakistan hates the US and likely the west a lot more than Iran (of the two, which has the terrorists we are looking for?).
But it's just packets, I don't know if I am that worried. Redundancy is best, for political and technical reasons - maybe I'd like to see a new Wifi distance record set and have Afghanistan beam their bits to a router on top of Mt. Everest? I would hope that the landmass they are on would prompt them to come up with something, idk, new?
Eventually they will offer censorship services or a level of 'Islam-friendly' censorship and they will be the dominate player. I don't mean political censorship, 'omg dont let people read the Constitution' - but block porn, etc.
"Look, you get your internet from us already, get your clean internets from us too!"
I only am thinking this because I'm learning of these religious-friendly search engines. A niche market, but I get it because people want to protect their delicate minds (or just avoid that 'hate' speak or whatever... should have been Bing's business angle). I think the region would be happy with that. I imagine a great firewall, just not for politics (as the primary driver).
Exactly, it's the ists you need to be concerned about.
Except it wasn't an example of actual cat abuse - but they were still doing it for the lulz. Silly to think otherwise.
Wasn't this the idea (roughly) around trusted computing? Are kernel devs going to pay for the signing? Only MS et. al. would and thus kill free software.
I think modding consoles is only illegal as your intention is to circumvent the copyright protections. You can mod all you want to run homebrew software. That's the tricky part - are you turning on software on the chip (microcode, instructions) that are protected by this upgrade feature? Hacking the software to perform the unlock is certainly illegal, you must develop a standalone version.
Agreed - there could be spoofing all around in an isolated environment.
Of course it would be wrong for the VP of a company who probably has done more deals with Microsoft on interoperability to know something about their software. Netware of the past was *the* directory service for Windows.
For those who don't "repsect" Novell any more because they act like a corporate player doesn't get it. They came in and fought the SCO fight a bit and at the same time did some questionable deals with MS, it's all just business to them. They have stood on principle quite a few times but they are still just trying to provide software solutions for a few bucks that they can later divide up and spend on new cars.
No they don't. Anonymous political speech is one thing, but hiding to insult or call for violence is not (i.e., the 'they should just hang that guy' or 'all of them' type of comments). If you wouldn't express it to friends or family then why express it online behind a name like MickeyMouse123?
I am appalled at some of the comments I read on local stories. And in these cases people are coming out with information in regards to a case, yet no one can ever be found to testify (for the prosecution!).
Yes, and: He's a dirty [enter race here] that is ruining [state/country/city name] and [if black Obama will let them go / if other insert sky falling conspiracy / if white say name of residing neighborhood should be burned down].
I thought this was just my city. A woman was in a bad accident and it became a forum to discuss which race was the superior race... Makes me cringe and also makes me wonder how much the police do watch these boards. Some of the calls for violence and vigilantism are truly illegal.