Maybe newspapers who don't want to get republished by Google should learn about "robots.txt"? Granted, it's more than a decade old, but it still works.
Corporations seek to enrich their owners. That's no different from any other business. It's no different from you when you decide how much you sell your labor for to other people. Unlike other businesses, you can actually buy shares in corporations.
I can't read German. It should be obvious that I expect links in English as this is an English language site.
Look, you didn't know that these laws existed so you asked for evidence. I gave it to you. Google Translate can translate these laws just fine if you still don't believe me.
The USA also gives subsidies to churches, so it's hardly characteristic of Europe.
The US government transfers massive amounts of money to churches in violation of the first amendment? Really? Where?
"The whole lot (of European nations) was guilty of the most vile forms of colonialism." So was the USA. Your point?
Really? Where in the world is the US supposed to have practiced this "vile form of colonialism"?
But Europe did indeed invent fascism, colonialism, communism, socialism, industrial genocide, and Marxism.
You seem to forget that Germany had a democracy before World War II.
Indeed, it was. And when their economy was in the toilet, they blamed the Jews, the capitalists, and the Americans, and then democratically and knowingly elected an anti-Semitic war monger and democratically abolished their own democracy in hopes that he'd restore power, wealth, and glory to the Fatherland. And I think they'd do something like that again given similar circumstances, as would other European nations, because all of them feel superior and entitled and don't know much about history. You yourself are quite representative of those attitudes.
Hailing a cab in NYC is still easier than just about anywhere in the world.
And since the problem is an actual (artificial) scarcity of cabs, improving information with an app isn't going to help: you aren't getting a cab because the cab can't find you, you aren't getting a cab because there are too few licensed cabs.
Normal people don't strap these sensors to their fingers (where there is no room for batteries), they put them in a pen. Normal people also don't use bar codes that weren't designed for the purpose, they use patterns that work much better for determining position. So, normal people just buy a Logitech IO2 or the Livescribe pen.
It's not a bad life when you get tenure. A comfortable living and you get to do what you want to do. Unfortunately, universities sell that unattainable dream to get cheap labors, with TAs/RAs getting paid less than a typical Wal-Mart cashier.
And this is different from... acting, screenwriting, painting, playing basketball, playing the piano, singing, etc.... how exactly? All those professions have a high risk of failure and a highly skewed income distribution.
Furthermore, you make it sound as if universities are somehow lying to their students about their chances. Are students not capable of doing basic math? There are usually many times as many grad students as there are professors at a university. It's obvious only a small fraction of the grad students will get academic positions.
Full professors at research universities are not just people who bothered to get a Ph.D. They are elite, whether or not you believe it or want to hear it.
Yes, but elite at what? Advertising and self-promotion or actual science? Look at the biographies and personalities of past scientific greats. They worked hard, but they would hardly have been particularly good at today's media and talk circus.
It's the problem with capitalism in general. It happens all the time, everywhere. I think buying a company in another market area should be considered illegal if your market share is above 50%. Hell, make it 30%
YouTube was little more than a brand name, a few engineers, and a money losing proposition. What exactly did you want to "prohibit" there?
Furthermore, since you like to beat up on capitalism, I suggest you look at what's happening in Europe's "social market economies" or socialist nations: instead of having an overbearing, uncompetitive, privacy invading corporate behemoth, you get an overbearing, privacy invading public monopoly that is then quite officially above the law and gets large amounts of tax money sunk into it.
You have a problem with elementary reasoning if you think that you can disprove the statement "while European governments and many European companies get a free pass" with a few counterexamples.
It's just a fact that European governments engage in massive and nearly legally unrestricted spying on their citizens. European governments collect, and in many cases even sell, private data on their citizens to corporate entities, and give it away to foreign nations. Many large European corporations, in particular telecoms, keep vast quantities of sensitive data on people.
The fact that occasionally, European privacy regulators also target governmental entities or corporations doesn't change that one bit.
Axel Springer, Bertelsmann, Burda, the various public broadcasting corporations, etc.
Name one big European search engine or video portal!
What gives you the idiotic idea that I was talking about "search engines or video portals"? The companies lobbying against Google are the old failing media empires of Europe: they publish newspapers, books, radio, and TV. European corporate interests don't even try to compete, they just want government protection to continue to sell their obsolete wares at inflated prices. And they are using their control of media to bamboozle European voters into supporting them. And if history is any guide, they will get away with it.
Actually, there are no European companies trying to compete with Google and failing. There are no European companies even trying
As I was saying: they haven't even figured out how to compete with Google. Was that sentence too hard for you to grasp?
In different words, the media companies and publishers of Europe don't know how to compete, so instead of trying, they lobby their governments to try to make it hard for Google to offer its services in Europe.
I don't like Google tying together all these services. I think it is a privacy nightmare and it's risky too. For example, if your Google account gets disabled because of a blog post, you lose access to all your Android apps and Google movies. But you know what? You have a choice.
The sooner people realize this, the better, because that means it keeps alternative services viable. And there still are plenty of alternatives to every service Google offers.
But we don't need European "privacy regulators". Slaps on the fingers of companies like this are thoroughly ineffective in terms of protecting your privacy. And if European privacy regulators succeed in legitimizing the single-service-for-everything, we are worse off, because terms of service don't protect you from criminal or governmental misuse of your aggregated data.
All the EU is doing is basically telling Google to put the data back in their individual silos and stop mising and churning it
And what defines "separate"? Facebook has a single privacy policy for your profile, photos, videos, blog posts, etc.
All the EU is really doing is politically motivated posturing: they don't like Google because the big European corporations their member governments are in bed with haven't figured out how to compete with Google.
It's too bad people can't opt out of the intrusive data collection and privacy invasion schemes of the European governments. Frankly, I greatly prefer Google having my private data than the German or French government.
Well, my point is that 21MHz talked about being acquired by Google as somehow a bad thing. I bet both Nokia stockholders and Nokia employees would have loved to have been acquired by Google.
Police and other agencies already can remotely enable the microphone on your cell phone; there's nothing to "imagine" there. They can do that bypassing the smartphone OS.
When it comes to the smartphone OS itself, they almost certainly can also install whatever they want already, because they can run man in the middle attacks on your phone and have access to private keys for software packages. "This" (as in the article) isn't relevant or new.
Offensive speech is already banned in many European nations. Germany, for example, has penalties of up to a year in jail for insulting someone, and up to three years in jail for insulting religions like Christianity and Islam. And, yes, these laws are being enforced.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe newspapers who don't want to get republished by Google should learn about "robots.txt"? Granted, it's more than a decade old, but it still works.
Corporations seek to enrich their owners. That's no different from any other business. It's no different from you when you decide how much you sell your labor for to other people. Unlike other businesses, you can actually buy shares in corporations.
Even if that were true, that's their right (of course, it was actually Apple who refused to let Google brand their own product).
But if it screws Apple, that's fine by me. Getting rid of the head of iOS development seems like a good start to me.
I actually prefer C#/.NET for apps development. I think XCode and Objective-C are awful. Unfortunately, as an OS, Windows 8 continues to be a mess.
Look, you didn't know that these laws existed so you asked for evidence. I gave it to you. Google Translate can translate these laws just fine if you still don't believe me.
The US government transfers massive amounts of money to churches in violation of the first amendment? Really? Where?
Really? Where in the world is the US supposed to have practiced this "vile form of colonialism"?
No, it wasn't: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/157129/democracy/233828/Prehistoric-forms-of-democracy
But Europe did indeed invent fascism, colonialism, communism, socialism, industrial genocide, and Marxism.
Indeed, it was. And when their economy was in the toilet, they blamed the Jews, the capitalists, and the Americans, and then democratically and knowingly elected an anti-Semitic war monger and democratically abolished their own democracy in hopes that he'd restore power, wealth, and glory to the Fatherland. And I think they'd do something like that again given similar circumstances, as would other European nations, because all of them feel superior and entitled and don't know much about history. You yourself are quite representative of those attitudes.
Hailing a cab in NYC is still easier than just about anywhere in the world.
And since the problem is an actual (artificial) scarcity of cabs, improving information with an app isn't going to help: you aren't getting a cab because the cab can't find you, you aren't getting a cab because there are too few licensed cabs.
Normal people don't strap these sensors to their fingers (where there is no room for batteries), they put them in a pen. Normal people also don't use bar codes that weren't designed for the purpose, they use patterns that work much better for determining position. So, normal people just buy a Logitech IO2 or the Livescribe pen.
http://www.livescribe.com/en-us/smartpen/echo/
And this is different from... acting, screenwriting, painting, playing basketball, playing the piano, singing, etc. ... how exactly? All those professions have a high risk of failure and a highly skewed income distribution.
Furthermore, you make it sound as if universities are somehow lying to their students about their chances. Are students not capable of doing basic math? There are usually many times as many grad students as there are professors at a university. It's obvious only a small fraction of the grad students will get academic positions.
But in that case... why not simply put one of the existing high performance key-value stores into the kernel?
Yes, but elite at what? Advertising and self-promotion or actual science? Look at the biographies and personalities of past scientific greats. They worked hard, but they would hardly have been particularly good at today's media and talk circus.
(1) There are no stable jobs, period.
(2) If she got out of the field, she probably doesn't love it.
Fact is that despite the horrible conditions, academic positions are still highly sought after.
YouTube was little more than a brand name, a few engineers, and a money losing proposition. What exactly did you want to "prohibit" there?
Furthermore, since you like to beat up on capitalism, I suggest you look at what's happening in Europe's "social market economies" or socialist nations: instead of having an overbearing, uncompetitive, privacy invading corporate behemoth, you get an overbearing, privacy invading public monopoly that is then quite officially above the law and gets large amounts of tax money sunk into it.
You have a problem with elementary reasoning if you think that you can disprove the statement "while European governments and many European companies get a free pass" with a few counterexamples.
It's just a fact that European governments engage in massive and nearly legally unrestricted spying on their citizens. European governments collect, and in many cases even sell, private data on their citizens to corporate entities, and give it away to foreign nations. Many large European corporations, in particular telecoms, keep vast quantities of sensitive data on people.
The fact that occasionally, European privacy regulators also target governmental entities or corporations doesn't change that one bit.
Axel Springer, Bertelsmann, Burda, the various public broadcasting corporations, etc.
What gives you the idiotic idea that I was talking about "search engines or video portals"? The companies lobbying against Google are the old failing media empires of Europe: they publish newspapers, books, radio, and TV. European corporate interests don't even try to compete, they just want government protection to continue to sell their obsolete wares at inflated prices. And they are using their control of media to bamboozle European voters into supporting them. And if history is any guide, they will get away with it.
As I was saying: they haven't even figured out how to compete with Google. Was that sentence too hard for you to grasp?
In different words, the media companies and publishers of Europe don't know how to compete, so instead of trying, they lobby their governments to try to make it hard for Google to offer its services in Europe.
I don't like Google tying together all these services. I think it is a privacy nightmare and it's risky too. For example, if your Google account gets disabled because of a blog post, you lose access to all your Android apps and Google movies. But you know what? You have a choice.
The sooner people realize this, the better, because that means it keeps alternative services viable. And there still are plenty of alternatives to every service Google offers.
But we don't need European "privacy regulators". Slaps on the fingers of companies like this are thoroughly ineffective in terms of protecting your privacy. And if European privacy regulators succeed in legitimizing the single-service-for-everything, we are worse off, because terms of service don't protect you from criminal or governmental misuse of your aggregated data.
No, they don't. European regulators like to cause trouble to US companies, while European governments and many European companies get a free pass.
Are you kidding? European governments are completely captured by corporate interests. In this case, those corporate interests happen to hate Google.
And what defines "separate"? Facebook has a single privacy policy for your profile, photos, videos, blog posts, etc.
All the EU is really doing is politically motivated posturing: they don't like Google because the big European corporations their member governments are in bed with haven't figured out how to compete with Google.
It's too bad people can't opt out of the intrusive data collection and privacy invasion schemes of the European governments. Frankly, I greatly prefer Google having my private data than the German or French government.
Well, my point is that 21MHz talked about being acquired by Google as somehow a bad thing. I bet both Nokia stockholders and Nokia employees would have loved to have been acquired by Google.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beleidigung
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beschimpfung_von_Bekenntnissen,_Religionsgesellschaften_und_Weltanschauungsvereinigungen
Those statements were correct as well. Here is a page that summarizes the data pretty well (it points to sources):
http://www.stop-kirchensubventionen.de/
It's you who is "talking out of his ass", and you're being rude about it too.
Engineer discovers biology, builds elementary genetic circuit, and thinks it's a great breakthrough!
Police and other agencies already can remotely enable the microphone on your cell phone; there's nothing to "imagine" there. They can do that bypassing the smartphone OS.
When it comes to the smartphone OS itself, they almost certainly can also install whatever they want already, because they can run man in the middle attacks on your phone and have access to private keys for software packages. "This" (as in the article) isn't relevant or new.
Offensive speech is already banned in many European nations. Germany, for example, has penalties of up to a year in jail for insulting someone, and up to three years in jail for insulting religions like Christianity and Islam. And, yes, these laws are being enforced.
That's kind of like talking about "the sexiest transvestite hooker" around.
Being acquired by Google seems like a good thing. Google looked at Nokia and passed on it...