The ads were from unverified pharmacies selling counterfeit drugs or prescription meds without prescriptions. According to the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, 85% percent of online pharmacies sell controlled drugs without prescriptions. The law says that web companies are liable if they advertise criminal activities, such as online gambling.
It is news. The news is that this only affects Android. Android has become the new Windows, home of viruses, malware, and pre-installed junk you can't remove. It's even worse than PCs due to fragmentation--the article mentions that the Sony Ericsson Xperia Mini Pro (what a name) has four different app stores. When Linux fans cheer about some perceived victory through Android, they're really cheering the fact that carriers throw Android onto their cheap, flimsy phones and load it with a bunch of branded crap. That's not the victory we wanted.
So your theory is that Google won by tricking Apple and Microsoft into buying valuable Nortel patents for only $4.5 billion while negotiating to buy Motorola for three times that amount? How did Google win there?
Insiders claim the negotiations began after the failed Nortel bid. This crazy theory Google fans have that they tricked competitors into buying valuable patents for a third of the cost that Google ended up paying for Motorola is pretty silly to read, especially after you read the threats made by Motorola's CEO about starting an Android civil war. You guys are starting to come off even worse than Apple fanboys.
Google rocked their world by being forced into buying a has-been hardware company for the cost of two years of profit after losing the Nortel patents that were only $4.5 billion?
No, Motorola completely owned Google. Google was painted into a corner and had no choice but to buy Motorola to prevent an Android civil war. I think Google fans are so desperate for any kind of good news that they're spinning anything they can to make themselves feel good about being Google fans.
You're just parroting Dan Lyons' discredited theory of events.
* Feigned interest in the Nortel patent with joke bids
Google fans keep claiming that they "faked" a $4.5 billion bid for the Nortel patents, but if you actually read the links in the submission, sources at Google told journalists that Google was very interested in the Nortel patents and didn't expect for others to team up against them.
* Apple and Microsoft fell for the bait and overpayed for Nortel's patents
Apple and Microsoft didn't overpay. Google is the one who paid $12.5 billion for Motorola.
* Meanwhile Google is off negotiating with Motorola for the purchase of their mobile/settop box/IPTV division
"Meanwhile?" The negotiations began after the failed Nortel bid and during the period of time Motorola's CEO was publicly threatening to wage a patent war on other Android vendors. Also, Microsoft was pursuing Motorola, which was a big motivator for Google.
* Apple and Microsoft and their proxies are plastering the Net with justification for using patents as a weapon against the Android Juggernaut
The "proxies" stupidity makes you look like a complete raving fanboy. Android fanboys are even more insufferably obnoxious than Apple fanboys.
* Google now owns the largest mobile patent war chest with some 17,000 patents and and additional 7,500 pending
Huh? They don't own the largest patent war chest at all.
You can tell just how major this win for Google is by just how desperate the spin from the Apple and Microsoft proxies in the press are pumping out.
No, you can tell how desperate this move was for Google after the Nortel fiasco by how loudly their fanboys are trying to convince anyone who will listen that it was some brilliant powerplay, ignoring all the accounts from inside sources as well as the fact that Motorola was publicly threatening to wage war on Android vendors during the period of time they would have been under negotiation with Google, forcing Google to buy them outright rather than simply enter into a patent licensing agreement. You can call it an "epic win" all you want, but it doesn't change the reality of the situation. Google just blew two years of profit on a has-been manufacturer, while the Nortel patents were only $4.5 billion, so I'm not even sure how you justify your theory.
I think you're the one confused by math. Their 2010 profits were about $8 billion, and their 2009 profits about $6 billion. That's where the "two years of revenue" phrase comes from.
So why the panic? I suppose it's disruptive. On Friday a lot of folks thought they had a plan to kill Android. Now they're going to have to go back to the drawing board. People don't like too much change.
You can play Android cheerleader if you want, but insiders are all saying this was a desperation move forced on Google by Motorola after losing the Nortel patents.
Google didn't confuse their competitors into doing anything. Sources in Google have already told other journalists that Google really did want the Nortel patents. Calling it "pure brilliance" is really stretching it, especially since $12 billion is a hell of a lot more than $4.5 billion--that's two years of revenue gone.
Again, Motorola's CEO was threatening to go after Android vendors during the time there were negotiations with Google. Motorola forced Google into buying them outright instead of simply entering a license agreement. They probably let Google know that Microsoft was interested in them. Google is in a corner when it comes to Android patents and had no choice but to go with what Motorola wanted.
Motorola is a has-been hardware vendor. Not to mention that producing hardware would put Google in direct competition with other Android vendors. This was about Motorola's patents.
Only the upgrade system caught people's attention.
This is completely wrong. Your comment about the plot is also ridiculous, but to claim the upgrade system is what made Deus Ex famous? Just plain wrong.
People don't have "fundamental software freedoms." The GPL3 is merely a copyright license, and arguably a restrictive one compared to other licenses that provide more freedom to do things with the source that are prohibited under the GPL.
The difference is that Microsoft's agenda serves only themselves, while the FSF's agenda serves humanity as a whole.
This is a completely subjective conclusion. For example, one could just as easily argue that Microsoft providing a successful product has in fact served humanity, bringing an accessible, mainstream operating system platform to millions of PC users. The fact Slashdotters hate Microsoft doesn't really mean much objectively. In fact, based on your signature, you come off like a bit of an ideologue, so your post isn't surprising, but just know that your position is easily refuted.
It's getting quite tiresome how Slashdot's response to almost everything it disagrees with is to robotically label it "FUD," as if that somehow refutes the argument.
Few people seem to be discussing this, but just this month, Motorola's CEO was publicly threatening to wage patent warfare on other Android vendors. That would have been during the time they were under negotiation with Google, so I believe Motorola strong-armed Google into buying them outright for $12 billion rather than simply entering into a patent license agreement, by threatening to cause an Android civil war.
Some people were acting like buying Motorola was some great power play, but it was really an act of desperation that cost Google two years' worth of revenue.
I fully support someone choosing not to use a service because they don't care for this bargain, but people who don't seem to understand that businesses aren't in business to give them stuff for free kinda annoy me.
And the groveling attitudes toward Google and its alleged betterment of society that pop up so often on Slashdot annoy me, so it's good to remind everyone now and then that Google is one of those evil megacorps Slashdot hates so much.
Especially since Microsoft was trashed for years over its use of side products to tie people to their core business.
That won't happen. Google's core business is selling targeted advertising space, and they have to justify their rates to advertisers as well as the value of the demographics being advertised to by guaranteeing that the harvested data is legitimate and that they come from real people.
Slashdot Mirror
The ads were from unverified pharmacies selling counterfeit drugs or prescription meds without prescriptions. According to the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, 85% percent of online pharmacies sell controlled drugs without prescriptions. The law says that web companies are liable if they advertise criminal activities, such as online gambling.
Just to be clear, the $1 billion in spending is on the part of companies paying to advertise, not consumers.
Google claimed to only accept ads from pharmacies verified with PharmacyChecker.com, but ads from unverified pharmacies continued to appear.
It is news. The news is that this only affects Android. Android has become the new Windows, home of viruses, malware, and pre-installed junk you can't remove. It's even worse than PCs due to fragmentation--the article mentions that the Sony Ericsson Xperia Mini Pro (what a name) has four different app stores. When Linux fans cheer about some perceived victory through Android, they're really cheering the fact that carriers throw Android onto their cheap, flimsy phones and load it with a bunch of branded crap. That's not the victory we wanted.
So your theory is that Google won by tricking Apple and Microsoft into buying valuable Nortel patents for only $4.5 billion while negotiating to buy Motorola for three times that amount? How did Google win there?
Insiders claim the negotiations began after the failed Nortel bid. This crazy theory Google fans have that they tricked competitors into buying valuable patents for a third of the cost that Google ended up paying for Motorola is pretty silly to read, especially after you read the threats made by Motorola's CEO about starting an Android civil war. You guys are starting to come off even worse than Apple fanboys.
Right, someone pointing out that this was a desperation move must mean they're "Microsoft astroturfers." Slashdot never changes.
What are you smoking? Android tablet marketshare isn't even out of the single digits.
Google rocked their world by being forced into buying a has-been hardware company for the cost of two years of profit after losing the Nortel patents that were only $4.5 billion?
No, Motorola completely owned Google. Google was painted into a corner and had no choice but to buy Motorola to prevent an Android civil war. I think Google fans are so desperate for any kind of good news that they're spinning anything they can to make themselves feel good about being Google fans.
It's official--Google's astroturfing shills are completely insane.
You're just parroting Dan Lyons' discredited theory of events.
Google fans keep claiming that they "faked" a $4.5 billion bid for the Nortel patents, but if you actually read the links in the submission, sources at Google told journalists that Google was very interested in the Nortel patents and didn't expect for others to team up against them.
Apple and Microsoft didn't overpay. Google is the one who paid $12.5 billion for Motorola.
"Meanwhile?" The negotiations began after the failed Nortel bid and during the period of time Motorola's CEO was publicly threatening to wage a patent war on other Android vendors. Also, Microsoft was pursuing Motorola, which was a big motivator for Google.
The "proxies" stupidity makes you look like a complete raving fanboy. Android fanboys are even more insufferably obnoxious than Apple fanboys.
Huh? They don't own the largest patent war chest at all.
No, you can tell how desperate this move was for Google after the Nortel fiasco by how loudly their fanboys are trying to convince anyone who will listen that it was some brilliant powerplay, ignoring all the accounts from inside sources as well as the fact that Motorola was publicly threatening to wage war on Android vendors during the period of time they would have been under negotiation with Google, forcing Google to buy them outright rather than simply enter into a patent licensing agreement. You can call it an "epic win" all you want, but it doesn't change the reality of the situation. Google just blew two years of profit on a has-been manufacturer, while the Nortel patents were only $4.5 billion, so I'm not even sure how you justify your theory.
I think you're the one confused by math. Their 2010 profits were about $8 billion, and their 2009 profits about $6 billion. That's where the "two years of revenue" phrase comes from.
You can play Android cheerleader if you want, but insiders are all saying this was a desperation move forced on Google by Motorola after losing the Nortel patents.
Google didn't confuse their competitors into doing anything. Sources in Google have already told other journalists that Google really did want the Nortel patents. Calling it "pure brilliance" is really stretching it, especially since $12 billion is a hell of a lot more than $4.5 billion--that's two years of revenue gone.
Again, Motorola's CEO was threatening to go after Android vendors during the time there were negotiations with Google. Motorola forced Google into buying them outright instead of simply entering a license agreement. They probably let Google know that Microsoft was interested in them. Google is in a corner when it comes to Android patents and had no choice but to go with what Motorola wanted.
There's no brilliance here. Just desperation.
Um, no they're not.
No, they are still in the advertising business, unless you somehow traveled to the theoretical future and found Google-Motorola hardware for sale.
Motorola is a has-been hardware vendor. Not to mention that producing hardware would put Google in direct competition with other Android vendors. This was about Motorola's patents.
Right, people wanting a single-window interface are just a tiny niche of users. No, wait, they're practically every graphic artist ever.
But sure, go ahead and keep things "the way GIMP users use it." All three of them.
This is completely wrong. Your comment about the plot is also ridiculous, but to claim the upgrade system is what made Deus Ex famous? Just plain wrong.
Is there COD-style health regeneration? Location-specific damage?
People don't have "fundamental software freedoms." The GPL3 is merely a copyright license, and arguably a restrictive one compared to other licenses that provide more freedom to do things with the source that are prohibited under the GPL.
This is a completely subjective conclusion. For example, one could just as easily argue that Microsoft providing a successful product has in fact served humanity, bringing an accessible, mainstream operating system platform to millions of PC users. The fact Slashdotters hate Microsoft doesn't really mean much objectively. In fact, based on your signature, you come off like a bit of an ideologue, so your post isn't surprising, but just know that your position is easily refuted.
It's getting quite tiresome how Slashdot's response to almost everything it disagrees with is to robotically label it "FUD," as if that somehow refutes the argument.
Few people seem to be discussing this, but just this month, Motorola's CEO was publicly threatening to wage patent warfare on other Android vendors. That would have been during the time they were under negotiation with Google, so I believe Motorola strong-armed Google into buying them outright for $12 billion rather than simply entering into a patent license agreement, by threatening to cause an Android civil war.
Some people were acting like buying Motorola was some great power play, but it was really an act of desperation that cost Google two years' worth of revenue.
And the groveling attitudes toward Google and its alleged betterment of society that pop up so often on Slashdot annoy me, so it's good to remind everyone now and then that Google is one of those evil megacorps Slashdot hates so much.
Especially since Microsoft was trashed for years over its use of side products to tie people to their core business.
That won't happen. Google's core business is selling targeted advertising space, and they have to justify their rates to advertisers as well as the value of the demographics being advertised to by guaranteeing that the harvested data is legitimate and that they come from real people.