Well, this is ironic. Many Slashdotters defended Google's wifi snooping, whereby they collected emails, passwords, and more but received no punishment from the FTC because Google promised not to do it again (Marissa Mayer's Obama fundraiser days before had nothing to do with it, I'm sure).
But when an app snoops, it's illegal and should be removed.
If you want to beat Koreans, you need to sit in front of your computer 10 hours a day doing nothing else but playing Starcraft, like in the professional Korean burnout camps. After you beat them, you'll finally get to play!
Are there any facts in the articles that you can dispute? If not, you're playing a classic distortion tactic.
Google does, in fact, only play 2.4% corporate income tax due to tax dodging, and they did, in fact, host Obama at a Democrat fundraising event days before the FTC dismissed their privacy probe. There are multiple sources for this; the two I linked were simply at the top of the Google search results.
When Microsoft got off with a slap to the wrist from its antitrust trial verdict, it was widely regarded around here as a sign of bias from the change in administration (Clinton to Bush). Such associations between Google and the current administration, however, go strangely unacknowledged.
Because everybody has a driving need to feel really clever and witty, and writing "IMAGINE IF WE ENDED THE WARS!" makes them feel that way. It's completely obvious and predictable, but it's also easy karma on Slashdot.
3D will always be a gimmick. It has come and gone since the 1950s. It doesn't work very well on the smaller television screens of the home viewing audience, it's annoying for people who already wear glasses, and it will would feel inappropriate for serious dramas. Schindler's List in 3D?
This is Slashdot, where submitters are free to craft their own fantasy world in the space of a paragraph. Of course, when Windows Update installs IE9 on everyone's machines, reality will override fantasy.
This seems like one of the least important issues about today's programming languages. Is anyone having problems because their source code uses ASCII? The guy even suggests making color a part of the language syntax, such as marking protected regions with gray frames. The problems with these ideas (which are not original) are almost an entire article themselves. An amusing Sunday night article, but no thanks.
I didn't say Apple invented USB. I'm saying that it wasn't until the original iMac that hardware manufacturers fully embraced the standard in order to support the new Mac, which used USB ports. At the time, the standard with PCs was still a PS/2 mouse and keyboard, a parallel port for printers, and so on, so the iMac's design was very forward-thinking.
The first iMac was controversial at the time because it eschewed all previous peripheral connector types for USB ports. At the time, USB was a new standard that wasn't as widely adopted as it is today.
Like I said--another popularization of technology taken for granted.
Further, how is Firewire their preferred standard when every iPod and iPhone comes with a USB connector? Apple has always been the biggest supporter of USB. They even put extra USB ports on their keyboards and cinema displays, for crying out loud.
I'm talking about the 3.5-inch floppies that Apple was first to include in its Lisa and Macs. They were removed in the late 90s when nobody was using floppies anymore. If you're seriously arguing that 1.5MB floppies were still widely used by 2000, I don't know what to say.
Firewire was started in the mid-80s to replace parallel SCSI, nearly a decade before USB's existence. It is still the standard for data transfer between devices such as A/V equipment. Apple's been phasing it out over the years has always been a supporter of USB, adopting it in the original iMac to the exclusion of older keyboard and mouse connectors, forcing hardware manufacturers to support the new standard.
HTML5--another in a long line of standards forcefully popularized by Apple that Apple won't get credit for when everyone takes it for granted. See also: 3.5-inch floppies, USB hardware, the "File Edit View Window Help" menu layout, and more...
Boy, I sure am tired of seeing this old argument trotted out in every one of these articles. There is a reasonable expectation of privacy if you are only connecting to friends. Nobody expects the apps they're playing to be sending private information out to advertisers.
You're a sign of the change happening to posters here. Years ago, this community used to be very pro-piracy. Tor stories used to hit the front page. These days, it seems privacy only matters when it enables risk-free piracy, because it seems like the only time people get pissed off about privacy anymore is when user IPs are requested from ISPs for downloading copyrighted materials.
Do you seriously believe that the mere fact you connect to the internet means all your private information should be distributed to everybody? Does ANYBODY here remember when one of the major appeals of the internet was its anonymity? I guess Google has conditioned you into accepting that everything gets indexed, archived, and sold to advertisers. Even your emails.
It really is true--people can be trained to accept a chipping away at their individuality and their rights if it's done gradually over time.
It's completely logical and obvious that a druggie who is rich is more likely to survive than a druggie who is not. Ozzy's big vice, especially in the 80s, was alcohol, but unlike most alcoholics, he could afford to be one and afford the treatment to become sober.
People are apparently attaching themselves to the cute idea that Ozzy is genetically special because he survived his drug abuse. I don't know if you've seen him, but he has clearly suffered long-term effects that would hamper the lives of non-celebrities.
Sharon Osbourne, his wife and manager, is a very, very shrewd business person. She's the kind of person who actually re-recorded drum and bass tracks on Ozzy's early solo albums in order to avoid paying those musicians. This, like everything else about Ozzy, is a publicity stunt to get people talking about Ozzy and buy his recent album and his autobiography. He's not some mutant superhuman.
Other people who put shit in their bodies for decades end up on the street. Not only is Ozzy rich, his wife is also his manager, so he has a babysitter and a record label who will always make sure he's taken care of.
Ozzy, this isn't hard to figure out. You're alive because you're rich. You can afford a comfortable lifestyle as well as medical treatment when you need it.
Now, please stop fighting with Iommi and make another Black Sabbath album already.
The thing is, I'd rather have rampant conservatism than liberalism, because liberalism entails a large government with expanded scope in order to push the agenda, and it's very difficult to fight against a government power once it's been established.
It's not like they where planning to keep this data and profit by re-selling it to marketeers
How do you know what Google was planning to do?
- Even if Google did got punished, this won't suddenly make the clueless users less vulnerable to anyone with bad intentions.
But it would discourage other more malicious parties from accessing networks for nefarious purposes, such as selling it to marketeers.
Google we're talking about. They should receive some kind of punishment for "accidentally" collecting that data in the first place. That's a mistake that shouldn't be made and should be publicly discouraged due to the dangers for abuse. Blaming clueless users isn't a valid response, because leaving your door unlocked doesn't mean it's okay for a stranger to enter your house.
Slashdot Mirror
Google could start by protecting customers from Google.
Well, this is ironic. Many Slashdotters defended Google's wifi snooping, whereby they collected emails, passwords, and more but received no punishment from the FTC because Google promised not to do it again (Marissa Mayer's Obama fundraiser days before had nothing to do with it, I'm sure).
But when an app snoops, it's illegal and should be removed.
If you want to beat Koreans, you need to sit in front of your computer 10 hours a day doing nothing else but playing Starcraft, like in the professional Korean burnout camps. After you beat them, you'll finally get to play!
Are there any facts in the articles that you can dispute? If not, you're playing a classic distortion tactic.
Google does, in fact, only play 2.4% corporate income tax due to tax dodging, and they did, in fact, host Obama at a Democrat fundraising event days before the FTC dismissed their privacy probe. There are multiple sources for this; the two I linked were simply at the top of the Google search results.
When Microsoft got off with a slap to the wrist from its antitrust trial verdict, it was widely regarded around here as a sign of bias from the change in administration (Clinton to Bush). Such associations between Google and the current administration, however, go strangely unacknowledged.
It's no wonder you posted anonymously.
Because everybody has a driving need to feel really clever and witty, and writing "IMAGINE IF WE ENDED THE WARS!" makes them feel that way. It's completely obvious and predictable, but it's also easy karma on Slashdot.
Didn't you hear? Obama officially ended combat operations! Our troops who are still fighting over there are just, uh, hanging out or something.
Google is betting on its own corruption and greed canceling out Microsoft's.
Speaking of bias, what about the FTC ending their privacy probe into Google just days after Google execs hosted an Obama fundraiser, which also happened on the same day that it was reported that Google dodges enough taxes to only pay a 2.4% corporate income tax, the lowest of its technology peers? I guess Google wants to pretend only Microsoft gets preferential treatment.
You're basing a conclusion about all users on some guy's lack of Facebook replies from "around 20 people" in a Starbucks.
Users care. They're often simply not informed enough to know their privacy is being violated.
3D will always be a gimmick. It has come and gone since the 1950s. It doesn't work very well on the smaller television screens of the home viewing audience, it's annoying for people who already wear glasses, and it will would feel inappropriate for serious dramas. Schindler's List in 3D?
This is Slashdot, where submitters are free to craft their own fantasy world in the space of a paragraph. Of course, when Windows Update installs IE9 on everyone's machines, reality will override fantasy.
This seems like one of the least important issues about today's programming languages. Is anyone having problems because their source code uses ASCII? The guy even suggests making color a part of the language syntax, such as marking protected regions with gray frames. The problems with these ideas (which are not original) are almost an entire article themselves. An amusing Sunday night article, but no thanks.
Isn't it great that there are people trying to create an app platform out of this shit?
I didn't say Apple invented USB. I'm saying that it wasn't until the original iMac that hardware manufacturers fully embraced the standard in order to support the new Mac, which used USB ports. At the time, the standard with PCs was still a PS/2 mouse and keyboard, a parallel port for printers, and so on, so the iMac's design was very forward-thinking.
The first iMac was controversial at the time because it eschewed all previous peripheral connector types for USB ports. At the time, USB was a new standard that wasn't as widely adopted as it is today.
Like I said--another popularization of technology taken for granted.
Further, how is Firewire their preferred standard when every iPod and iPhone comes with a USB connector? Apple has always been the biggest supporter of USB. They even put extra USB ports on their keyboards and cinema displays, for crying out loud.
I'm talking about the 3.5-inch floppies that Apple was first to include in its Lisa and Macs. They were removed in the late 90s when nobody was using floppies anymore. If you're seriously arguing that 1.5MB floppies were still widely used by 2000, I don't know what to say.
Firewire was started in the mid-80s to replace parallel SCSI, nearly a decade before USB's existence. It is still the standard for data transfer between devices such as A/V equipment. Apple's been phasing it out over the years has always been a supporter of USB, adopting it in the original iMac to the exclusion of older keyboard and mouse connectors, forcing hardware manufacturers to support the new standard.
HTML5--another in a long line of standards forcefully popularized by Apple that Apple won't get credit for when everyone takes it for granted. See also: 3.5-inch floppies, USB hardware, the "File Edit View Window Help" menu layout, and more...
Boy, I sure am tired of seeing this old argument trotted out in every one of these articles. There is a reasonable expectation of privacy if you are only connecting to friends. Nobody expects the apps they're playing to be sending private information out to advertisers.
You're a sign of the change happening to posters here. Years ago, this community used to be very pro-piracy. Tor stories used to hit the front page. These days, it seems privacy only matters when it enables risk-free piracy, because it seems like the only time people get pissed off about privacy anymore is when user IPs are requested from ISPs for downloading copyrighted materials.
Do you seriously believe that the mere fact you connect to the internet means all your private information should be distributed to everybody? Does ANYBODY here remember when one of the major appeals of the internet was its anonymity? I guess Google has conditioned you into accepting that everything gets indexed, archived, and sold to advertisers. Even your emails.
It really is true--people can be trained to accept a chipping away at their individuality and their rights if it's done gradually over time.
It's completely logical and obvious that a druggie who is rich is more likely to survive than a druggie who is not. Ozzy's big vice, especially in the 80s, was alcohol, but unlike most alcoholics, he could afford to be one and afford the treatment to become sober.
People are apparently attaching themselves to the cute idea that Ozzy is genetically special because he survived his drug abuse. I don't know if you've seen him, but he has clearly suffered long-term effects that would hamper the lives of non-celebrities.
Sharon Osbourne, his wife and manager, is a very, very shrewd business person. She's the kind of person who actually re-recorded drum and bass tracks on Ozzy's early solo albums in order to avoid paying those musicians. This, like everything else about Ozzy, is a publicity stunt to get people talking about Ozzy and buy his recent album and his autobiography. He's not some mutant superhuman.
Other people who put shit in their bodies for decades end up on the street. Not only is Ozzy rich, his wife is also his manager, so he has a babysitter and a record label who will always make sure he's taken care of.
Ozzy, this isn't hard to figure out. You're alive because you're rich. You can afford a comfortable lifestyle as well as medical treatment when you need it.
Now, please stop fighting with Iommi and make another Black Sabbath album already.
The thing is, I'd rather have rampant conservatism than liberalism, because liberalism entails a large government with expanded scope in order to push the agenda, and it's very difficult to fight against a government power once it's been established.
How do you know what Google was planning to do?
But it would discourage other more malicious parties from accessing networks for nefarious purposes, such as selling it to marketeers.
Google we're talking about. They should receive some kind of punishment for "accidentally" collecting that data in the first place. That's a mistake that shouldn't be made and should be publicly discouraged due to the dangers for abuse. Blaming clueless users isn't a valid response, because leaving your door unlocked doesn't mean it's okay for a stranger to enter your house.