If you watched the Atmosphere and I|O events, the developer machines were split about 60/40 over Mac and Ubuntu. I didn't see Windows in either event's demonstrations.
Aaaand... after reading TFA, it confirms ChromeOS and dogfooding:
Employees said it was also an effort to run the company on Google’s own products, including its forthcoming Chrome OS, which will compete with Windows. “A lot of it is an effort to run things on Google product,” the employee said. “They want to run things on Chrome.”
Well, I think they're headed to ChromeOS long-term. While this particular report may be true or not since it's based on anonymous sources, Eric Schmidt himself said that this would be Google's response during the Atmosphere event. He also indicated that they're moving toward eating their own dog food at every level, and that wasin or around a discussion of ChromeOS (I'm going from memory). I took the interview as a whole to be an indication that Google wanted to move to ChromeOS and Apps for as much of the internal stuff as it could.
There are quite a few people taking your position in this discussion so I think it's important to address it seriously, instead of slamming you with down-mods (as it appears is happening). I understand that you want to be broad-minded and fair, concerned for others' feelings. I think that's commendable, though in this case misguided.
Free speech is exactly my (or anyone's) right to say things that offend you (or anyone). Watch late-night TV in the U.S.. There are a large number of jokes made at the expense of religious and political figures: Jesus, the Pope, the President, etc. Few people get seriously upset at these jokes. The Internet is filled with hateful speech and shocking images, yet most people realize that these things are or were created by groups that don't share the same morals as those people.
Compare that to places where there is a serious limit on speech. I have lived or spent large amounts of time in Korea, China, Laos, and Thailand, all of which have serious limits to free speech. Try insulting the Thai King on a street corner and see where it gets you, legally. No one is going to lynch you: you'll just be arrested. (No, I'm not a Red Shirt -- Thaksin was at least as bad as the current gov't). I was pulled in to an interrogation room in China because the government didn't like who I had been talking to. Don't get me started on Korea and its ID laws designed to chill free speech.
Facebook is a private company. They can pull this page if they want to. I support their right to do so. It's a mistake, though, because it opens them to law suits for discrimination if they don't take a similar stand with other religious and pseudo-religious groups. It's silly to go down the road of removing anything that's offensive to anyone. Facebook could be left with no content at all.
In the US, it would be named the "Save the Children" bill, or be given some stupid acronym like "the CHARGE (Chidren Have A Right to Gain Equally) Act," even though the acronym had little to do with the bill's content and didn't even make sense, really. No senator could be seen to vote against the "Save the Children" bill, so it would pass after lots of pork got tucked in between its pages.
It's specifically this neighborhood of Austin, not all of it, and not only my apartment complex. I think I was pretty clear about that in my original post.
My cable company (Grande) is the only wired ISP allowed in my area of Austin. It's regulated that way, and it's a de jure monopoly. Clear operates, but I think that's only because the way the monopoly is granted.
There is no reading comprehension in the world, apparently. This patent is about what Google claims it was trying to do -- recording SSID and MAC information for location purposes. It has nothing to do with the "mistaken" data packets (sent unencrypted over the air). How the submitter connected the two, I don't know. I suspect lack of coffee and excess Google hate.
Bonus -- if you like LAN play, you get sued. Add Warden to the mix, and I hate Blizzard with a passion. "No onerous DRM?" Can't play on a LAN without access to your servers. Spyware monitoring your computer's memory every 15 seconds for an EULA violation. What are these? Pictures of cute little kittens?
You do realize that they didn't get caught, right? They volunteered this information. They "got caught" scanning SSIDs and MACs, but that was part of a publicly announced project which lots of people already knew about. The other (likely useless) data was collected during this project. Use the wrong (or no) filter on Kismet, and you'll have this problem, too.
As to your issue with Google Docs "privacy," I'd like to know what your problem is. There was a big deal made out of people not knowing they were publishing stuff when they clicked "Make available to others without signing in," but that's about it. Just about everyone with a brain understood what that phrase meant. Google people are smart. They weren't trying to trick anyone there. They just didn't think to look from the viewpoint of idiots who can't understand past the actual words used.
Slashdot Mirror
If you watched the Atmosphere and I|O events, the developer machines were split about 60/40 over Mac and Ubuntu. I didn't see Windows in either event's demonstrations.
Aaaand ... after reading TFA, it confirms ChromeOS and dogfooding:
Employees said it was also an effort to run the company on Google’s own products, including its forthcoming Chrome OS, which will compete with Windows. “A lot of it is an effort to run things on Google product,” the employee said. “They want to run things on Chrome.”
Well, I think they're headed to ChromeOS long-term. While this particular report may be true or not since it's based on anonymous sources, Eric Schmidt himself said that this would be Google's response during the Atmosphere event. He also indicated that they're moving toward eating their own dog food at every level, and that wasin or around a discussion of ChromeOS (I'm going from memory). I took the interview as a whole to be an indication that Google wanted to move to ChromeOS and Apps for as much of the internal stuff as it could.
Here is a report of the interview: http://news.cnet.com/8301-30684_3-20002315-265.html
"News for Nerds." How is boarding a ship nerdy?
There are quite a few people taking your position in this discussion so I think it's important to address it seriously, instead of slamming you with down-mods (as it appears is happening). I understand that you want to be broad-minded and fair, concerned for others' feelings. I think that's commendable, though in this case misguided.
Free speech is exactly my (or anyone's) right to say things that offend you (or anyone). Watch late-night TV in the U.S.. There are a large number of jokes made at the expense of religious and political figures: Jesus, the Pope, the President, etc. Few people get seriously upset at these jokes. The Internet is filled with hateful speech and shocking images, yet most people realize that these things are or were created by groups that don't share the same morals as those people.
Compare that to places where there is a serious limit on speech. I have lived or spent large amounts of time in Korea, China, Laos, and Thailand, all of which have serious limits to free speech. Try insulting the Thai King on a street corner and see where it gets you, legally. No one is going to lynch you: you'll just be arrested. (No, I'm not a Red Shirt -- Thaksin was at least as bad as the current gov't). I was pulled in to an interrogation room in China because the government didn't like who I had been talking to. Don't get me started on Korea and its ID laws designed to chill free speech.
Facebook is a private company. They can pull this page if they want to. I support their right to do so. It's a mistake, though, because it opens them to law suits for discrimination if they don't take a similar stand with other religious and pseudo-religious groups. It's silly to go down the road of removing anything that's offensive to anyone. Facebook could be left with no content at all.
Exactly. Who would have guessed that FB would choose money over free speech? Not me. I'm shocked. No, really. Quit laughing. ;)
No. Not shopped. Hanging on the rack at Home Plus.
Then they'll charge you again for about 200 bytes of info that isn't even time-sensitive (SMS).
That satire written so many years ago turned out to be prophetic, instead. How sad is that?
p.s. I saw a six-blade razor in Asia last year.
I think Twitter just came out of hiding.
Well, I can't say. I just moved to the area. I'm not the only one, though.
In the US, it would be named the "Save the Children" bill, or be given some stupid acronym like "the CHARGE (Chidren Have A Right to Gain Equally) Act," even though the acronym had little to do with the bill's content and didn't even make sense, really. No senator could be seen to vote against the "Save the Children" bill, so it would pass after lots of pork got tucked in between its pages.
It's specifically this neighborhood of Austin, not all of it, and not only my apartment complex. I think I was pretty clear about that in my original post.
I called all of them. They told me they aren't allowed to provide service here. The landlord told me the same thing when I moved in.
My cable company (Grande) is the only wired ISP allowed in my area of Austin. It's regulated that way, and it's a de jure monopoly. Clear operates, but I think that's only because the way the monopoly is granted.
i started with "Expelled," and I quickly ended the fiasco. You've got to be kidding me.
Sending ("announcing") an SSID over the airwaves is the definition of advertising its existence.
Hate Google. I don't care. Just make sure your hate doesn't lower your reading comprehension score to zero and you start sounding like Twitter. mkay?
There is no reading comprehension in the world, apparently. This patent is about what Google claims it was trying to do -- recording SSID and MAC information for location purposes. It has nothing to do with the "mistaken" data packets (sent unencrypted over the air). How the submitter connected the two, I don't know. I suspect lack of coffee and excess Google hate.
bnetd is about Starcraft. Warden is about WoW. This whole article is about Blizzard, which makes both of those titles, in addition to your Diablo II.
Bonus -- if you like LAN play, you get sued. Add Warden to the mix, and I hate Blizzard with a passion. "No onerous DRM?" Can't play on a LAN without access to your servers. Spyware monitoring your computer's memory every 15 seconds for an EULA violation. What are these? Pictures of cute little kittens?
A non-exhaustive list of ther things that are considered immoral:
The thing about morality is that it all depends on who you talk to. Ethics, on the other hand, are about agreements and honoring those agreements.
You do realize that they didn't get caught, right? They volunteered this information. They "got caught" scanning SSIDs and MACs, but that was part of a publicly announced project which lots of people already knew about. The other (likely useless) data was collected during this project. Use the wrong (or no) filter on Kismet, and you'll have this problem, too.
As to your issue with Google Docs "privacy," I'd like to know what your problem is. There was a big deal made out of people not knowing they were publishing stuff when they clicked "Make available to others without signing in," but that's about it. Just about everyone with a brain understood what that phrase meant. Google people are smart. They weren't trying to trick anyone there. They just didn't think to look from the viewpoint of idiots who can't understand past the actual words used.
So, if they admitted the oversight, tried to fix it, and audited their process so that it didn't happen again, would that be acceptable?
Ummm... We'd all start using Bing?