NoScript's AdBlock-blocking trick was kinda dirty, but I don't see them as being hypocritical for allowing their own ads given the tremendous service(which increases safety while speeding up browsing) they provide for free.
This is pure idiocy. What about all the sites out there that provide tremendous services for free, but have their ads blocked? You are nothing but a hypocrite.
There's no rational economic rationale for expensive television advertising a software product for which you charge no money.
Google charges no money for their search engine. Does that mean that they aren't making money from it? Of course not.
Currently, Google either gets none of the search revenue through a broswser (Microsoft gets it all in IE), or not all of it (they have to share with Opera and Mozilla). With Chrome, they keep all the search revenue.
So Firefox is falling far behind Chrome because Chrome almost has extensions, almost GreaseMonkey support, uses WebKit, and has a privacy mode which Firefox will also have shortly? Interesting logic there...
WebKit is not an "individualized web toolkit". It's a browser engine Google borrowed from Apple.
By the way, the one process per tab thing in Chrome, now THAT'S a memory hog.
And you're welcome to call it Faux News all you want to. Get off your high horse and realize that as much as you don't like this or that media outlet, they all have offices filled with people who spin stories one way or another.
No one is more actively spreading blatant lies than Faux News. They aren't even TRYING to be accurate.
Re:The problem that Star Trek faces is simple
on
Reviews: Star Trek
·
· Score: 1
The problem Star Trek faces? What problem? There's a problem just because you don't like it? There's no audience except for you?
Remember, though, that the first, ridiculous incarnation of the iPhone didn't even have 3G which is a laughable omission for a supposedly hi-tech company
BTW I still stand behind the principle that having IE with Windows is not anti-competative. If that were the case then Red Hat, Apple OS, and others would be anti-competative for having an browser pre-installed in their systems.
According to Swedish law, the notification need not have any special format, nor contain any references to Swedish law
Really! So you are saying that the DMCA applies in Sweden? Wow.
Finally, they have gone on record to say that the purpose of TPB was to infringe copyright.
You'll need to come up with a source for that claim.
Linking to infringing material is ok, as long as you cooperate with rights holders.
BS. Private entities have no authority. If they want cooperation, they should report it to the police, who will then get a court order, which TPB will comply with. But private companies have no legal authority.
Google complies with takedown notices, which grants them freedom from liability according to Swedish law (18 para 2002:562). TPB... oh wait.
AFAIK, TPB will take down content if served with a Swedish court order. DMCA notices are obviously complete idiocy, and only jingoist American morons would think that a DMCA claim has any merit in other countries.
#1 is irrelevant. #2 is baseless speculation. #3 is irrelevant as well, and TPB would honor Swedish court orders to take down content. But DMCAs are obviously useless, which is why the TPB guys are making fun of idiot American companies who think US law has any value in the rest of the world. So your entire argument is basically BS.
Ultimately the IFPI said that Google is working with them to stop piracy.
That sucks. When did the IFPI turn into a governemnt law enforcement agency? The only right thing to do is to refuse to cooperate unless there is a court order. But I guess Google is too afraid of being sued to stand its ground.
TPB admins were notified that some of the torrents they link to are used to distribute content in violation of copyright; in some cases, repeatedly. In all such cases, they refused to look further into it, much less take down the torrents.
As they should. The TPB guys don't have the time to spy on their own users. And DMCA has no effect in Sweden, so no wonder they made fun of idiot Americans who thought it would help. Serving them with a Swedish court order would get them to take down content, though. As with all carriers.
On the other hand, TPB is used mostly (almost exclusively I'd say) to exchange music and videos illegally. There are methods in place to remove illegal material, but for every torrent you remove ten more rise in its place. No-one should be able to say "TPB was designed to facilitate legal file-sharing" without adding "...but in reality it's just a site to get movies and music for free".
This is just a bunch of BS.
Whatever your views, this ruling (unless successfully appealed) has just set a huge precident for future court cases.
Nope. It has been appealed to higher courts. As such, no precedent.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, because ALL webmasters did that.
You don't represent everyone else. Some people just want the ANNOYING ads blocked.
This is pure idiocy. What about all the sites out there that provide tremendous services for free, but have their ads blocked? You are nothing but a hypocrite.
Uh, no, Chrome has less than 2% of the browser market. They want more users.
Actually, Mozilla has tons of cash.
Chrome's one process per tab thing will ensure high memory usage, then.
Google charges no money for their search engine. Does that mean that they aren't making money from it? Of course not.
Currently, Google either gets none of the search revenue through a broswser (Microsoft gets it all in IE), or not all of it (they have to share with Opera and Mozilla). With Chrome, they keep all the search revenue.
WebKit is not an "individualized web toolkit". It's a browser engine Google borrowed from Apple.
By the way, the one process per tab thing in Chrome, now THAT'S a memory hog.
No one is more actively spreading blatant lies than Faux News. They aren't even TRYING to be accurate.
Your comment just doesn't make sense.
And yet it became a huge success.
So they have live rounds available 24/7?
GFY with your ignorant redneck nonsense.
What Intel is being charged for is illegal in the US as well, dumbass. Nothing to do with being successful. Everything to do with breaking the law.
Read this, you fucking ignorant moron.
And the wife/girlfriend?
Neither Red Hat nor Apple is a monopolist.
How, specifically?
Really! So you are saying that the DMCA applies in Sweden? Wow.
You'll need to come up with a source for that claim.
BS. Private entities have no authority. If they want cooperation, they should report it to the police, who will then get a court order, which TPB will comply with. But private companies have no legal authority.
AFAIK, TPB will take down content if served with a Swedish court order. DMCA notices are obviously complete idiocy, and only jingoist American morons would think that a DMCA claim has any merit in other countries.
#1 is irrelevant. #2 is baseless speculation. #3 is irrelevant as well, and TPB would honor Swedish court orders to take down content. But DMCAs are obviously useless, which is why the TPB guys are making fun of idiot American companies who think US law has any value in the rest of the world. So your entire argument is basically BS.
That sucks. When did the IFPI turn into a governemnt law enforcement agency? The only right thing to do is to refuse to cooperate unless there is a court order. But I guess Google is too afraid of being sued to stand its ground.
As they should. The TPB guys don't have the time to spy on their own users. And DMCA has no effect in Sweden, so no wonder they made fun of idiot Americans who thought it would help. Serving them with a Swedish court order would get them to take down content, though. As with all carriers.
They would have. On request from Swedish courts. DMCA does not apply in Sweden.
They admitted to no such thing.
On the other hand, Google links DIRECTLY to copyright-protected content like images, text, audio, etc.
As does Google in that case.
This is just a bunch of BS.
Nope. It has been appealed to higher courts. As such, no precedent.