Why does chrome on windows phone home so often? I doubt that it is to check for updates, Once a day should be more than enough for that.
Now that google is integrating all their services, what happens to the safebrowsing info that they must be collecting. Guess it goes into the pot too.
looking at harm alone is one-sided. We use software for a reason. Where there is only a closed source version then you have to consider whether the benefits outweigh the harm it might (or will, if you're paranoid) inflict. esr does concede this point in passing but the tone of the article, focusing on harm, probably get more headlines.
Unfortunately, some open source projects suck, and if the only quality solution for a particular requirement is closed source then you decide based on the perceived cost / benefit. I've contributed to a couple of OS projects that had the potential to fill a need I had. Eventually I ended up using a commercial solution because its cost was a bargain compared to the amount of time I was sinking into what was starting to look like a bottomless pit. I didn't particularly want to do this, but it ended up being the best way forward.
So where's the harm in making this decision? I seriously doubt that some arbitrary developer is going to jeopardize a commercial relationship by infecting their own software with nasty stuff. If anything, given recent events, this is more likely with open source projects. But I don't have the source code, so I guess the world is going to end.
I'll be glad to switch if something better comes along, but as those projects were not itches that I need to scratch,I'm happy to support someone who want payment for their efforts.
Google has a very simple mission. They want to know what you and your IP are doing. That's all. Give them that, and they own you and your activity on the internets.
To get at this simple little piece of info, web sites get cool stuff like googleanalytics (info already available via other tools). You say "Nice". Google says thank you very much for your kind words, we do this because we want to give back to the community. Yeah right.
Users get to use cool stuff like gmail (unfortunately very good, but lots of alternatives), and all the other freebies, search and all the rest. All brought together under that simple little cookie at google.com. Google: "we love building cool stuff. We call it giving back."
The real killer for me, the one that almost makes me wonder about mozilla and the supposed superstar salaries some of them get paid, is that firefox's "safebrowsing" is driven by... yep, go take a look for yourself.
What do they say about hiring the fox to guard the chicken coop? Every request you put out gets checked out before you get there - Is it really safe for this dumb schmuck to go there?
Have you ever tried to disable safebrowsing? Are you mad?!
I could start getting paranoid about all of this, but actually I'm a trusting sort of person, after all, these are the guys that promised to do no evil.
>...and provides further evidence or rapid change in the region.
Not everyone agrees. For another spin on this event take a look at
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Wilkins_Ice_Shelf_con.pdf
which suggests that the evidence for rapid climate change in this area is missing and suggests that, at best, hyperbole is involved.
I don't know if the current version of Chrome still does this but the first beta of Chrome installed a windows service that checked for updates very frequently - whether you were running their browser or not.
I would have thought that checking for an update once a day would be sufficient to keep most people up to date. Their updater was checking once an hour or so - google must be one of the few companies making sure that they have a system that will handle 4x software updates made on the same day.
imo google uses the updater as a ping that tracks your IP. Couple that with the info they collect from "safebrowsing", search and their analytics and they have it all.
Updater - yeah right.
Needless to say, chrome is history.
verily, i say unto ye, i am going into that den of iniquity, the lair of the unbeliever (spit) to spread the word of our lord amongst the heathen, and the forsaken.
it matter not that they do not speak the language of the lord's fervent followers.and that to them it soundeth like binary gobbledeegook. (slobber) Surely from my demeanour and the large size and shape of my head they will surely recognize that here is a righteous man, a follower of the true way, (spittle) with much holy and important word of the ways of truth. And, surely, they will stop what they do, and learn our language at once, so that they to can hear and understand the way towards righteousness.(wipe foam)
tomorrow we can deal with world peace, starting with the middle east. Should be done by lunchtime don't you think?
Slashdot Mirror
Why does chrome on windows phone home so often? I doubt that it is to check for updates, Once a day should be more than enough for that. Now that google is integrating all their services, what happens to the safebrowsing info that they must be collecting. Guess it goes into the pot too.
looking at harm alone is one-sided. We use software for a reason. Where there is only a closed source version then you have to consider whether the benefits outweigh the harm it might (or will, if you're paranoid) inflict. esr does concede this point in passing but the tone of the article, focusing on harm, probably get more headlines.
Unfortunately, some open source projects suck, and if the only quality solution for a particular requirement is closed source then you decide based on the perceived cost / benefit. I've contributed to a couple of OS projects that had the potential to fill a need I had. Eventually I ended up using a commercial solution because its cost was a bargain compared to the amount of time I was sinking into what was starting to look like a bottomless pit. I didn't particularly want to do this, but it ended up being the best way forward.
So where's the harm in making this decision? I seriously doubt that some arbitrary developer is going to jeopardize a commercial relationship by infecting their own software with nasty stuff. If anything, given recent events, this is more likely with open source projects. But I don't have the source code, so I guess the world is going to end.
I'll be glad to switch if something better comes along, but as those projects were not itches that I need to scratch,I'm happy to support someone who want payment for their efforts.
Google has a very simple mission. They want to know what you and your IP are doing. That's all. Give them that, and they own you and your activity on the internets.
To get at this simple little piece of info, web sites get cool stuff like googleanalytics (info already available via other tools). You say "Nice". Google says thank you very much for your kind words, we do this because we want to give back to the community. Yeah right.
Users get to use cool stuff like gmail (unfortunately very good, but lots of alternatives), and all the other freebies, search and all the rest. All brought together under that simple little cookie at google.com. Google: "we love building cool stuff. We call it giving back."
The real killer for me, the one that almost makes me wonder about mozilla and the supposed superstar salaries some of them get paid, is that firefox's "safebrowsing" is driven by ... yep, go take a look for yourself.
What do they say about hiring the fox to guard the chicken coop? Every request you put out gets checked out before you get there - Is it really safe for this dumb schmuck to go there?
Have you ever tried to disable safebrowsing? Are you mad?!
I could start getting paranoid about all of this, but actually I'm a trusting sort of person, after all, these are the guys that promised to do no evil.
>...and provides further evidence or rapid change in the region. Not everyone agrees. For another spin on this event take a look at http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Wilkins_Ice_Shelf_con.pdf which suggests that the evidence for rapid climate change in this area is missing and suggests that, at best, hyperbole is involved.
I don't know if the current version of Chrome still does this but the first beta of Chrome installed a windows service that checked for updates very frequently - whether you were running their browser or not. I would have thought that checking for an update once a day would be sufficient to keep most people up to date. Their updater was checking once an hour or so - google must be one of the few companies making sure that they have a system that will handle 4x software updates made on the same day. imo google uses the updater as a ping that tracks your IP. Couple that with the info they collect from "safebrowsing", search and their analytics and they have it all. Updater - yeah right. Needless to say, chrome is history.
Google administering phishing is like the fox fixing the leak in the hen house roof
Dear Agnes
I don't know whether I should breathe through my nose or through my mouth. Please help.
breathless
Dear breathless,
it all depends, are you walking or running?
yours,
Agnes
verily, i say unto ye, i am going into that den of iniquity, the lair of the unbeliever (spit) to spread the word of our lord amongst the heathen, and the forsaken.
it matter not that they do not speak the language of the lord's fervent followers.and that to them it soundeth like binary gobbledeegook. (slobber) Surely from my demeanour and the large size and shape of my head they will surely recognize that here is a righteous man, a follower of the true way, (spittle) with much holy and important word of the ways of truth. And, surely, they will stop what they do, and learn our language at once, so that they to can hear and understand the way towards righteousness.(wipe foam)
tomorrow we can deal with world peace, starting with the middle east. Should be done by lunchtime don't you think?
slobber slobber