When you are logged into a google account (like GMAIL) and if you open Google News (same/different tab/window), you are shown 'Customized News'.
For me it is very annoying. I dont want Google to 'Customize News' based on my previous browsing history or whatever algorithms have thrown up. Google or for that matter any organization should not dictate what I should read. And I dont like Google keeping track of news/stories/websites I read and connect that to my Google Account.
There is an option to switch to Standardised News, but that means another hit on the server.
Then don't use it. Is that so hard?
Sigh! When did common sense go way? Oh, wait.... never mind....
I'm an Apple fan. I have a powerbook, two mac minis, and I was thinking about buying a powermac G5. But I sure as hell don't support any usage of the DMCA.
Attacking people who express their First Amendment rights (and since these sites are being shut down by the DCMA I assume they're in the US) to tell other people what they've found out about a product they OWN, on the basis of their business model, is fucking violation of civil rights. It's not 'hack unfriendly'.
Sigh! When will people get a clue? The First Amendment rights apply to the government restricting speech, not a company. Civil rights? I won't even go into this. It is too far away to be broached.
qz law: the first one who mentions First Amendment rights in a context not involving the US government loses the thread.
SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Two busy Web sites that focus on Apple Computer Inc.'s Mac OS X operating system went silent Friday just days after they featured links to information on how to hack the software and run it on non-Apple PCs.
Hacking the software to make it run could fall under the DMCA. I'm not saying it does but it could.
Seems every few months we get a story about a wonder just a few years down the road. Most never get here, and none on the original optimistic schedule.
I'll be shipping wire recorders next month. Honest! With REAL tube amps.
That's not to say that you can't have root-like privs -- the default first user on a Mac is an "Administrator," which just means that they can sudo -s and become root temporarily. However to do this you have to authenticate for every action. (Or every 5 minutes or so.)
Nope. Once you sudo -s to a root shell it is yours forever and ever. You are thinking of sudo a_command. There is the timer on that method.
He mused that after the experience of the concentration camps, coping with the problems of business or life was a piece of cake by comparison. His own hoary version of "if it doesn't kill you, it will make you."
But if ISPs are allowed to start charging customers based upon packet type (or degrading service based upon the same criteria) odds are you'll never see it.
But I would definitely hear about it from the media and all over everywhere. It is all about advertising. They will want everyone to know.
Yahoo's survey said that users who sign up for the rewards program would be required to do most of their searching with the company. The program may require users to register, so the company can track usage, or use a Yahoo rewards toolbar.
Not worth it. Let them track someone else. Then the next time the subpoena wagon rolls through town they can hang them, not me.
Some mock attacks were aimed at causing a "significant cyber disruption" that could seriously damage energy, transportation and health care industries and undermine public confidence, said George Foresman, an undersecretary at the Homeland Security Department.
Then why are they on the pulic internet amd not their own private one? I guess cost is one factor.
I have heard for years about the "Digital Divide" that separates those with computer/internet access and those without. To offer multi level internet access would actually physically impose such a divide and make the internet a place for wealthy elitists. The low end internet would get worse and worse as companies wouldn't want to advertise to the people that don't have enough cash to get the higher level internet in the first place, thus you would get less content.
This division intriques me. I would like to subscribe to your....
A K5 joke.
Anyway, this does bring up an interesting question. What would the less content be? I don't want movies on demand. Yeah, like I can have them anyway with todays bandwidth. I can carry more bandwidth in my truck (a round trip to Blockbuster in about 15 minutes) than I can on my DSL. Plus I don't want to watch movies on my 'puter. That is why I have a TV.
So how would they seperate the content for more bux? I read news and do mostly email on teh intarweb. What can they offer me that will make me pay for their services?
iraq. the voting is polarising along religious lines, into three main groups. the entire country is fracturing into chaos, ripe for being plucked and whipped up by religious fanatics ["ahh things were better in the old days even dare i say it better with saddam around: let's go kill some americans, it must be their fault: if you die you will go to heaven, my poor downtrodden son"].
So often I've seen people on slashdot saying how inevitable it is that google will be evil since it has to at the end of the day make money for shareholders. While that is true, it does have to make money for shareholders, the fact that 'Do no evil' is in the google charter does ensure that it doesn't have to choose evil if given a choice between evil with profits or good with losses.
I dunno about this. I don't know if a google charter trumps the law.
Chris Smith, New Jersey Republican and chairman of the House human-rights subcommittee that is holding the hearing, tells the Wall Street Journal, 'I was asked the question the other day, do U.S. corporations have the obligation to promote democracy? That's the wrong question. It would be great if they would promote democracy. But they do have a moral imperative and a duty not to promote dictatorship.'
Corporations have only one goal - to make money for themselves or their shareholders. They have no "moral imperative and a duty not to promote dictatorship".
One last point: no where in the article could I find what OS was actually being used. Are you presuming it was Windows or did you see some text I missed?
TFA kind of infers it:
As the world waited for one computer virus to strike on Friday, another wriggled its way into the Russian stock exchange and knocked it offline.
Computer experts had warned that 3 February could bring gloom for many as a computer virus called Nyxem was scheduled to start deleting files on machines it had infected.
Nyxem is programmed to randomly delete Word, Excel and PowerPoint documents as well as pdf files, zip files and several other file types. The virus was released several weeks ago and has spread by forwarding itself to email addresses found on the computers it infects.
But widespread damage failed to materialise and by early evening UK time on Friday several anti-virus companies said they had received no reports of incidents involving Nyxem. Patches against the virus had been released on 16 January.
But a collective sigh of relief was tempered by news that the Russian stock exchange has been subjected to an attack instigated by an unnamed, and apparently unrelated, computer pest.
Slashdot Mirror
Goodwins' law. BZZZZT! Game over.
qz
So for all the people saying "blame China, not Google," now do we blame Google or the USA?
Nice catch.
qz
There is an option to switch to Standardised News, but that means another hit on the server.
Then don't use it. Is that so hard?
Sigh! When did common sense go way? Oh, wait.... never mind....
qz
He has a clue.
qz
You already have.
qz
Sigh! When will people get a clue? The First Amendment rights apply to the government restricting speech, not a company. Civil rights? I won't even go into this. It is too far away to be broached.
qz law: the first one who mentions First Amendment rights in a context not involving the US government loses the thread.
qz
SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Two busy Web sites that focus on Apple Computer Inc.'s Mac OS X operating system went silent Friday just days after they featured links to information on how to hack the software and run it on non-Apple PCs.
Hacking the software to make it run could fall under the DMCA. I'm not saying it does but it could.
qz
I'll be shipping wire recorders next month. Honest! With REAL tube amps.
qz
Nope. Once you sudo -s to a root shell it is yours forever and ever. You are thinking of sudo a_command. There is the timer on that method.
qz
I am over 18 and stated so in the link you posted but it won't let me in. It just loops.
Is google censoring cane toads now?
So can you break copyright and let us see it?
Kinda tongue in cheek but the link won't let me in.
qz
But we all know Jack Tramiel bought into Atari after Commodore ousted him.
We all know how that turned out.
Anyway, his philosophy in business was interesting.
He mused that after the experience of the concentration camps, coping with the problems of business or life was a piece of cake by comparison. His own hoary version of "if it doesn't kill you, it will make you."
qz
Mine was the PET 2001 with the chicklet keys and whopping speedy mass storage device known as a cassette tape.
Still have it and it still works.
Ready.
qz
Yup! That would work for my mother.
qz
But I would definitely hear about it from the media and all over everywhere. It is all about advertising. They will want everyone to know.
We WILL know about it. Rest assured of that. ;)
qz
Not worth it. Let them track someone else. Then the next time the subpoena wagon rolls through town they can hang them, not me.
qz
There is equal. There is better. There is no equally better.
qz
Some mock attacks were aimed at causing a "significant cyber disruption" that could seriously damage energy, transportation and health care industries and undermine public confidence, said George Foresman, an undersecretary at the Homeland Security Department.
Then why are they on the pulic internet amd not their own private one? I guess cost is one factor.
qz
Nice post. Uhm, for a monkey, I mean. ;)
qz
This division intriques me. I would like to subscribe to your....
A K5 joke.
Anyway, this does bring up an interesting question. What would the less content be? I don't want movies on demand. Yeah, like I can have them anyway with todays bandwidth. I can carry more bandwidth in my truck (a round trip to Blockbuster in about 15 minutes) than I can on my DSL. Plus I don't want to watch movies on my 'puter. That is why I have a TV.
So how would they seperate the content for more bux? I read news and do mostly email on teh intarweb. What can they offer me that will make me pay for their services?
qz
I'm guessing you don't know the word sarcasm or I was being to subtle.
qz
Don't forget the virgins. I want those virgins!
qz
Thank you for your reply. I find your ideas intriquing. May I subscribe to your newsletter? If it is not illegal in the US I want to be a part of it.
qz
I dunno about this. I don't know if a google charter trumps the law.
qz
Chris Smith, New Jersey Republican and chairman of the House human-rights subcommittee that is holding the hearing, tells the Wall Street Journal, 'I was asked the question the other day, do U.S. corporations have the obligation to promote democracy? That's the wrong question. It would be great if they would promote democracy. But they do have a moral imperative and a duty not to promote dictatorship.'
Corporations have only one goal - to make money for themselves or their shareholders. They have no "moral imperative and a duty not to promote dictatorship".
They have one goal - profit.
Please, let's keep morals out of business.
qz
TFA kind of infers it:
As the world waited for one computer virus to strike on Friday, another wriggled its way into the Russian stock exchange and knocked it offline.
Computer experts had warned that 3 February could bring gloom for many as a computer virus called Nyxem was scheduled to start deleting files on machines it had infected.
Nyxem is programmed to randomly delete Word, Excel and PowerPoint documents as well as pdf files, zip files and several other file types. The virus was released several weeks ago and has spread by forwarding itself to email addresses found on the computers it infects.
But widespread damage failed to materialise and by early evening UK time on Friday several anti-virus companies said they had received no reports of incidents involving Nyxem. Patches against the virus had been released on 16 January.
But a collective sigh of relief was tempered by news that the Russian stock exchange has been subjected to an attack instigated by an unnamed, and apparently unrelated, computer pest.
qz