Sony and Microsoft already have it. Or are you asking if they should be allowed to collect or buy the data in the first place? Either way, I think they should be allowed to use.
Ideally, their use of the data would come with some conditions. For example, I wish they had to disclose what data they have about me, where they got it, and who they have shared it with. It should also be possible to ask them to delete the data. I don't think it's in my best interests though for companies to be heavily regulated in the way the EU seems to be going. That's just my opinion though.
If you aren't paying for the product, then you are the product.
How is what Google is doing any different from any other ad supported business? I can watch all kinds of TV without paying because advertisers are footing the bill. I go to a baseball game, my ticket is subsidized by omnipresent ads. I can subscribe to lots of magazines for free because of advertisers. Come to think of it, neither you nor I are paying to post on Slashdot either. Is all of this dishonest?
I'd be a lot more sympathetic if Google had a monopoly or if the barriers to entry for competitors was much higher. The truth is, Google could collapse as quickly as it rose.
Google licenses Android for free, because they get paid in different ways and have a strategy that stretches beyond next quarter. They don't have any kind of monopoly in any of their businesses, so the comparison with MSFT of the 90's isn't a great comparison.
It's a little like Mozilla giving Firefox away for free because they get paid in different ways. Should they be stopped because others who want to charge money for the browser can't figure out a way to compete?
Software and process patents are just a way to funnel money from innovators to lawyers.
You have the right answer. Nobody seems to think about the greater good any more. Large corporations and governments already have access to all of this data. Google is just making it available for regular people in an incredibly useful way. It's perfectly valid to have problems with this, but don't ignore the benefits as well.
I think you are right. Sony doesn't have the design or engineering talent to create something truly innovative. Even if they did and were able to come up with something truly revolutionary, there is no way it would be allowed to succeed. Sony, more than just about any other company, is frozen by the innovator's dilemma.
Exactly right. Their calculations include things like opportunity costs. Sony is especially bad in that they believe that anybody making money on their platform should be sending Sony a cut.
Will they abandon browser based streaming and just start writing closed source apps that gives them a greater degree of control than ever before? Probably.
Don't listen to anybody who tells you a tablet will replace your desktop. What I keep saying is that there is a very large segment of the PC owning public for whom an iPad is a much better computer. These people bought PC's because that was their only choice. Now that the iPad exists. they will switch to the computer that they have been waiting for. So, in a sense, a tablet is a PC replacement for these people but the reality is that they never wanted a PC in the first place.
The MacBook Air has turned into a pretty awesome machine. If I were to buy something today, that would probably be what I get.
Secondly, Apple has a huge advantage from a design point of view because they control the entire iPad experience. It's going to be extremely difficult for Microsoft to develop software and for different OEMs to build hardware and end up with a coherent ecosystem like Apple has created. Mostly this is because, Microsoft no longer has the best developers (and never had the design talent) and none of the announced tablet manufacturers have the money or engineers that Apple has.
I don't actually own a netbook or iPad, although others in my family do. Like you, a laptop and desktop work better for me.
I don't think the tablet is a laptop replacement, nor is a laptop a good tablet replacement. Lots of people were buying netbooks and other low end laptops because that's all that was available. What they really wanted (even if they didn't know it at the time) was a tablet and when a decent one finally came around, it became a best seller and left the low end of the mobile PC market in a bit of a shambles.
Stop thinking of them as laptop replacements, because that's not what they are.
Wow, rarely has there been a post that I disagree with more.
Right now, the tablet market is iPad and people who have them, mostly love them. The iPad is wreaking havoc on the low end PC market and they are still selling more iPads quarter after quarter. Apple is rumored to be dumping part of their desktop line up. There's no indication that the tablet line up is going anywhere.
after you buy one and try to use it you find that you're better off using your smart phone or your netbook
If this were true, I think you would be seeing a resurgence in netbook sales. The reality is that sales are way down and are stagnant. I think a lot of Slashdotters are really out of touch with how normal people use computers.
There are many other tablets out there that are technically equivalent or superior to Apple's tablets, but nobody wants to use them
Technically equivalent or superior? You must be measuring by clock cycle or memory size. I don't know of any tablet that even comes close to the iPad in areas that matter like build quality, battery life, and software. Apple has figured out that saying no to a feature is a bolder move than adding yet another switch or option and their product is subjectively better for it.
Contrast this to the uptake of useful devices like PCs, laptops, netbooks, PDAs and smart phones. People actually wanted to use these... these devices have had staying power
How's that PDA working for you? Netbook sales are way down from their peak and not recovering. And who wants to use their PC? That's their work machine. The iPad is their play machine.
Talk to people who compete in the low end PC market. The iPad has them terrified. It's a huge part of what spurred Apotheker to conclude that the PC business is dead. And have you seen Windows 8? That has me thinking that Microsoft is also turning away from the desktop market. It almost seems like they are splitting Windows into server and tablet versions.
My problem with credit unions is finding one that doesn't have very high fees for foreign currency transactions. I have relatives in Canada that send my kids birthday checks from Canadian banks and the three or four credit unions in my part of the city all have either very high fees or won't cash the checks at all. That's why I'm still at Wells Fargo. Officially there's a $1.50 fee per check, but they've never refused to waive the fee (and I make sure to ask every time).
Sounds to me like Allard picked the wrong battle to fight and ended up losing the war.
But he kept his soul.:) People like Allard have more opportunities than time. If Microsoft is too conservative, move on.
It is a shame about Courier, but I'm afraid that even if it was greenlighted, it still would have been a flop. Microsoft would have hired somebody to create a reference device and it would never have received the same scrutiny and careful design that the iPad got from Apple. Even worse, the design would have been altered by focus group testing and internal battles between Microsoft factions.
Historically, Facebook hasn't had any problem deciding that was once private is now public. Lots of people have posted stuff that was private, but is now public.
On top of that, Facebook hasn't exactly tried very hard to make their privacy settings understandable or accessible. I'm sure lots of normal people (ie those not reading Slashdot) would be surprised just how public their lives are.
Almost every decision Diginotar made around the breach, was a bad one. Other CA's have had breaches and made responsible disclosures and they are still around. That doesn't mean there are zero consequences (nor should there be), but responsible behavior goes a long way in convincing their 5 customers that they are still worth trusting.
So, err, how would they give him time in jail for parking on a handicapped spot... on restricted private property?
If the police don't have access to the property, then obviously they won't be writing tickets. A handicapped person who does have access to the lot might be able to sue Apple though because California allows private citizens to sue for ADA violations.
I believe ADA Title III has all the details.
BTW - your driveway scenario doesn't fit the parameters of Title III unless it's the driveway for a commercial facility.
The engine has a rev limiter. It might sound scary, but it isn't going to damage itself in the 30 seconds it would take to get to the side of the road and stop.
Even if you didn't throw it into neutral, the brakes are still strong enough to stop the car.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes! Stand up to them! Freedom of expression is for us, not them!
Sony and Microsoft already have it. Or are you asking if they should be allowed to collect or buy the data in the first place? Either way, I think they should be allowed to use.
Ideally, their use of the data would come with some conditions. For example, I wish they had to disclose what data they have about me, where they got it, and who they have shared it with. It should also be possible to ask them to delete the data. I don't think it's in my best interests though for companies to be heavily regulated in the way the EU seems to be going. That's just my opinion though.
If you aren't paying for the product, then you are the product.
How is what Google is doing any different from any other ad supported business? I can watch all kinds of TV without paying because advertisers are footing the bill. I go to a baseball game, my ticket is subsidized by omnipresent ads. I can subscribe to lots of magazines for free because of advertisers. Come to think of it, neither you nor I are paying to post on Slashdot either. Is all of this dishonest?
I'd be a lot more sympathetic if Google had a monopoly or if the barriers to entry for competitors was much higher. The truth is, Google could collapse as quickly as it rose.
Google licenses Android for free, because they get paid in different ways and have a strategy that stretches beyond next quarter. They don't have any kind of monopoly in any of their businesses, so the comparison with MSFT of the 90's isn't a great comparison.
It's a little like Mozilla giving Firefox away for free because they get paid in different ways. Should they be stopped because others who want to charge money for the browser can't figure out a way to compete?
Software and process patents are just a way to funnel money from innovators to lawyers.
You have the right answer. Nobody seems to think about the greater good any more. Large corporations and governments already have access to all of this data. Google is just making it available for regular people in an incredibly useful way. It's perfectly valid to have problems with this, but don't ignore the benefits as well.
I think you are right. Sony doesn't have the design or engineering talent to create something truly innovative. Even if they did and were able to come up with something truly revolutionary, there is no way it would be allowed to succeed. Sony, more than just about any other company, is frozen by the innovator's dilemma.
Exactly right. Their calculations include things like opportunity costs. Sony is especially bad in that they believe that anybody making money on their platform should be sending Sony a cut.
The original Kindles do have that 1980's Texas Instruments design sense going for them though.
Will they abandon browser based streaming and just start writing closed source apps that gives them a greater degree of control than ever before? Probably.
Nope, at least not because of Silverlight. MLB was a Silverlight launch partner but they quickly left the platform and moved to Flash.
Don't listen to anybody who tells you a tablet will replace your desktop. What I keep saying is that there is a very large segment of the PC owning public for whom an iPad is a much better computer. These people bought PC's because that was their only choice. Now that the iPad exists. they will switch to the computer that they have been waiting for. So, in a sense, a tablet is a PC replacement for these people but the reality is that they never wanted a PC in the first place.
A couple of comments.
The MacBook Air has turned into a pretty awesome machine. If I were to buy something today, that would probably be what I get.
Secondly, Apple has a huge advantage from a design point of view because they control the entire iPad experience. It's going to be extremely difficult for Microsoft to develop software and for different OEMs to build hardware and end up with a coherent ecosystem like Apple has created. Mostly this is because, Microsoft no longer has the best developers (and never had the design talent) and none of the announced tablet manufacturers have the money or engineers that Apple has.
I don't actually own a netbook or iPad, although others in my family do. Like you, a laptop and desktop work better for me.
I don't think the tablet is a laptop replacement, nor is a laptop a good tablet replacement. Lots of people were buying netbooks and other low end laptops because that's all that was available. What they really wanted (even if they didn't know it at the time) was a tablet and when a decent one finally came around, it became a best seller and left the low end of the mobile PC market in a bit of a shambles.
Stop thinking of them as laptop replacements, because that's not what they are.
Wow, rarely has there been a post that I disagree with more.
Right now, the tablet market is iPad and people who have them, mostly love them. The iPad is wreaking havoc on the low end PC market and they are still selling more iPads quarter after quarter. Apple is rumored to be dumping part of their desktop line up. There's no indication that the tablet line up is going anywhere.
If this were true, I think you would be seeing a resurgence in netbook sales. The reality is that sales are way down and are stagnant. I think a lot of Slashdotters are really out of touch with how normal people use computers.
Technically equivalent or superior? You must be measuring by clock cycle or memory size. I don't know of any tablet that even comes close to the iPad in areas that matter like build quality, battery life, and software. Apple has figured out that saying no to a feature is a bolder move than adding yet another switch or option and their product is subjectively better for it.
How's that PDA working for you? Netbook sales are way down from their peak and not recovering. And who wants to use their PC? That's their work machine. The iPad is their play machine.
Talk to people who compete in the low end PC market. The iPad has them terrified. It's a huge part of what spurred Apotheker to conclude that the PC business is dead. And have you seen Windows 8? That has me thinking that Microsoft is also turning away from the desktop market. It almost seems like they are splitting Windows into server and tablet versions.
My problem with credit unions is finding one that doesn't have very high fees for foreign currency transactions. I have relatives in Canada that send my kids birthday checks from Canadian banks and the three or four credit unions in my part of the city all have either very high fees or won't cash the checks at all. That's why I'm still at Wells Fargo. Officially there's a $1.50 fee per check, but they've never refused to waive the fee (and I make sure to ask every time).
But he kept his soul. :)
People like Allard have more opportunities than time. If Microsoft is too conservative, move on.
It is a shame about Courier, but I'm afraid that even if it was greenlighted, it still would have been a flop. Microsoft would have hired somebody to create a reference device and it would never have received the same scrutiny and careful design that the iPad got from Apple. Even worse, the design would have been altered by focus group testing and internal battles between Microsoft factions.
Historically, Facebook hasn't had any problem deciding that was once private is now public. Lots of people have posted stuff that was private, but is now public.
On top of that, Facebook hasn't exactly tried very hard to make their privacy settings understandable or accessible. I'm sure lots of normal people (ie those not reading Slashdot) would be surprised just how public their lives are.
The upcoming crop of Win8 tablets are the products that the Courier was cancelled for.
Read the article - the Courier was a much more radical departure for Microsoft than any of the Win8 tablets are going to be.
The iPad is not the first tablet, but it is the first one that has sold very well.
Almost every decision Diginotar made around the breach, was a bad one. Other CA's have had breaches and made responsible disclosures and they are still around. That doesn't mean there are zero consequences (nor should there be), but responsible behavior goes a long way in convincing their 5 customers that they are still worth trusting.
If the police don't have access to the property, then obviously they won't be writing tickets. A handicapped person who does have access to the lot might be able to sue Apple though because California allows private citizens to sue for ADA violations.
I believe ADA Title III has all the details.
BTW - your driveway scenario doesn't fit the parameters of Title III unless it's the driveway for a commercial facility.
It's the other way around. Nokia wanted insider access to Microsoft and so they hired Elop.
Why do you think a hardware solution would be less bug-prone than a software solution?
The engine has a rev limiter. It might sound scary, but it isn't going to damage itself in the 30 seconds it would take to get to the side of the road and stop.
Even if you didn't throw it into neutral, the brakes are still strong enough to stop the car.
Isn't the point of having the compiler as a service so that your executable can feed source code to a compiler?