@"they should have just have asked for donations"
They have been asking for donations since the start. I really don't see a big deal about charging a nominal processing fee for something that costs them money to process - it also ensures that only people who are really serious will apply, so you don't get flooded with millions of junk applications from Seymour Butts etc.
If anyone says Mars colonization is 'unaffordable' remind them that the cost of the Iraq war alone would have covered NASA's budget for another 200 years, or funded at least 100 manned Mars missions.
That's not to mention all the other wars, and not even getting started on other wasteful programs like the War on Drugs. Space travel is actually damn cheap compared to all the other crap we waste massive amounts of money on.
The problem isn't "speech" - the penalties against Tesla if they attempt to violate these laws by simply selling cars to members of the public, are not "speech" - they're a form of state-sponsored violence.
Fact: Win 8.1 is a giant step in tying a cloud service/tracking account for all that you now do in their OS
But here's the thing: Even after Windows' recent "giant steps" in the direction of spying on you like Google does, they are still nowhere even near even 2% of the amount of spying Google's products already do on you now, today.
That'll win hearts and minds in a political debate. (Though I happen to agree with you.) Voting either Republican or Democrat is a sign of either ignorance, or a lack of personal ethics.
So, let me get this straight.... the only thing that used to stop the issues with Capitalism was the government stepping in, but it's socialist if the government stops companies now so we can't do that
"Government" is not some uniform thing with uniform intentions, it's a group of people drafting policy. So in fact, you can have both government for the people (socialism) or government for the corporations (NOT capitalism, but corporatocracy). Corporatocracy and Socialism represent different types of government. They both happen to use the word "government" but they're quite different in nature.
Not really; words have specific meanings. Either something is capitalism or it isn't, and we have to call things what they actually are. What we have now is increasing Corporatocracy, which by definition is a decrease in Capitalism. Many people confuse the former for the latter, but this is no accident, as there are ongoing deliberate attempts to confuse the public about the origin of the problem... by spewing out propaganda that 'unregulated Capitalism' is the cause, they socially engineer the public to demand "regulation", when in fact they own the legislators who draft the regulations that carefully and cunningly just grant them further consolidation of power and artificial protection by the government.
Yeah, I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy, but I'd rather pay for an OS that doesn't spy on me than have a "free" one that does. Each to their own though.. some people are either happy to make that trade-off (which I can understand) or prefer to live in ignorance of it.
I was going to say the same thing, but more politely. Patents are evil, destructive, harmful, unethical. If you're using them, you should do some introspection on your value system.
So it won't hinder the cops ability to do their jobs if their guns were bright pink? I wager it's a LOT easier for a criminal to aim at someone carrying a bright pink gun in anything but the most brightly lit conditions.
The biggest irony is that nobody seems to care about actual dangers that actually harm children - for example, one of the top causes of teen death is suicide, and a major contributing cause is bullying - there is neither an outcry, nor political effort to even try come up with solutions - we cry "ZOMG think of the children oh noes, ban encryption and implement government surveillance" while simultaneously daily shuttling our depressed victimized alienated kids into the very school system that will inflict so much abuse on them that they commit suicide, without thinking anything of it, just telling them to "ignore" what is inflicted on them.
It's simple, Google will renew the deal only if they calculate it benefits them to do so. Several years ago when nobody used Chrome and Firefox was a major browser they stood to benefit strategically from the search engine placement - however, it was a trojan horse, as with every search result delivered, came a blaring "Install Chrome" message. The long-term goal was to kill Firefox and always has been, to achieve dominance, as once they have majority browser share they can push all their own stuff and apply their mass surveillance on a large scale.
Depending on whose figures you believe, Chrome is probably now at around 45%, and Firefox at 20%... so it's not a total coup yet, but Google's hand is much stronger now, Firefox's much weaker, there is less benefit to Google from the partnership. I'm guessing the partnership will still be of value to them but they may renew on a lower amount (I don't know where that $300 million claimed figure comes from as I doubt they publish this info but perhaps I'm wrong).
Unfortunately for all of us we're headed back to the situation we were in when Internet Explorer was at 90%, except with Chrome. IE6 was garbage but at least it didn't spy on everything you did. A healthy environment is one where no particular browser or OS is dominant.
The TODO group's motto. If the members of this group really cared about "talk openly, develop openly", they would release all their collectively owned software patents into the public domain. Until then, open source means 'you fix bugs for us, we still own the patents on the final product'.
In some ways, it's worse than just a PR stunt, because patents effectively neutralize many of the benefits of open source - this effectively allows these companies like Google andF B to recruit developers to fix their bugs for free, while they make billions from the improved software - because they know the fact that it's open source doesn't matter when the big software 'parent cartels' own all the patents and cross-license, ring-fence and regulate to keep real competition out the market anyway. The serfs work for free while the lords live the high life.
Abolishing software patents would do more to benefit the software industry (and everyone on earth) than making every last piece of code open source.
2) No, "nothing prevents you", but we all know that the vast majority of Joe Public users aren't going to - coyly pretending this isn't the case only benefits Google
You misread it: "As part of the updated contract, Google is requiring one of its partners to increase the number of Google-made apps from nine in 2011 to 20 in 2014. This year's agreement also required that there must be a Google search widget on the default home screen of the phone along with an icon for the Google Play store and a Google icon that houses 13 apps included "Google Chrome, Google Maps, Google Drive, YouTube, and Gmail among others"
It isn't, but Google apparently have better marketers that have managed to carefully portray a carefully-preened image of Google as a "friendly" company, so everyone here will defend it.
This is why mobile space computing devices will always be toys in my eyes
That's exactly what they used to say about PC's when PC's were new and cheap and crap, in the early 90s. Ten years later PC's were dominating, and had become much more powerful. We're just seeing history repeat.
So you're saying it's a case of, "Google, products so good you need to be forced to use them?"
If they're so much better, manufacturers would simply choose them by default.
Sorry, but this is blatantly just a play out of Microsoft's old playbook... by the day Google are behaving more and more like Microsoft used to, bullying everyone into using their products.
Slashdot Mirror
@"they should have just have asked for donations" They have been asking for donations since the start. I really don't see a big deal about charging a nominal processing fee for something that costs them money to process - it also ensures that only people who are really serious will apply, so you don't get flooded with millions of junk applications from Seymour Butts etc.
If anyone says Mars colonization is 'unaffordable' remind them that the cost of the Iraq war alone would have covered NASA's budget for another 200 years, or funded at least 100 manned Mars missions.
That's not to mention all the other wars, and not even getting started on other wasteful programs like the War on Drugs. Space travel is actually damn cheap compared to all the other crap we waste massive amounts of money on.
The problem isn't "speech" - the penalties against Tesla if they attempt to violate these laws by simply selling cars to members of the public, are not "speech" - they're a form of state-sponsored violence.
Fact: Win 8.1 is a giant step in tying a cloud service/tracking account for all that you now do in their OS
But here's the thing: Even after Windows' recent "giant steps" in the direction of spying on you like Google does, they are still nowhere even near even 2% of the amount of spying Google's products already do on you now, today.
Me, I think the majority just lack morals.
You're pretty fucking stupid then
That'll win hearts and minds in a political debate. (Though I happen to agree with you.) Voting either Republican or Democrat is a sign of either ignorance, or a lack of personal ethics.
So, let me get this straight.... the only thing that used to stop the issues with Capitalism was the government stepping in, but it's socialist if the government stops companies now so we can't do that
"Government" is not some uniform thing with uniform intentions, it's a group of people drafting policy. So in fact, you can have both government for the people (socialism) or government for the corporations (NOT capitalism, but corporatocracy). Corporatocracy and Socialism represent different types of government. They both happen to use the word "government" but they're quite different in nature.
You can call it whatever you want,
Not really; words have specific meanings. Either something is capitalism or it isn't, and we have to call things what they actually are. What we have now is increasing Corporatocracy, which by definition is a decrease in Capitalism. Many people confuse the former for the latter, but this is no accident, as there are ongoing deliberate attempts to confuse the public about the origin of the problem ... by spewing out propaganda that 'unregulated Capitalism' is the cause, they socially engineer the public to demand "regulation", when in fact they own the legislators who draft the regulations that carefully and cunningly just grant them further consolidation of power and artificial protection by the government.
Yeah, I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy, but I'd rather pay for an OS that doesn't spy on me than have a "free" one that does. Each to their own though .. some people are either happy to make that trade-off (which I can understand) or prefer to live in ignorance of it.
This sounds to me like a case of two competing corporatocracies that both want exclusive control of a market. There are no 'good guys'.
I was going to say the same thing, but more politely. Patents are evil, destructive, harmful, unethical. If you're using them, you should do some introspection on your value system.
Modded down for posting a fact, wtf
Women are no longer really the minority in gaming: http://www.dailydot.com/geek/adult-women-largest-gaming-demographic/
So it won't hinder the cops ability to do their jobs if their guns were bright pink? I wager it's a LOT easier for a criminal to aim at someone carrying a bright pink gun in anything but the most brightly lit conditions.
The biggest irony is that nobody seems to care about actual dangers that actually harm children - for example, one of the top causes of teen death is suicide, and a major contributing cause is bullying - there is neither an outcry, nor political effort to even try come up with solutions - we cry "ZOMG think of the children oh noes, ban encryption and implement government surveillance" while simultaneously daily shuttling our depressed victimized alienated kids into the very school system that will inflict so much abuse on them that they commit suicide, without thinking anything of it, just telling them to "ignore" what is inflicted on them.
It's simple, Google will renew the deal only if they calculate it benefits them to do so. Several years ago when nobody used Chrome and Firefox was a major browser they stood to benefit strategically from the search engine placement - however, it was a trojan horse, as with every search result delivered, came a blaring "Install Chrome" message. The long-term goal was to kill Firefox and always has been, to achieve dominance, as once they have majority browser share they can push all their own stuff and apply their mass surveillance on a large scale.
Depending on whose figures you believe, Chrome is probably now at around 45%, and Firefox at 20% ... so it's not a total coup yet, but Google's hand is much stronger now, Firefox's much weaker, there is less benefit to Google from the partnership. I'm guessing the partnership will still be of value to them but they may renew on a lower amount (I don't know where that $300 million claimed figure comes from as I doubt they publish this info but perhaps I'm wrong).
Unfortunately for all of us we're headed back to the situation we were in when Internet Explorer was at 90%, except with Chrome. IE6 was garbage but at least it didn't spy on everything you did. A healthy environment is one where no particular browser or OS is dominant.
The TODO group's motto. If the members of this group really cared about "talk openly, develop openly", they would release all their collectively owned software patents into the public domain. Until then, open source means 'you fix bugs for us, we still own the patents on the final product'.
Sorry for typos, 'parent cartels' should be 'patent cartels'
In some ways, it's worse than just a PR stunt, because patents effectively neutralize many of the benefits of open source - this effectively allows these companies like Google andF B to recruit developers to fix their bugs for free, while they make billions from the improved software - because they know the fact that it's open source doesn't matter when the big software 'parent cartels' own all the patents and cross-license, ring-fence and regulate to keep real competition out the market anyway. The serfs work for free while the lords live the high life.
Abolishing software patents would do more to benefit the software industry (and everyone on earth) than making every last piece of code open source.
2) No, "nothing prevents you", but we all know that the vast majority of Joe Public users aren't going to - coyly pretending this isn't the case only benefits Google
Android has over 80% market share - that's very close to monopoly. Oh, unless you mean only the US, but the market is the whole world.
You misread it: "As part of the updated contract, Google is requiring one of its partners to increase the number of Google-made apps from nine in 2011 to 20 in 2014. This year's agreement also required that there must be a Google search widget on the default home screen of the phone along with an icon for the Google Play store and a Google icon that houses 13 apps included "Google Chrome, Google Maps, Google Drive, YouTube, and Gmail among others"
http://www.businessinsider.in/Confidential-Documents-Reveal-How-Google-Is-Trying-To-Limit-Samsungs-Control-Of-Android/articleshow/43555067.cms
It isn't, but Google apparently have better marketers that have managed to carefully portray a carefully-preened image of Google as a "friendly" company, so everyone here will defend it.
This is why mobile space computing devices will always be toys in my eyes
That's exactly what they used to say about PC's when PC's were new and cheap and crap, in the early 90s. Ten years later PC's were dominating, and had become much more powerful. We're just seeing history repeat.
So you're saying it's a case of, "Google, products so good you need to be forced to use them?"
If they're so much better, manufacturers would simply choose them by default.
Sorry, but this is blatantly just a play out of Microsoft's old playbook ... by the day Google are behaving more and more like Microsoft used to, bullying everyone into using their products.