"They are leveraging it to promote Google Finance, Maps, Flighs, so on."
You really don't understand how this works. It's exactly the opposite. They promote Search, Finance, Maps (what's Flighs?) so they can sell ads.
"The search engine ad market" is not something subject to a monopoly, anymore than "the market for Chevrolets" is, which was my original point. It's the advertising market, which is very much bigger than just Google. Google doesn't even have an ad presence on Bing or Yahoo or Yandex or Baidu (as a seller - they appear to actually pay for ads on those sites), so a claim that they've "cornered the search engine ad market" is simply laughable. They've cornered the Google search ad market, just as GM has cornered the Chevrolet market. That in no way gives them a monopoly, of any sort.
Beyond that, they certainly haven't cornered the advertising market, even if you limit it to the Internet - there a lots of "free" services paid for with advertising - Facebook is an example, as is craigslist. But, I suppose you'd just say that Facebook has a monopoly over "the social media advertising market."
Whoosh. GM does not have a monopoly, in the legal sense.
There are lots of different cars available, but if you want a Chevy, you have to go to GM, but that doesn't make them subject to antitrust action for having a monopoly.
Similarly, there are lots of different means of advertising (or so my TV and magazines tell me), but if you want your ads to show up along with Google search results, you have to advertise with Google. That doesn't make them a monopoly. Google doesn't even have a monopoly if you only limit it to web advertising.
There's a large advertising market outside of Google. Saying they have a monopoly with Search+Adsense is like claiming GM has a monopoly on Chevrolets.
He was responding to a post which was clearly discussing USB standards. Additionally, requiring a proprietary cable to plug into a proprietary connector to get around USB charging limitations adds nothing to an argument for standardizing on USB charging.
I like how this Anonymous Coward guy, in addition to being anonymous, and a coward, seems to never read what he's responding to, and therefore post comments full of non-sequiturs.
Right. Then company X simply creates shell company Y, with few assets, to do the dirty work. This needs to be addressed with criminal, not civil, penalties - including for those who pay for or knowingly facilitate such services. Give the guy running it a few years in prison and the call center agents a few months, in addition to a fine equal to revenues/wages (not profits).
The problem with Newsweek is that a couple of years ago it changed from being news to being editorial. Actual content has probably dropped by 1/3 in the past couple of years, too. They're on their death bed.
For print (and electronic, for that matter) weeklies, The Week and The Economist offer more than Newsweek/Time/USNAWR ever did.
Who waits a week for their news, even their analysis anymore?
Those who are more interested in quality coverage with both breadth and depth than a lightweight, but timely response from pundits.
Verizon is hardly to blame for you not reading the contract you signed/agreed to, which says, in part
You accept this agreement by: Agreeing in writing, by email, over the phone, or in person;
Opening a package that says you are accepting by opening it; or
Activating your Service. ... By entering this Agreement, you consent to our data collection, use and sharing practices described in our Privacy Policy. We provide you with choices to limit, in certain circumstances, our use of the data we have about you.
They have just as much "moral right" to discuss their customer's habits as their customers have to discuss their habits, as is happening in this very discussion on/. If you're paying for service, part of the cost of providing that service may be subsidized by selling info which has value.
LOL. SPs are little more than "rollups" for a bunch of patches, so new installs aren't burdened with hours of installing Windows Updates after the OS itself. They sometimes add minor features. You're the one being disingenuous by comparing them to an OXS upgrade, which is feature oriented.
USB power has a fundamental limitation - micro-USB connectors are only rated for 1.7 A. The USB charging spec maxes out at 1.5 A. That's right at the edge for today's phones and battery technology. Lithium batteries exist which can be charged at a 1C rate, and a 1.5 Ah battery is about what most smartphones have. It's more limiting for tablets, which have batteries which can charge faster than USB can allow.
ITYM "More people die in hospitals than in car wrecks. There's a difference. Unless the hospital collapses, it's hard to imagine how it could kill anyone.
The sentiment behind your statement is, of course, entirely flawed. One could just as easily say that fewer people are killed in war (0.3%) than in traffic accidents (2.1%), and imply that being in a war is safer than driving.
Leaders, no. Figureheads, yes. Modern Presidencies merely cater to the ignorance that most of the US electorate has about our own political system. It's easier for Joe Sixpak to place blame on (or give credit to) an easily identified individual than to spread the blame across 500+ congress critters.
Yes, it's a luxury. A "right" doesn't exist where you can demand that someone else buy you something (the child/parent relationship excepted). If the CEO of Ericsson disagrees, I'll need to know his address, so I can send him my Internet bill.
Of course, what he's really saying is "Governments, through the force of taxation, should get the richer taxpaers to buy Internet connections for the poorer, increasing the market for my company."
"An IP address will identify a connection, that someone is responsible for."
Sure. The ISP is responsible for that IP address, and has bigger pockets than some individual subscriber - so why not go there? ISPs have fought long and hard to not be considered "common carriers," so that would be just desserts.
Slashdot Mirror
Canada is south of Detroit. Just look at a map.
"They are leveraging it to promote Google Finance, Maps, Flighs, so on."
You really don't understand how this works. It's exactly the opposite. They promote Search, Finance, Maps (what's Flighs?) so they can sell ads.
"The search engine ad market" is not something subject to a monopoly, anymore than "the market for Chevrolets" is, which was my original point. It's the advertising market, which is very much bigger than just Google. Google doesn't even have an ad presence on Bing or Yahoo or Yandex or Baidu (as a seller - they appear to actually pay for ads on those sites), so a claim that they've "cornered the search engine ad market" is simply laughable. They've cornered the Google search ad market, just as GM has cornered the Chevrolet market. That in no way gives them a monopoly, of any sort.
Beyond that, they certainly haven't cornered the advertising market, even if you limit it to the Internet - there a lots of "free" services paid for with advertising - Facebook is an example, as is craigslist. But, I suppose you'd just say that Facebook has a monopoly over "the social media advertising market."
Meh.
Whoosh. GM does not have a monopoly, in the legal sense.
There are lots of different cars available, but if you want a Chevy, you have to go to GM, but that doesn't make them subject to antitrust action for having a monopoly.
Similarly, there are lots of different means of advertising (or so my TV and magazines tell me), but if you want your ads to show up along with Google search results, you have to advertise with Google. That doesn't make them a monopoly. Google doesn't even have a monopoly if you only limit it to web advertising.
There's a large advertising market outside of Google. Saying they have a monopoly with Search+Adsense is like claiming GM has a monopoly on Chevrolets.
My WiFi goes to 11!
That's exactly not true.
He was responding to a post which was clearly discussing USB standards. Additionally, requiring a proprietary cable to plug into a proprietary connector to get around USB charging limitations adds nothing to an argument for standardizing on USB charging.
You may read, but you clearly lack comprehension.
I like how this Anonymous Coward guy, in addition to being anonymous, and a coward, seems to never read what he's responding to, and therefore post comments full of non-sequiturs.
Right. Then company X simply creates shell company Y, with few assets, to do the dirty work. This needs to be addressed with criminal, not civil, penalties - including for those who pay for or knowingly facilitate such services. Give the guy running it a few years in prison and the call center agents a few months, in addition to a fine equal to revenues/wages (not profits).
For print (and electronic, for that matter) weeklies, The Week and The Economist offer more than Newsweek/Time/USNAWR ever did.
Those who are more interested in quality coverage with both breadth and depth than a lightweight, but timely response from pundits.
Verizon is hardly to blame for you not reading the contract you signed/agreed to, which says, in part
They have just as much "moral right" to discuss their customer's habits as their customers have to discuss their habits, as is happening in this very discussion on /. If you're paying for service, part of the cost of providing that service may be subsidized by selling info which has value.
They disclose what they do with the info and offer an "opt-out" (may need to be a customer to view that page) and if you don't trust that, no one is forcing you to use their services.
"Moral" doesn't mean what you think it means.
If it has extra pins, it is by definition NOT a Micro-USB connector.
LOL. SPs are little more than "rollups" for a bunch of patches, so new installs aren't burdened with hours of installing Windows Updates after the OS itself. They sometimes add minor features. You're the one being disingenuous by comparing them to an OXS upgrade, which is feature oriented.
Apple gives out malware patches for free, too.
USB power has a fundamental limitation - micro-USB connectors are only rated for 1.7 A. The USB charging spec maxes out at 1.5 A. That's right at the edge for today's phones and battery technology. Lithium batteries exist which can be charged at a 1C rate, and a 1.5 Ah battery is about what most smartphones have. It's more limiting for tablets, which have batteries which can charge faster than USB can allow.
Have you seen Bob's haircut? Shear is correct.
Adobe software doesn't count. It barely runs on Windows.
Just one example. Win8 Pro Upgrade: $70 (newegg) vs. Mac OSX Mountain Lion Upgrade: $20 (Apple Store).
"Hospitals kill more people than car wrecks."
ITYM "More people die in hospitals than in car wrecks. There's a difference. Unless the hospital collapses, it's hard to imagine how it could kill anyone.
The sentiment behind your statement is, of course, entirely flawed. One could just as easily say that fewer people are killed in war (0.3%) than in traffic accidents (2.1%), and imply that being in a war is safer than driving.
1) Let me help.
2) Oops, was that too much help?
Leaders, no. Figureheads, yes. Modern Presidencies merely cater to the ignorance that most of the US electorate has about our own political system. It's easier for Joe Sixpak to place blame on (or give credit to) an easily identified individual than to spread the blame across 500+ congress critters.
"I guess the alternative is to wait until just before the end of time to buy all your devices."
Even better, if you're buying at the end of time, pay with credit!
Yes, it's a luxury. A "right" doesn't exist where you can demand that someone else buy you something (the child/parent relationship excepted). If the CEO of Ericsson disagrees, I'll need to know his address, so I can send him my Internet bill.
Of course, what he's really saying is "Governments, through the force of taxation, should get the richer taxpaers to buy Internet connections for the poorer, increasing the market for my company."
"An IP address will identify a connection, that someone is responsible for."
Sure. The ISP is responsible for that IP address, and has bigger pockets than some individual subscriber - so why not go there? ISPs have fought long and hard to not be considered "common carriers," so that would be just desserts.