I don't think he's a buffoon, but, you're right, it is a shame that people tune him out. Maybe those who tune him out should take this opportunity to rethink their position on the guy. So few politicians are willing to defend net neutrality it's really nice to see someone buck that trend.
I always got the sense that the antioxidant craze was healthwashing run amok. Every time I've looked into it there seem to be as many detriments as benefits. From what I've read, oxidation plays a role in so many different processes isn't it unclear whether its good or bad as a whole?
However, as far as I understand it, there are some hurdles with regards to building a ROM depending on the phone you have. Some have locked bootloaders / proprietary drivers.
For apps, there is a lot of stuff on GitHub, but as someone else already posted that requires the dev to have shared the code.
If you root your device a good firewall is DroidWall
Pretty obvious really -- CWMike along with Julie188 have been plaguing Slashdot with this InfoWorld/ComputerWorld tripe for years. The articles are almost always either sensationalism (magic future computing may crack your password, clock is ticking!) or trolling flamebait (is [insert favorite mobile OS] dangerous?). It's bullshit blogspam and Slashdot can do better. I just wish they cared a bit more about weeding out this kind of stuff.
Sci-fi fans are likely to not be counted in the all important C3 rating from Neilsen. I can't imagine sci-fi fans even agreeing to be tracked by Neilsen though. DVR ratings also dont matter as much to networks because they cant use those stats to sell ad time, and online ads bring in significantly less revenue than cable/broadcast. Frankly I'm a bit surprised they are so far behind with regards to accurate rating systems, but it's no surprise as to why we have shows that cater to those whom are technologically behind the curve...
It's hard to see anything MS does without some cautious skepticism that they may hold ulterior motives. I personally see two possibilities here:
1) They are trying to keep the FF userbase from building up a critical mass of users watching video with open source/patent free codecs such as WebM
2) They are trying to further marginalize Flash video (since at the moment Flash based video is the only H.264 option for FF users).
These two things arent mutually exclusive either, but I think they make more sense given MS's history and the context. What you said would make more sense if MS released a WebM player for IE/FF. To be clear though, having more options is good and this release isn't necessarily bad, but it's a good idea to keep in mind MS's past gift horses.
There isnt anything wrong with the concept of persistent local storage, the problem is multiple persistent local storage areas that a user has to jump through hoops to clear. HTML5, Cookies, and Flash Cookies all have this issue.
Demonizing your enemy in the face of public opinion is an old tactic. If they make the public think this group is responsible for 'less noble' causes, they will erode support. Doesn't need to be true, or even the same group, to be effective.
If you have never heard of it, what good is your prediction? Personally I think he's right, but I dont see any axe grinding -- He, like many, believes Android to be far superior to ChromeOS, which it really is. Google was recently put on the spot for why they are developing two different operating systems, and to have a former Google employee speaking frankly about which he thinks is better doesn't seem much like axe grinding. Anyways, if you have never heard of a product, next time maybe you should, you know, reconsider whether you have the knowledge to form an opinion about it, or the people discussing it. Or, maybe you're just a troll pretending you haven't heard of it. Either way I'm not sure why anyone would mod that as insightful.
Which still seems pretty obvious, even circa 1999. However since MS has been shaking down Android manufacturers with similarly questionable patents lately, I have a hard time getting upset about this. If Google were to go on some kind of suing spree an actually went after Mozilla, then that would be pretty upsetting. Being granted the patent does seems very dumb and it puts the problems of patenting software in stark relief (some may say it highlights them;) ). But if it's some kind of defense versus MS, then I won't lose any sleep.
If by proactive you mean re-branding "managed services" as net neutrality and patting themselves on the back -- meanwhile blessing ISP throttling, and mobile throttling, thus protecting corporate profit in an industry with already insanely high profit margins, at the expensive of the consumer and innovative companies like netflix... then, uh, yeah.
The FCC needs to wake the hell up and realize they aren't protecting competition in a nascent market but rather protecting the government granted monopolies which stifle innovation and are the very reason the market is still "nascent." This is why the US is so far behind in broadband.
Personally I suspect a lot of the news coming out now is orchestrated PR for the policy vote coming on the 21st. I think the FCC is putting out a lot of "we're fighting for the little guy" stories to soften the blow of toothless net neutrality policy that relies on the goodwill of ISPs to act "reasonably" and "transparently"
If they had deregulated consumer price the same thing would have happened, it just would have cost more. Let's not forget it was Enron et al that were out to screw over people to make a buck that caused so many problems in California. It really didn't matter if they screwed over the distributors or the consumers. Deregulating distributors would have just added another layer corporations out to get theirs.
TFA is very light on technical details. What security API are they looking to access? To do what? They have access to AOSP/Linux, and could even cook up custom ROMs if they needed. Is there some cryptographic hardware driver they need or something?
Also, From the 'article'
It seems to me that Apple and Google are making self-centered bad decisions here that won't play well with the American public. Clearly, Apple and Google should re-think these myopic and selfish policies
WTF? Maybe this journalist should re-think his self-centered trite opinion fluff pieces. Oh wait, it's NetworkWorld. Not much chance of that happening I guess.
Slashdot Mirror
Union government?
I don't think he's a buffoon, but, you're right, it is a shame that people tune him out. Maybe those who tune him out should take this opportunity to rethink their position on the guy. So few politicians are willing to defend net neutrality it's really nice to see someone buck that trend.
with little oversight
federal agents then obtained a court order to seize the domain name.
Seriously, just stop -- you're offtopic and just wrong.
I always got the sense that the antioxidant craze was healthwashing run amok. Every time I've looked into it there seem to be as many detriments as benefits. From what I've read, oxidation plays a role in so many different processes isn't it unclear whether its good or bad as a whole?
The tech news headlines would be awesome... "Opera releases version 10.... uh, again...ffs"
For the Android OS there is: The Android Open Source Project
However, as far as I understand it, there are some hurdles with regards to building a ROM depending on the phone you have. Some have locked bootloaders / proprietary drivers.
For apps, there is a lot of stuff on GitHub, but as someone else already posted that requires the dev to have shared the code.
If you root your device a good firewall is DroidWall
Pretty obvious really -- CWMike along with Julie188 have been plaguing Slashdot with this InfoWorld/ComputerWorld tripe for years. The articles are almost always either sensationalism (magic future computing may crack your password, clock is ticking!) or trolling flamebait (is [insert favorite mobile OS] dangerous?). It's bullshit blogspam and Slashdot can do better. I just wish they cared a bit more about weeding out this kind of stuff.
Sci-fi fans are likely to not be counted in the all important C3 rating from Neilsen. I can't imagine sci-fi fans even agreeing to be tracked by Neilsen though. DVR ratings also dont matter as much to networks because they cant use those stats to sell ad time, and online ads bring in significantly less revenue than cable/broadcast. Frankly I'm a bit surprised they are so far behind with regards to accurate rating systems, but it's no surprise as to why we have shows that cater to those whom are technologically behind the curve...
Ars has a fantastic article on all of this: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/future-of-tv/2010/12/who-watches-the-watchers-tv-ratings-in-the-age-of-digital-tv.ars
http://knowyourmeme.com/i/000/063/180/original/We_need_to_go_derper.jpg
It's hard to see anything MS does without some cautious skepticism that they may hold ulterior motives. I personally see two possibilities here:
1) They are trying to keep the FF userbase from building up a critical mass of users watching video with open source/patent free codecs such as WebM
2) They are trying to further marginalize Flash video (since at the moment Flash based video is the only H.264 option for FF users).
These two things arent mutually exclusive either, but I think they make more sense given MS's history and the context. What you said would make more sense if MS released a WebM player for IE/FF. To be clear though, having more options is good and this release isn't necessarily bad, but it's a good idea to keep in mind MS's past gift horses.
Way to pour salt on his wound.
There isnt anything wrong with the concept of persistent local storage, the problem is multiple persistent local storage areas that a user has to jump through hoops to clear. HTML5, Cookies, and Flash Cookies all have this issue.
The target could be Assange though, via guilt by association.
Demonizing your enemy in the face of public opinion is an old tactic. If they make the public think this group is responsible for 'less noble' causes, they will erode support. Doesn't need to be true, or even the same group, to be effective.
If you have never heard of it, what good is your prediction? Personally I think he's right, but I dont see any axe grinding -- He, like many, believes Android to be far superior to ChromeOS, which it really is. Google was recently put on the spot for why they are developing two different operating systems, and to have a former Google employee speaking frankly about which he thinks is better doesn't seem much like axe grinding. Anyways, if you have never heard of a product, next time maybe you should, you know, reconsider whether you have the knowledge to form an opinion about it, or the people discussing it. Or, maybe you're just a troll pretending you haven't heard of it. Either way I'm not sure why anyone would mod that as insightful.
Which still seems pretty obvious, even circa 1999. However since MS has been shaking down Android manufacturers with similarly questionable patents lately, I have a hard time getting upset about this. If Google were to go on some kind of suing spree an actually went after Mozilla, then that would be pretty upsetting. Being granted the patent does seems very dumb and it puts the problems of patenting software in stark relief (some may say it highlights them ;) ). But if it's some kind of defense versus MS, then I won't lose any sleep.
This is a patent for a lightbulb appearing over your head indicating how tall you are.
I'm not hating upon Google
Uhm...
If by proactive you mean re-branding "managed services" as net neutrality and patting themselves on the back -- meanwhile blessing ISP throttling, and mobile throttling, thus protecting corporate profit in an industry with already insanely high profit margins, at the expensive of the consumer and innovative companies like netflix... then, uh, yeah.
The FCC needs to wake the hell up and realize they aren't protecting competition in a nascent market but rather protecting the government granted monopolies which stifle innovation and are the very reason the market is still "nascent." This is why the US is so far behind in broadband.
Personally I suspect a lot of the news coming out now is orchestrated PR for the policy vote coming on the 21st. I think the FCC is putting out a lot of "we're fighting for the little guy" stories to soften the blow of toothless net neutrality policy that relies on the goodwill of ISPs to act "reasonably" and "transparently"
If they had deregulated consumer price the same thing would have happened, it just would have cost more. Let's not forget it was Enron et al that were out to screw over people to make a buck that caused so many problems in California. It really didn't matter if they screwed over the distributors or the consumers. Deregulating distributors would have just added another layer corporations out to get theirs.
http://blip.tv/play/lG2B1fgbAg
This has been posted before and apologies for the tentacle porn thread hijack, but this is well worth the watch in any broadband policy discussion.
I'm behind 7 pheromones.
err..
I would agree but my computer's gone wrong and wont let me.
Not to sound like a [ Buffering.... ]
TFA is very light on technical details. What security API are they looking to access? To do what? They have access to AOSP/Linux, and could even cook up custom ROMs if they needed. Is there some cryptographic hardware driver they need or something?
Also, From the 'article'
It seems to me that Apple and Google are making self-centered bad decisions here that won't play well with the American public. Clearly, Apple and Google should re-think these myopic and selfish policies
WTF? Maybe this journalist should re-think his self-centered trite opinion fluff pieces. Oh wait, it's NetworkWorld. Not much chance of that happening I guess.