In the past it seemed like you always got better results searching MSDN with Google than their old search. If I just wanted to just see the objects in "namespace System.Net" where using the site token on Google the first result was the MSDN doc page on the System.Net namespce. If you used their old search you were just as likely to get a Tech Net or random discussion that was mentioned "namespace" and "System" and "Net".
I'm pretty sure these days things have gotten better (I suspect it is now powered by Bing!) but those days it Microsoft own search of their own live docs was as primitive than using "man -k" .
The focus on "web inter-op" and publishing. If they are striving for "looks the same on PC, Mac and on the web", their chances are better if they start using a font typeset that is freely distributable to those platforms.
Do you have evidence or example behavior/feature that shows that OSX doesn't have a very fast 3D layer? Otherwise the most damning thing about OSX graphics engine is that it isn't DirectX. That isn't better or worse but simply different.
The key difference between GfWL and Steam, Battle.net and other PC systems is that except for initial hiccups at launch Steam and Battle.net and those systems work as advertised. However, Games for Windows Live has not where people today have problems with the service getting a handful of games with a handful of users to work glitch and problem free.
DRM is a pesky issue that isn't going away. People should be leery about how these things are implemented but if you want people to hate it then do it half ass like GfWL.
Actually, a big problem with all of this, setting aside whether or not kids are misdiagnosed, is that a lot of these chemicals and treatments aren't well understood in adults let alone studied in children. A lot of doctors are making up treatment regiments as they go: They give a kid something and see what happens. If they don't like the result, they try something else. But then there is a side effect so they add another drug to counter it. But then both changes the kid's behavior so they switch or add a third drug. Doctors continue to do this "refinement" to come up with a chemical cocktail they feel like "its working" but the kid ends up taking a multiple multiple pills where even the kids and parents are unsure what it is supposed to.
A major problem I see is that too much experimenting and too little research on the side effects of all of these chemicals on kids going through developmental stages. It may turn out have a rambunctious kid is less of a health issue than finding out at age 25 they are psychologically addicted and must be continually pumped with expensive drugs or they go into a psychosis from the "sensations" they get without it.
I liken XBox Live on 360 as the $50 Monster Cable internet cable to your network. Microsoft and other claim "it makes it better" by are vague about the claims and specifics just like Monster Cable. When you play "Modern Warfare 2" who is providing the online multiplayer experience? Microsoft is only providing the "account names" to Activision where Infinity Ward (or who ever is left) is responsible for matching and setting up the game as well as the technical aspects the engine and content. Friends lists and party chat and all that probably are a boon to recent gamers but to many old gamers we have had our contact systems for decades that are platform independent. We don't sit around on our XBox 360 waiting for each other to jump in. We first contact each other and find out if we are in the mood to play something then turn on the 360.
XBox Live is only "neat" in the context of that if your gaming experience is limited to only the 360 then it is probably worth the $50 subsidy. If on the other hand you use other platforms and looking at the feature list, it starts to look like one is renting a Monster Cable.
If Armstrong reported back from Applo 11 he saw precious gems the size of beach balls we'd had bases on The Moon long ago. If Viking 1 and Viking 2 turned on their cameras and saw the ground was litered gold and silver we'd have bases there too. But the truth at the moment turns out they are just barren. On Earth people avoid vast stretches of barren "bad lands" and consider them mostly worthless. Why go out to The Moon and beyond just for really expensive "bad lands"?
There maybe faults with Kagan but "no judicial experience" is kind of disengenious. She has a pretty extensive record being a clerk for a couple of judges including for Marshall. She has an extensive record in academia including Harvard Law. She has some record being Solicitor General. Kagan appears to have spent a lot of time in and around the Supreme Court of the United States. While never being a judge at state or federal levels that isn't a requirement for the job where Kagan appears to be familiar with constituional law and qualified to comment on constitutional questions.
Harriet Miers on the other hand is by profession a personal attorney with a corporate law background and doesn't appear to have any more of a constitutional background than being an advisor to the President. Worse still being a direct council to Bush means there could and would be direct conflicts of interest and previliage in some instances.
There are legitamate complaints about Kagan but she is heads and shoulders above qualifications on constitional law, history, and even procedures than Miers.
It shows that Red Hat is more engineering while Canonical is more packaging and arrangement. Red Hat is working on "lower parts" of the software where they are bound to hit bugs created by themselves or others while Canonical is far more likely to find content and packaging mistakes. People shouldn't imply "value" in lines of contribution either.
I don't think the finding is "shocking" and I don't think users of either distro should be enraged. Canonical can't contribute at this level as readily as Red Hat can which isn't a big deal.
I'm under the impression elsewhere that tax forms are filled out by the government treasury and sent to the person who then can read it and modify and correct for things unreported. The idea that taxes need to be a guessing game for individuals is kind of crazy and perpetuated by companies like Intuit because this is their bread + butter.
And besides, these tax software companies often have a harsh software business model. I'm not entirely sure anyone should defend them.
The reason why is that Microsoft has had a taste of vertical integration and they like it. This is what Apple is doing and has perfected so it is no surprise Microsoft thinks they can as well. If Microsoft creates and controls a device, creates and controls a new hardware production, creates and controls the software platform, creates and controls technology specs, and creates and controls the only store users can buy apps then they can make so much more money than just selling software. Using simplified terms, if there is a $1 of profit for iPad, Microsoft only can take a crack at pennies from just selling just their own software apps. If this was MSPad then $1 of profit means Microsoft gets many more chances to take from the $1: $0.05 for licensing libraries, $0.05 for hosting the online store, $0.05 software validation, etc. In this situation Microsoft gets paid while others create.
Simply put Microsoft gets more chances at nickles with MSPad than if they write for the most popular portable pad platform. Its no surprise Ballmer says this is "job one" because it is so lucrative.
Please make sure you only buy products labled "Rolls for Sure(TM)" to avoid compatibility issues. That way when we abandon "Rolls For Sure" after a year, you know without a doubt you will need to rebuy all of your previous wheels.
- Its free and distributed by a patch/update. - It doesn't interfere if I don't have 3-D hardware hooked up. - Easy to enable/disable/configure if I do have 3-D hardware hooked up.
If it is seemless and free and doesn't break anything then it is really a "value add" and I don't mind.
A cultural norm my European cousins have noticed about Americans is that we seem to be taught to believe what "friends tell us" more than "stranger tell us" even when that relationship seems irrelevant. They observe that seems to make Americans rather listen to people we know instead of "experts tell us" and sometimes outright hostility to "authority tells us". Anyone with a little bit of collegic philosophy or logic study should realize that it isn't that our friends are purposely misleading but that they can be just as wrong.
In the Good Old Days, when Microsoft announced they were interested in getting in some market or technology the VCs would tremble. Those VCs inside that market worried about being killed when investors flocked to Microsoft instead of their incubated solution. Those VC outside that market eagerly looked for small fries that wanted to partner with Microsoft to make it happen. Lots of people made moves just on the notion that higher ups at Microsoft were just considering something.
Its MO for Microsoft to stand up and announce stuff like this but the issue is that a lot less people care or follow trends Microsoft sets where the siren song of Google and Apple sound a lot better.
There are multiple version with multiple flavors at different price points that confuses "people". Add to this the finicky way upgrades behave and "upgrade upgrade" software and it is no wonder a lot of people don't care or realize a 64-bit version exists.
It is a matter of public record I registered and showed up to vote in the 2008 fall elections for the State of Iowa, 2nd Congressional district. What isn't public record is what I put on my ballot. This is where the comparison breaks down: Registering and voting just records the activity. Signing a petition commits a stance to the activity.
I believe the issues are with the process and mechanisms of referendum and ballot initiatives" not an issue of anonomity. These are mechanisms used to craft laws. If these people want to actively and directly participate in crafting laws that effect the public, then they must publicly attach their names to it. Another way to think about it: Voters don't let Congress or state legistlatures anonomously sponsor bills so why should petitioners? Given all of this it doesn't seem like the problem is anonomity.
I don't know why anyone feels the need to defend either of them. My initial inclination is that Apple has a point: If Adobe has shown their technology is deficient or compared to another, Apple should be free to choose the other. And to that point, Flash has never worked right on my phone nor has it really worked right on Linux x64. Its all about bringing the "future of the web" to the hot platform but everyone else gets left overs. But I also see that Apple is arbitrary and draconian with their platforms as well. Their technology servers to better Apple.
There are no angels in this argument, only devils we should scowl at more than the other. I scowl less at Apple at this case but they adopt this stance not to help the users but to help themselves. HTML 5 will work on Windows, Linux 64, Mac, iPad and a bunch of other platforms I haven't considered yet. Unless Adobe steps up their quality and does a turn around in the stability and performance on Flash then they aren't the future of the web but a problem many will create technology to solve.
There is some real HMI theory behind this though. HMI studies show the less buttons and dynamic the interface the more people think and feel it is faster and more responsiveness even if nothing has changed at all. Give a user an interface with a lot of buttons or one with a few, the user perceives the one with less buttons even when the guts function at exactly the same speed.
They aren't trying to hide a problem but avoiding creating a false one. Gravitating towards a minimal interface also helps with mobile versions.
Okay but why wasn't isn't information about icons and skill trees in the game? The old reasons, not enough hardware/software resources, don't apply any longer. If there is a real problem, the vendors should provide redundant copies of the documentation to the player: In the game offered in Help or Tutorial, on the disk on a common format like PDF or Html, and the classic pamphlet.
There has been a history of officials over there going "We have these rules but we can negotiate and work out what is necessary for you to come and do business here". Although it isn't new or exclusive to China to have a government just change the rules out from under people or companies "just because" some of the scales are quite egregious. So I wouldn't be surprised if Google says "We like to come to China but censored searches messes with our technology" while their government said "We have our differences for the moment but setup shop here and we can work it out later". Later is now here and it didn't help they have a hunch where the hacking attacks are coming from....
I wonder if the best idea is for Google to stay in China but make it super apparent what is going on. When one access google.(country code) they should see the usual localized Google. When one access google.cn, they should see "Results Filtered" immediately below. Click on that and get a brief, exact, and legal citation explaining why the quality of service is effected. The Chinese net users won't be in favor of Google's actions unless they are aware of how it effects them. If they can't show them what they are missing, the next best thing is to let them know they are missing out where the worst would be pulling the plug.
Nintendo survived the N64/Gamecube era stuff, which is something Sega didn't, due to their strong hand hold market position. GBA and Pokemon carried Nintendo through some dark times.
Nintendo isn't fault less. Like other Japanese tech companies they tend to make wild, custom built technology that may fly or crash. Conveniently forgetting stuff like Virtual Boy or the weak "successes" provided by Nintendo by Disk System, N64 and GameCube to praise their recent success is kind of naivety. In particular, a big thing that will ruin the 3Ds is the price tag or increased software production costs.
Email is like sending a message on a postcard. How much expectation of privacy did you have doing that? The onus is up to the sender to protect the message instead of whining about any number of people who can and will inspect the email or the back of the postcard as it goes through the system.
Although getting Source on Mac is fine, Steam is the much bigger deal. Although I don't expect PC game developers to shift their production away from PC as their "first target platform", it does make it easier if one is also interested in distributing games on Mac. It doesn't matter the size of game developer, the Mac platform is a tough nut to crack due to scales of market shifted so far to the PC where an online one can help equalize. For instance, [i]World of Goo[/i] is an excellent game that works great on Mac but it must be hell to sell to just Mac owners. Your best bet in this situation for many publishers is to "combine distribute" the PC and Mac version on one disk which isn't totally efficient and desirable.
With Steam this gets a lot simpler. You now have a marketplace that goes directly to Mac owners and they get a bunch of the bonus support of Steamworks like version updates and achievement systems. Source on Mac for some games but I really see Steam as the big deal here. Steam opens up a lot to game developers.
And as a side though: Did Apple dropped a ball here where they could have used their gigantic online store to sell MacOS games? iTunes works great for updating games on iPhone and iPod...would it be so difficult to do the same for desktop games?
This stuff shouldn't be shocking to anyone: By law, they will reveal certain things about online services when requested. The problem should be that they don't want you to know what they are forced to give up which seems to be the wrong stance. These services should be function like a bank safety deposit box: Although private, it isn't legally sacrosanct and will be opened by third parties for inspection in certain circumstances.
If nothing else, all of these online services to have a general policy about this as well. If I suddenly croak, who gets access to stuff I stored out there online? Putting the password and other access information in a vault somewhere isn't reliable or sane. I may even state it in my will that I want my immediate family to take ownership of all of my online information but I have no idea how to compel Microsoft or Google or whatever to release these accounts to someone else. This seems like one of those areas all service providers should be better at defining instead of hiding the detail from us in the legalese of the EULA.
Slashdot Mirror
In the past it seemed like you always got better results searching MSDN with Google than their old search. If I just wanted to just see the objects in "namespace System.Net" where using the site token on Google the first result was the MSDN doc page on the System.Net namespce. If you used their old search you were just as likely to get a Tech Net or random discussion that was mentioned "namespace" and "System" and "Net".
I'm pretty sure these days things have gotten better (I suspect it is now powered by Bing!) but those days it Microsoft own search of their own live docs was as primitive than using "man -k" .
The focus on "web inter-op" and publishing. If they are striving for "looks the same on PC, Mac and on the web", their chances are better if they start using a font typeset that is freely distributable to those platforms.
Do you have evidence or example behavior/feature that shows that OSX doesn't have a very fast 3D layer? Otherwise the most damning thing about OSX graphics engine is that it isn't DirectX. That isn't better or worse but simply different.
The key difference between GfWL and Steam, Battle.net and other PC systems is that except for initial hiccups at launch Steam and Battle.net and those systems work as advertised. However, Games for Windows Live has not where people today have problems with the service getting a handful of games with a handful of users to work glitch and problem free.
DRM is a pesky issue that isn't going away. People should be leery about how these things are implemented but if you want people to hate it then do it half ass like GfWL.
Actually, a big problem with all of this, setting aside whether or not kids are misdiagnosed, is that a lot of these chemicals and treatments aren't well understood in adults let alone studied in children. A lot of doctors are making up treatment regiments as they go: They give a kid something and see what happens. If they don't like the result, they try something else. But then there is a side effect so they add another drug to counter it. But then both changes the kid's behavior so they switch or add a third drug. Doctors continue to do this "refinement" to come up with a chemical cocktail they feel like "its working" but the kid ends up taking a multiple multiple pills where even the kids and parents are unsure what it is supposed to.
A major problem I see is that too much experimenting and too little research on the side effects of all of these chemicals on kids going through developmental stages. It may turn out have a rambunctious kid is less of a health issue than finding out at age 25 they are psychologically addicted and must be continually pumped with expensive drugs or they go into a psychosis from the "sensations" they get without it.
I liken XBox Live on 360 as the $50 Monster Cable internet cable to your network. Microsoft and other claim "it makes it better" by are vague about the claims and specifics just like Monster Cable. When you play "Modern Warfare 2" who is providing the online multiplayer experience? Microsoft is only providing the "account names" to Activision where Infinity Ward (or who ever is left) is responsible for matching and setting up the game as well as the technical aspects the engine and content. Friends lists and party chat and all that probably are a boon to recent gamers but to many old gamers we have had our contact systems for decades that are platform independent. We don't sit around on our XBox 360 waiting for each other to jump in. We first contact each other and find out if we are in the mood to play something then turn on the 360.
XBox Live is only "neat" in the context of that if your gaming experience is limited to only the 360 then it is probably worth the $50 subsidy. If on the other hand you use other platforms and looking at the feature list, it starts to look like one is renting a Monster Cable.
If Armstrong reported back from Applo 11 he saw precious gems the size of beach balls we'd had bases on The Moon long ago. If Viking 1 and Viking 2 turned on their cameras and saw the ground was litered gold and silver we'd have bases there too. But the truth at the moment turns out they are just barren. On Earth people avoid vast stretches of barren "bad lands" and consider them mostly worthless. Why go out to The Moon and beyond just for really expensive "bad lands"?
There maybe faults with Kagan but "no judicial experience" is kind of disengenious. She has a pretty extensive record being a clerk for a couple of judges including for Marshall. She has an extensive record in academia including Harvard Law. She has some record being Solicitor General. Kagan appears to have spent a lot of time in and around the Supreme Court of the United States. While never being a judge at state or federal levels that isn't a requirement for the job where Kagan appears to be familiar with constituional law and qualified to comment on constitutional questions.
Harriet Miers on the other hand is by profession a personal attorney with a corporate law background and doesn't appear to have any more of a constitutional background than being an advisor to the President. Worse still being a direct council to Bush means there could and would be direct conflicts of interest and previliage in some instances.
There are legitamate complaints about Kagan but she is heads and shoulders above qualifications on constitional law, history, and even procedures than Miers.
It shows that Red Hat is more engineering while Canonical is more packaging and arrangement. Red Hat is working on "lower parts" of the software where they are bound to hit bugs created by themselves or others while Canonical is far more likely to find content and packaging mistakes. People shouldn't imply "value" in lines of contribution either.
I don't think the finding is "shocking" and I don't think users of either distro should be enraged. Canonical can't contribute at this level as readily as Red Hat can which isn't a big deal.
I'm under the impression elsewhere that tax forms are filled out by the government treasury and sent to the person who then can read it and modify and correct for things unreported. The idea that taxes need to be a guessing game for individuals is kind of crazy and perpetuated by companies like Intuit because this is their bread + butter.
And besides, these tax software companies often have a harsh software business model. I'm not entirely sure anyone should defend them.
The reason why is that Microsoft has had a taste of vertical integration and they like it. This is what Apple is doing and has perfected so it is no surprise Microsoft thinks they can as well. If Microsoft creates and controls a device, creates and controls a new hardware production, creates and controls the software platform, creates and controls technology specs, and creates and controls the only store users can buy apps then they can make so much more money than just selling software. Using simplified terms, if there is a $1 of profit for iPad, Microsoft only can take a crack at pennies from just selling just their own software apps. If this was MSPad then $1 of profit means Microsoft gets many more chances to take from the $1: $0.05 for licensing libraries, $0.05 for hosting the online store, $0.05 software validation, etc. In this situation Microsoft gets paid while others create.
Simply put Microsoft gets more chances at nickles with MSPad than if they write for the most popular portable pad platform. Its no surprise Ballmer says this is "job one" because it is so lucrative.
Please make sure you only buy products labled "Rolls for Sure(TM)" to avoid compatibility issues. That way when we abandon "Rolls For Sure" after a year, you know without a doubt you will need to rebuy all of your previous wheels.
I'm okay with it as long as...
- Its free and distributed by a patch/update.
- It doesn't interfere if I don't have 3-D hardware hooked up.
- Easy to enable/disable/configure if I do have 3-D hardware hooked up.
If it is seemless and free and doesn't break anything then it is really a "value add" and I don't mind.
A cultural norm my European cousins have noticed about Americans is that we seem to be taught to believe what "friends tell us" more than "stranger tell us" even when that relationship seems irrelevant. They observe that seems to make Americans rather listen to people we know instead of "experts tell us" and sometimes outright hostility to "authority tells us". Anyone with a little bit of collegic philosophy or logic study should realize that it isn't that our friends are purposely misleading but that they can be just as wrong.
In the Good Old Days, when Microsoft announced they were interested in getting in some market or technology the VCs would tremble. Those VCs inside that market worried about being killed when investors flocked to Microsoft instead of their incubated solution. Those VC outside that market eagerly looked for small fries that wanted to partner with Microsoft to make it happen. Lots of people made moves just on the notion that higher ups at Microsoft were just considering something.
Its MO for Microsoft to stand up and announce stuff like this but the issue is that a lot less people care or follow trends Microsoft sets where the siren song of Google and Apple sound a lot better.
There are multiple version with multiple flavors at different price points that confuses "people". Add to this the finicky way upgrades behave and "upgrade upgrade" software and it is no wonder a lot of people don't care or realize a 64-bit version exists.
It is a matter of public record I registered and showed up to vote in the 2008 fall elections for the State of Iowa, 2nd Congressional district. What isn't public record is what I put on my ballot. This is where the comparison breaks down: Registering and voting just records the activity. Signing a petition commits a stance to the activity.
I believe the issues are with the process and mechanisms of referendum and ballot initiatives" not an issue of anonomity. These are mechanisms used to craft laws. If these people want to actively and directly participate in crafting laws that effect the public, then they must publicly attach their names to it. Another way to think about it: Voters don't let Congress or state legistlatures anonomously sponsor bills so why should petitioners? Given all of this it doesn't seem like the problem is anonomity.
I don't know why anyone feels the need to defend either of them. My initial inclination is that Apple has a point: If Adobe has shown their technology is deficient or compared to another, Apple should be free to choose the other. And to that point, Flash has never worked right on my phone nor has it really worked right on Linux x64. Its all about bringing the "future of the web" to the hot platform but everyone else gets left overs. But I also see that Apple is arbitrary and draconian with their platforms as well. Their technology servers to better Apple.
There are no angels in this argument, only devils we should scowl at more than the other. I scowl less at Apple at this case but they adopt this stance not to help the users but to help themselves. HTML 5 will work on Windows, Linux 64, Mac, iPad and a bunch of other platforms I haven't considered yet. Unless Adobe steps up their quality and does a turn around in the stability and performance on Flash then they aren't the future of the web but a problem many will create technology to solve.
There is some real HMI theory behind this though. HMI studies show the less buttons and dynamic the interface the more people think and feel it is faster and more responsiveness even if nothing has changed at all. Give a user an interface with a lot of buttons or one with a few, the user perceives the one with less buttons even when the guts function at exactly the same speed.
They aren't trying to hide a problem but avoiding creating a false one. Gravitating towards a minimal interface also helps with mobile versions.
Okay but why wasn't isn't information about icons and skill trees in the game? The old reasons, not enough hardware/software resources, don't apply any longer. If there is a real problem, the vendors should provide redundant copies of the documentation to the player: In the game offered in Help or Tutorial, on the disk on a common format like PDF or Html, and the classic pamphlet.
There has been a history of officials over there going "We have these rules but we can negotiate and work out what is necessary for you to come and do business here". Although it isn't new or exclusive to China to have a government just change the rules out from under people or companies "just because" some of the scales are quite egregious. So I wouldn't be surprised if Google says "We like to come to China but censored searches messes with our technology" while their government said "We have our differences for the moment but setup shop here and we can work it out later". Later is now here and it didn't help they have a hunch where the hacking attacks are coming from....
I wonder if the best idea is for Google to stay in China but make it super apparent what is going on. When one access google.(country code) they should see the usual localized Google. When one access google.cn, they should see "Results Filtered" immediately below. Click on that and get a brief, exact, and legal citation explaining why the quality of service is effected. The Chinese net users won't be in favor of Google's actions unless they are aware of how it effects them. If they can't show them what they are missing, the next best thing is to let them know they are missing out where the worst would be pulling the plug.
Nintendo survived the N64/Gamecube era stuff, which is something Sega didn't, due to their strong hand hold market position. GBA and Pokemon carried Nintendo through some dark times.
Nintendo isn't fault less. Like other Japanese tech companies they tend to make wild, custom built technology that may fly or crash. Conveniently forgetting stuff like Virtual Boy or the weak "successes" provided by Nintendo by Disk System, N64 and GameCube to praise their recent success is kind of naivety. In particular, a big thing that will ruin the 3Ds is the price tag or increased software production costs.
Email is like sending a message on a postcard. How much expectation of privacy did you have doing that? The onus is up to the sender to protect the message instead of whining about any number of people who can and will inspect the email or the back of the postcard as it goes through the system.
Although getting Source on Mac is fine, Steam is the much bigger deal. Although I don't expect PC game developers to shift their production away from PC as their "first target platform", it does make it easier if one is also interested in distributing games on Mac. It doesn't matter the size of game developer, the Mac platform is a tough nut to crack due to scales of market shifted so far to the PC where an online one can help equalize. For instance, [i]World of Goo[/i] is an excellent game that works great on Mac but it must be hell to sell to just Mac owners. Your best bet in this situation for many publishers is to "combine distribute" the PC and Mac version on one disk which isn't totally efficient and desirable.
With Steam this gets a lot simpler. You now have a marketplace that goes directly to Mac owners and they get a bunch of the bonus support of Steamworks like version updates and achievement systems. Source on Mac for some games but I really see Steam as the big deal here. Steam opens up a lot to game developers.
And as a side though: Did Apple dropped a ball here where they could have used their gigantic online store to sell MacOS games? iTunes works great for updating games on iPhone and iPod...would it be so difficult to do the same for desktop games?
This stuff shouldn't be shocking to anyone: By law, they will reveal certain things about online services when requested. The problem should be that they don't want you to know what they are forced to give up which seems to be the wrong stance. These services should be function like a bank safety deposit box: Although private, it isn't legally sacrosanct and will be opened by third parties for inspection in certain circumstances.
If nothing else, all of these online services to have a general policy about this as well. If I suddenly croak, who gets access to stuff I stored out there online? Putting the password and other access information in a vault somewhere isn't reliable or sane. I may even state it in my will that I want my immediate family to take ownership of all of my online information but I have no idea how to compel Microsoft or Google or whatever to release these accounts to someone else. This seems like one of those areas all service providers should be better at defining instead of hiding the detail from us in the legalese of the EULA.