might help to put more than 8 seconds of trolling worth to try to understand the difference between this and what apple does.
what your rage is about, and all the things summed up, are exactly apple things. they are not what is going on here for chrome.
Chrome is more like making sure that people can't get around the UAC concept in windows. This is more about enforcing good software policies, not like apple's "we're restricting user choice" which they have done to everything. This is more restricting bad developers from being able to get people to run bad apps.
Whether that is a good decision or one you want to stick with is another story altogether, but this (chrome) is more like assuming that people cannot be trusted and hiding the shit in your house to prevent theft, as opposed to (apple) telling people they can only be on the main floor of the house when they obviously have more options. Windows just lets people in and hopes that they don't steal shit. Consumer grade Linux requires a password for anyone to come in, but at that point anyone with the password can steal shit. Each of these reflect on the trust.
as someone else pointed out, that means it's not an open site. it's a bunch of useless bullshit phrases then. May as well have called it opencloudleaks to cram in more buzzwords.
dont' forget the fun part - will these giveaways go to anything of actual value for society, or donations towards their own private charities?
either way makes them sound like saints when they're not even compromising on anything, along with a comedy tax break (an entire years worth of profits) that lets them recoup the money rather quickly.
this just in: corporations want you to be afraid to go outside of the square box they put you in. this article is a fearmongering of the exact same, as shown that they have interviewed a single private investigator.
also just in: corporations look into when people are stealing shit from them!
the ignorance is also about the report failing to understand that phones and PC's are entirely separate markets and not even remotely linked. You don't carry PC's with you in your pocket - that means keyboard, mouse, monitor, etc.
This is like saying that (X product will lose dominance) due to (y product in a separate market).
when was that ever proven in court? What was stolen? Those diplomatic cables were never "exclusive US ownership" - by definition, they are owned by the citizens of the united states, not the government - We pay for these diplos with tax money. Have you ever heard of prior restraint?
oh right, never proven to be illegal or stolen. good job making that leap there, fyi.
the question is, will it route to wikileaks when under government pressure? Oh right, it'll monetize every website you go to and block anyone the politicians don't like.
The issue here is simple: why should this have to be private? as citizens of the US we should be able to expect honest communications - what was said privately was not entirely what was said publicly. Go watch about the housing crisis - we told the public it was fine and dandy in the face of a giantic problem that was forseen in 2004 as being a danger.
so where's the us honesty again? shit we don't even tell the truth to our own citizens. You think working for a corporation, eating prepackaged food, and buying a house is a good way to live? the "1950's era" "american dream?".
youtube doesnt' use a set amount of bandwidth. It's based on speeds, even for mobile. On desktop you use a different codec quality minimized vs fullscreen, so again the same applies even on a desktop now.
Slashdot Mirror
might help to put more than 8 seconds of trolling worth to try to understand the difference between this and what apple does.
what your rage is about, and all the things summed up, are exactly apple things. they are not what is going on here for chrome.
Chrome is more like making sure that people can't get around the UAC concept in windows. This is more about enforcing good software policies, not like apple's "we're restricting user choice" which they have done to everything. This is more restricting bad developers from being able to get people to run bad apps.
Whether that is a good decision or one you want to stick with is another story altogether, but this (chrome) is more like assuming that people cannot be trusted and hiding the shit in your house to prevent theft, as opposed to (apple) telling people they can only be on the main floor of the house when they obviously have more options. Windows just lets people in and hopes that they don't steal shit. Consumer grade Linux requires a password for anyone to come in, but at that point anyone with the password can steal shit. Each of these reflect on the trust.
this is the first time they've actually made *themselves* vulnerable.
going through subsidiaries is one thing but the end result here is that IV might get screwed (hopefully).
as someone else pointed out, that means it's not an open site. it's a bunch of useless bullshit phrases then. May as well have called it opencloudleaks to cram in more buzzwords.
dont' forget the fun part - will these giveaways go to anything of actual value for society, or donations towards their own private charities?
either way makes them sound like saints when they're not even compromising on anything, along with a comedy tax break (an entire years worth of profits) that lets them recoup the money rather quickly.
or if you're not retarded and hook up HTPC's that can handle it.
or if you know what you're doing, you can watch probably 4-6 channels per TV.
beyond the hype of whether capslock should be there or not, what are they replacing it with? I couldn't make that out even from the photos.
As a note removing capslock would also completely screw over the typical keyboard layout too, nor would it prevent anyone from remapping capslock.
uh, no.
actually, they probably don't do such things.
this just in: corporations want you to be afraid to go outside of the square box they put you in. this article is a fearmongering of the exact same, as shown that they have interviewed a single private investigator.
also just in: corporations look into when people are stealing shit from them!
news at 11.
the ignorance is also about the report failing to understand that phones and PC's are entirely separate markets and not even remotely linked. You don't carry PC's with you in your pocket - that means keyboard, mouse, monitor, etc.
This is like saying that (X product will lose dominance) due to (y product in a separate market).
what about the part of "consensual sex without a condom in sweden is considered a rape charge that has now snagged interpol" did you miss?
what advertisement? I haven't seen ads on websites in years between my hosts file and adblock.
really?
when was that ever proven in court? What was stolen? Those diplomatic cables were never "exclusive US ownership" - by definition, they are owned by the citizens of the united states, not the government - We pay for these diplos with tax money. Have you ever heard of prior restraint?
oh right, never proven to be illegal or stolen. good job making that leap there, fyi.
as doc pointed out below - the government declare anything illegal, but until a judge finds that to be true, it ain't.
Isn't that just normal load balancing, if done properly?
I may be oversimplifying but figured I'd ask.
the question is, will it route to wikileaks when under government pressure? Oh right, it'll monetize every website you go to and block anyone the politicians don't like.
I'll pass on this, whenever.
please. they're just going after source after source. it takes minimal effort for wikileaks to find another host. So no, it's not over.
this is just the us gov't trying to attack a decentralized solution and failing, as noted that wikileaks is still up today.
uh, no.
government subsidies too. don't think they developed this for nothing.
The issue here is simple: why should this have to be private? as citizens of the US we should be able to expect honest communications - what was said privately was not entirely what was said publicly. Go watch about the housing crisis - we told the public it was fine and dandy in the face of a giantic problem that was forseen in 2004 as being a danger.
so where's the us honesty again? shit we don't even tell the truth to our own citizens. You think working for a corporation, eating prepackaged food, and buying a house is a good way to live? the "1950's era" "american dream?".
so why exactly have you trolled this entire thread into a "oh nobody uses bandwidth" argument?
why throw an argument that makes no sense?
why have speed limits over 10 mph?
same ridiculous argument.
it's about the connection, not 5gb on your phone.
let's ask this way, which is realistic, because phones are more and more becoming like computers.
Why would you need more than 5GB of bandwidth in a month on your computer?
oh right, any semblance of normal use will go way above that.
youtube doesnt' use a set amount of bandwidth. It's based on speeds, even for mobile. On desktop you use a different codec quality minimized vs fullscreen, so again the same applies even on a desktop now.
Coren understood my point - I wasn't trying to make you look idiotic or something, just read carefully buddy.
really? It's pretty much actual confirmation of it.
I was exaggerating, deliberately so.