Well I always use Google because none of the other search engines are very good.
This is the only real reason Google is the head of the pack in search engines.
Honestly, I don't believe there's a monopoly here. Google is but one web site on the net. Anyone else can easily cobble together their own crawlers and search page and try to compete. I'm sure Amazon Web Services will happily sell you compute time to run your business.
The only thing Google has over everyone else is a lead on the technology. They have spent countless man-hours refining and improving their crawling and indexing systems. They've spread a lot on tendrils into other technology too, all built on an innovative advertiser revenue stream.
Google has absolutely no power to hinder you from launching your own Google-like infrastructure. A monopoly is more like days past of Microsoft bundling IE with the operating system (something you need to run any web browser), and then deliberately 'messing' with competitors browsers when running on their OS. They have a long rich history of bullying third party developers with their control of the operating system. Google is in no such position. Android is open source so anyone can build upon it's pieces to make their own stuff. But Google will always have a technological advantage due to their experience in this field. But it's still not a monopoly. They can't mess with Bing, DuckDuckGo or any other search engine. Google is just better than them all because they're better at it. They've invested tremendous resources in getting better at what they do.
However Google is probably evil. Or at least they are creepy if you look behind the curtains. I'm not so sure I am comfortable being Google product. Which is what everyone who uses Google is. You're their product. They are selling YOU to advertisers and research. Their services are not free, even though you don't have to pay money (as an end-user.)
I'm baffled by this. Save Mozilla == Save the Internet?
How did this happen? Mozilla is dying cuz it's got nothing over anyone else.
Where is the path that Mozilla going the way of the floppy that leads to endangered internet?
IE is free, Edge is free, Chrome is free, Pale Moon is free, Opera is free... and there's a lot more I'm sure.
On a personal note, I am a little disappointed by Mozilla. Not because of Firefox, its a fine enough browser, but killing further development of Thunderbird, now that's a crime.
On another personal note, Facebook and Google aren't the internet. They're just big players. One is just plain evil and the other, well, I haven't decided yet. Google is awfully useful, and still gives it all away for free. However, Google has an established history of taking things away, with no recourse. That makes me wary.
Anyone with half a brain should definitely be suspicious. Why wait? And more importantly, why now? What's the motivation for coming out with this stuff NOW, instead of 6 years ago when it actually happened? Motivation is everything. And in this case, it's very suspect because of the lengthy amount of time that's elapsed.
Is Satoshi Nakamoto suspected of a crime? Is he or she a threat to national security? The NSA has expended all this effort and violated Satoshi's and a billion other people's privacy for.... what? Shits and giggles?
You know, when I mentioned this to coworkers, whom are not technical, that was their question too. Why? What did he do?
Reminds me of the early days (mid 1990's) of PGP, when there was a now obviously ineffective campaign to encourage everyone to put their emails into the 'encryption envelope.'
It did come up in a minor way: "Just because objectionable content is removed, that doesn't necessarily transform the content enough to allow this type of behavior under a fair use analysis". Essentially the court implies that censorship alone is a breach of copyright.
Oh please. This is blatant infringement.
Fair use would be
This is not even remotely close to fair use. Edited movie for content is still a movie you can watch and enjoy. Analysis and commentary with select clips from the film, that's fair use.
I mean, really? Do you think when a broadcast television station edits a movie to fit into the time allotted is 'fair use', too?
We're talking about companies that turn over employees fast, pay rock bottom wages and even go as far as to bring in foreign workers so they can pay even less. They don't give a flying f about their employees, you really think they want anything other that their customer's money?
You're assuming that companies want to talk to their customers. They don't. The best customer is the one who pays the bill and makes no noise.
By making it increasingly difficult to contact companies for any kind of support or assistance, they've muted their customers. Why would they want to undo this?
Are you under the illusion that companies actually care?
Government is really on a hell of a fishing expedition here.
I highly doubt there's any planning of violence/vandalism on the site. That sort of stuff sounds like spur of the moment stuff. Do they really think protesters, in general, go out with malicious intent?
Bitcoin suffers from it's own design. It's decentralized, and unregulated. Criminals have flocked to the 'currency' for these very reasons.
It just goes to show, regulation does have a place. I personally can't get behind something that facilitates criminality to the degree bitcoin does.
It's very design is the problem. It can't be regulated. Oversight is impossible. In the age of scams, fraud and identity theft, we simply cannot have a deregulated decentralized, pseudo-anonymous 'currency.' It just causes way too many problems and ultimately doesn't solve any problems legitimate government issued currency has.
How the fuck do you run a program without downloading it? Or is this some marketing bullshit where "downloading" has a different meaning than "installing"?
We can stream HD video FFS. Is it so unimaginable to stream a program's code and data on the fly?
How the fuck do you run a program without downloading it? Or is this some marketing bullshit where "downloading" has a different meaning than "installing"?
I'm imaging something much like the way you can use a virtual machine without being anywhere near the hardware running it.
Not like server side processing is anything new. It's just spitting out the result in some new elegant way.
Wi-Fi Aware (Neighborhood Aware Networking -- NAN): Android Oreo has added support for a new connectivity feature called Wi-Fi Aware, also known as Neighborhood Aware Networking (NAN), which allows apps and devices to automatically find, connect to, and share data with each other directly without any internet access point or cellular data.
...it's completely not a feature. Quite the opposite. Everything is tracked, anyone can see what anyone else is doing. Associating wallets with real life people is not especially difficult.
Agreed. It's funny; I'd be willing to pay Netflix more, but I'm not willing to pay separate services individually.
This is where I don't agree. I am totally cool with a good solid streaming service charging for addons. Hulu is already doing it, you can add HBO stuff, but they want too much for it.
I think the $5 price point is a good target. HBO addon for Hulu is $14.95. That's just a bit much to swallow for content.
This splintering of streaming services is really stupid.
There is no way I am dealing with this. Team up with NetFlix, or go home. I am not buying subscriptions for every content provider, it's just stupid.
I don't even mind if you wanna force NetFlix to collect your $5/mo to access your content, that's ok. But no to multiple stream providers, I got enough accounts all over the web as it is now.
This rush to deploy driverless vehicles is insanity. Especially after the news of the gentleman who was denogginized by an 18 wheeler through no fault of his own. In response to events like that, Musk and other true believers simply think the concept might need a few more tweaks.
Self-driving cars already have a better driving record than any human could hope for. They don't have to be perfect, they just have to be better than us.
One of the suspects' lawyer argued that his client didn't have the skills to penetrate the security on the web site of a Fortune 500 company -- and insisted instead that his client just had a really special knack for finding good deals.
"Yeah, your honor, I was on the website and I pushed some stuff and it started sending me free stuff. I didn't mean it!"
Which of course is invalidated the moment they use the 'problem' again for more and more free stuff. Shameful.
Unlocked door doesn't make it suddenly OK to steal other people's stuff, sorry!
I learned BASIC when I was in school as a youngling.
It's not the best, but it is BASIC and fairly easy to start learning with.
Trouble with this is, the more complicated the programming language, the harder is it for young minds to grasp. BASIC was rather intended toward beginners to start from.
Would probably be wise to offer that on a very simple computer, because simple computer means easier to understand and program. Along the lines of the dated C64 level of computer shined in this role in it's day, and could again. Or something similarly simple.
Even the simplest programming language on any mature operating system are just going to be way to much to expect a young mind to learn, start small, work your way up.
Now that Cloudflare has kicked the Nazi's to the curb, let's get busy with some other more offensive sites that really have no business having access to the net. Everyone gets to name one.
Westboro Baptist Church. They gotta go. That trash definitely doesn't deserve free speech, they condone killing American soldiers!
Slashdot Mirror
Well I always use Google because none of the other search engines are very good.
This is the only real reason Google is the head of the pack in search engines.
Honestly, I don't believe there's a monopoly here. Google is but one web site on the net. Anyone else can easily cobble together their own crawlers and search page and try to compete. I'm sure Amazon Web Services will happily sell you compute time to run your business.
The only thing Google has over everyone else is a lead on the technology. They have spent countless man-hours refining and improving their crawling and indexing systems. They've spread a lot on tendrils into other technology too, all built on an innovative advertiser revenue stream.
Google has absolutely no power to hinder you from launching your own Google-like infrastructure. A monopoly is more like days past of Microsoft bundling IE with the operating system (something you need to run any web browser), and then deliberately 'messing' with competitors browsers when running on their OS. They have a long rich history of bullying third party developers with their control of the operating system. Google is in no such position. Android is open source so anyone can build upon it's pieces to make their own stuff. But Google will always have a technological advantage due to their experience in this field. But it's still not a monopoly. They can't mess with Bing, DuckDuckGo or any other search engine. Google is just better than them all because they're better at it. They've invested tremendous resources in getting better at what they do.
However Google is probably evil. Or at least they are creepy if you look behind the curtains. I'm not so sure I am comfortable being Google product. Which is what everyone who uses Google is. You're their product. They are selling YOU to advertisers and research. Their services are not free, even though you don't have to pay money (as an end-user.)
I'm baffled by this. Save Mozilla == Save the Internet?
How did this happen? Mozilla is dying cuz it's got nothing over anyone else.
Where is the path that Mozilla going the way of the floppy that leads to endangered internet?
IE is free, Edge is free, Chrome is free, Pale Moon is free, Opera is free... and there's a lot more I'm sure.
On a personal note, I am a little disappointed by Mozilla. Not because of Firefox, its a fine enough browser, but killing further development of Thunderbird, now that's a crime.
On another personal note, Facebook and Google aren't the internet. They're just big players. One is just plain evil and the other, well, I haven't decided yet. Google is awfully useful, and still gives it all away for free. However, Google has an established history of taking things away, with no recourse. That makes me wary.
Who cares about suspicious timing.
Anyone with half a brain should definitely be suspicious. Why wait? And more importantly, why now? What's the motivation for coming out with this stuff NOW, instead of 6 years ago when it actually happened? Motivation is everything. And in this case, it's very suspect because of the lengthy amount of time that's elapsed.
Why wait 6 years to come out with this stuff?
Got an axe to grind with Google?
While the story doesn't seem very far fetched, the delay is highly suspect.
Wouldn't it have just been simpler to create a honey pot that answered to the correct password?
Malware authors are getting increasingly good at detecting honey pot environments. Using the real deal is a good call, IMHO.
Is Satoshi Nakamoto suspected of a crime? Is he or she a threat to national security?
The NSA has expended all this effort and violated Satoshi's and a billion other people's privacy for.... what? Shits and giggles?
You know, when I mentioned this to coworkers, whom are not technical, that was their question too. Why? What did he do?
Exist, apparently. Guess that's a crime too.
Reminds me of the early days (mid 1990's) of PGP, when there was a now obviously ineffective campaign to encourage everyone to put their emails into the 'encryption envelope.'
We didn't listen. Now this is possible.
Slashdot ate the part of my comment, correction:
Fair use would [insert 1000's of YouTube videos featuring clips from movies with commentary, analysis, etc]
It did come up in a minor way: "Just because objectionable content is removed, that doesn't necessarily transform the content enough to allow this type of behavior under a fair use analysis". Essentially the court implies that censorship alone is a breach of copyright.
Oh please. This is blatant infringement.
Fair use would be
This is not even remotely close to fair use. Edited movie for content is still a movie you can watch and enjoy. Analysis and commentary with select clips from the film, that's fair use.
I mean, really? Do you think when a broadcast television station edits a movie to fit into the time allotted is 'fair use', too?
So only precedent-setting cases are news?
No. But news of some joker streaming copyrighted material over the internet without permission and busted for it definitely isn't.
The court didn't agree, however, because VidAngel didn't have the permission in the first place to stream the content.
Which basically means that's what the court ruled on, and videos being altered in this fashion before stream never even came up.
Nothing to see here. No precedent was set regarding the actual act of alterations.
Just an addendum:
We're talking about companies that turn over employees fast, pay rock bottom wages and even go as far as to bring in foreign workers so they can pay even less. They don't give a flying f about their employees, you really think they want anything other that their customer's money?
You're assuming that companies want to talk to their customers. They don't. The best customer is the one who pays the bill and makes no noise.
By making it increasingly difficult to contact companies for any kind of support or assistance, they've muted their customers. Why would they want to undo this?
Are you under the illusion that companies actually care?
Government is really on a hell of a fishing expedition here.
I highly doubt there's any planning of violence/vandalism on the site. That sort of stuff sounds like spur of the moment stuff. Do they really think protesters, in general, go out with malicious intent?
Fishy fishing expedition is fishy.
Bitcoin suffers from it's own design. It's decentralized, and unregulated. Criminals have flocked to the 'currency' for these very reasons.
It just goes to show, regulation does have a place. I personally can't get behind something that facilitates criminality to the degree bitcoin does.
It's very design is the problem. It can't be regulated. Oversight is impossible. In the age of scams, fraud and identity theft, we simply cannot have a deregulated decentralized, pseudo-anonymous 'currency.' It just causes way too many problems and ultimately doesn't solve any problems legitimate government issued currency has.
How the fuck do you run a program without downloading it? Or is this some marketing bullshit where "downloading" has a different meaning than "installing"?
We can stream HD video FFS. Is it so unimaginable to stream a program's code and data on the fly?
How the fuck do you run a program without downloading it? Or is this some marketing bullshit where "downloading" has a different meaning than "installing"?
I'm imaging something much like the way you can use a virtual machine without being anywhere near the hardware running it.
Not like server side processing is anything new. It's just spitting out the result in some new elegant way.
Wi-Fi Aware (Neighborhood Aware Networking -- NAN): Android Oreo has added support for a new connectivity feature called Wi-Fi Aware, also known as Neighborhood Aware Networking (NAN), which allows apps and devices to automatically find, connect to, and share data with each other directly without any internet access point or cellular data.
This sounds really creepy. And ripe for misuse.
...it's completely not a feature. Quite the opposite. Everything is tracked, anyone can see what anyone else is doing. Associating wallets with real life people is not especially difficult.
Agreed. It's funny; I'd be willing to pay Netflix more, but I'm not willing to pay separate services individually.
This is where I don't agree. I am totally cool with a good solid streaming service charging for addons. Hulu is already doing it, you can add HBO stuff, but they want too much for it.
I think the $5 price point is a good target. HBO addon for Hulu is $14.95. That's just a bit much to swallow for content.
This splintering of streaming services is really stupid.
There is no way I am dealing with this. Team up with NetFlix, or go home. I am not buying subscriptions for every content provider, it's just stupid.
I don't even mind if you wanna force NetFlix to collect your $5/mo to access your content, that's ok. But no to multiple stream providers, I got enough accounts all over the web as it is now.
This rush to deploy driverless vehicles is insanity. Especially after the news of the gentleman who was denogginized by an 18 wheeler through no fault of his own. In response to events like that, Musk and other true believers simply think the concept might need a few more tweaks.
Self-driving cars already have a better driving record than any human could hope for. They don't have to be perfect, they just have to be better than us.
One of the suspects' lawyer argued that his client didn't have the skills to penetrate the security on the web site of a Fortune 500 company -- and insisted instead that his client just had a really special knack for finding good deals.
"Yeah, your honor, I was on the website and I pushed some stuff and it started sending me free stuff. I didn't mean it!"
Which of course is invalidated the moment they use the 'problem' again for more and more free stuff. Shameful.
Unlocked door doesn't make it suddenly OK to steal other people's stuff, sorry!
I learned BASIC when I was in school as a youngling.
It's not the best, but it is BASIC and fairly easy to start learning with.
Trouble with this is, the more complicated the programming language, the harder is it for young minds to grasp. BASIC was rather intended toward beginners to start from.
Would probably be wise to offer that on a very simple computer, because simple computer means easier to understand and program. Along the lines of the dated C64 level of computer shined in this role in it's day, and could again. Or something similarly simple.
Even the simplest programming language on any mature operating system are just going to be way to much to expect a young mind to learn, start small, work your way up.
That's my 2 cents.
Now that Cloudflare has kicked the Nazi's to the curb, let's get busy with some other more offensive sites that really have no business having access to the net. Everyone gets to name one.
Westboro Baptist Church. They gotta go. That trash definitely doesn't deserve free speech, they condone killing American soldiers!