The difference is that I put MY camera outside MY house to see what's happening, not the police. I have a right to that data, but generally the police do not. If I do catch someone breaking into my car on my tape, would I give it to the cops? Of course. But would I cut out the part that has my buddy puking on my lawn at 2 in the morning? Definately.
It's not a matter of what information exists, but a matter of who has acces to that information.
At least, the first two paragraphs. Then the wonderful MSN formatting puts all the text BEHIND the links panel... Is it only me that this happnes? And it happens on EVERY MSN Article!
My point was not that one is better than the other, my point is that the general public percieves that is so. Your last paragraph touched on the point: it is (for better or worse) relatively easy to change a setting in windows; just about anything the normal user wants to do has a nice wizard. On the other hand, in linux, it actively tells me "Only do this if you know what you are doing". This scares most users, because most users still view their computer as a magical box that does magical things, and knows everything in the world.
An example of this comes from my grandmother and Juno. She used to always wonder why her phone gave this wierd noise. I picked it up, and heard a modem tone. She used Juno, and whenever you try to close Juno, it asks "Are you sure you want to exit?" with a yes/no. Of course, my grandmother (no offnse, Amah) is never sure about anything, so she always clicked no. Thus, she never got logged off.
Whether one OS is better than another isn't an argument for us techies here who know everything already, its the normal Grandmas and mother-in-laws to decide, and they continually go with what they know; in this world, that is Windows.
That is exactly what I said (or at least meant to). Thus, the company has nothing shameful in practices that are designed to benefit the shareholders. Further, they should not be questioned on this.
On the other hand, a Government is designed to uphold the best interests of its people. So, who should be questioning whom?
Billions of dollars that would become trillions if you switch to Linux. Why? Training. People "Know" (at least they think they do) how to use Windows, because they learned computers with Windows. All the money (~$100, educators license) for XP would be offset by probably 10-20 hours training and plenty of time wasted "Learning" this new OS, as opposed to just working (albeit at every user's own level) on whatever project is at hand.
Microsoft's monopoly with Windows comes from the fact that the general populace believes whether true or not, that it is the easier operating system, and don't want to take the time or the effort to learn or deal with somehting else. Suddenly, that $100 educator's license isn't looking like so much.
These companies are not and SHOULD NOT be ashamed. They moved to provide the best services for ALL parties. In order:
Their shareholders
The people they are serving
The governments they are working with
All the companies have worked in the best interests in order; first, the stock holders for providing ads (money) in these markets; second, the people they are serving in these markets (Google in my opinion the best, they tell what is being censored and provide alternative (though not foolproof) workarounds); third, the governments they are working with. They follow all US law (DMCA), and all Chinese law (censorship) as well as everything else. These companies have done the best things they can in the corporate sense, and while they may not be proud of having to censor their results, they certainly have NOTHING to be ashamed of.
If you google Google(1), the first result is of course Google. Then again, a search for Slashdot(2) gives us Slashdot. Looking at the next results, we get the interesting stuff: Google, Google News, Google Maps, etc. Slashdot, Slashdot RSS, Slashdot games.
We already know how Google ranks pages: First, find all pages with the one or more of the search words. More points for words in important areas (Head, H1, Strong, etc) and more points when they are together. Now, we have a numbered list of pages by topic importanct. Multiply that number by its page rank. To ge the page rank for X.com, multiply every link from n.com to x.com by n's Page Rank, add them together (and maybe add a secret sauce, but IMHO, I don't think so).
By this strategy, of course Google.com comes out way ahead of the competitors. It's got the search term in the URL, the head, and (I counted) 5 other times in the body (it would be six, but the Google Logo alt is advertising Torino 2006). How many people link to Google? Google says about 3,750,000(3). I made it to page 7(4) when I found the first "Anti google" link(5), and it's not entirely anti-google. How many people link there? About 113,000(6), and that's to news.bbc, not the article itself.
So is it surprising that google show up first? Not really. The formula described above is what Google claims to do; I have seen nothing to disuade me of the fact for 99.99999% of the time. The few cases this isn't apparent are the Personalized search (but I have no idea by how much), and of course being de-listed. On the other hand, being de-listed doesn't really do anything to other pages (5-10 points really won't affect many PR's one way or the other).
Am I the only one who thought it would be a working PC, with the case made out of legos? That'd be a lot cooler, IMHO. The mouse might be a little annoying to hold, though...
Seeming to be a comon thread amongst MMOG's these days (Star Trek, Star Gate...), this looks like it has tremendous potential. I truly hope that this project succeeds in all the areas that the spunky 19-year old developer hopes. If this goes well, perhaps we may see some other games in this genre; Pre-columbian Native Americans, Han-dynasty China, Shogun-era Japan. I could see this becoming a major franchise.
As for that 19 year-old head, I just wish I had a company to help me put my game ideas to code...
As far as I can tell from some presentations I've seen and articles I've read, the technology goes something like this:
When you enter the range of a cell tower, your phone sends it's number and 4 digit pin number. These are authenticated, and assuming everything works right, the cell tower updates your providers network that this tower can reach you. When someone calls you then, the telco looks up which cell tower(s) you are near, and tells them to connect with your phone. It does so, and everything is fine great and dandy, and you go on to assure your wife that you'll pick up the kids on the way home.
The tracking comes from triangulation of which tower(s) can reach you, and the strength of the signal for the calls you make. I live in a city of approx. 100,000 (Billings, Montana), and as far as I know, there are 7 100 meter+ cell towers. These are the ones that require a special permit in our (and from what I understand most) zoning laws.
From what I've been able to get from a buddy of mine that works for the major telco in Billings (sorry, not naming names. I don't know how sensitive this is.), their towers are able to determine how strong your signal is WHEN YOU ARE ON A CALL. The number of bars you see on your cell phone are determined by your phone, and are not communicated directly with the telco until you place/recieve a call.
My buddy claims that with just the seven towers, they can tell to within 3 blocks of where you are. When you are actively engaged in a call, that goes down to somewhere between 1/2 and 2 blocks, depending on where you are, etc. etc. etc.
Again, this information is entirely second to third hand, should be taken with a grain of salt. Still, I think this is very plausible.
As for the dangers, that rest entirely on how people use the knowledge.
Is this new? Looking at the cookie, it's right there: Expires Sunday, January 17, 2038 8:14:17 PM. I am doing a bit of research of my own on Google Personalized search, comparing different search results with Personalized on and off, moderate safe search High med-low, different computers, etc, etc, and I'll post a link to it when I've got a bit more.
The entire "News" article is a combination of every major Google rumor in the last 6 months, most of the information coming from PURE SPECULATION.
From the article: It was also reported in November that Google was buying shipping containers and building data centres within them, possibly with the aim of using them at significant nodes within the worldwide cable network. (The link was in the article)
It was not reported, it was speculated. It has only been speculated, ever, about anything like this, and until Google actually says something about it themselves, with a human's name (none of this "Undisclosed source" crap), the article better have "Speculation (Everyone elses)" in the first line, it shouldn't be considered as valid as this article claims to be. Maybe if you renamed it "Google rumors for Dummies".
Nice layout, decent results, but Google still has one thing you don't: detailed information about what I want when I search the internet.
I understand that you're trying to make a more private search engine, but in that effect, you're trying to put everyone into a one-size fits all. When I search for "Java", I am looking for Advanced-Expert ideas and tutorials on Java programming. You both give me java.sun.com as the first answer; Google goes on to the Java boutique and individual sections of the Java tutorial. Mozdex, on the other hand, goes into Yahoo and other people's Java games.
As for when I search Mozdex for C... I get C-Span, Dictionaries, everything under the sun EXCEPT references to programming (Google still gives me C-Span first, but goes immediately to Programming).
When I go searching for something on the internet, I want to be able to find what I want with the minimum of typing. Google knows that I am a programming; thus, I am probably looking for programming related articles. And they're right. I have never held that little concept that so many believe that their information is private over an HTTP (or any) connection. While many fear that, I accept it, and I truly do welcome our omnipotent Google Masters.
Google already does this... They tell the users of Google.cn that the results have been screened in accordance to the government, and Chinese users can still (theoretically) search google.com, google.uk, or the other google sites.
Am I the only one that thought this was a Slashdot interview? I know that "Interview" wasn't underlined, and didn't have an s, but still...
As for TFA: am I again the only one that doesn't see the point of "Tagging"? Or is it really just one more word in the "Web2.0" hype?
And again, am I the only person who thinks the del.icio.us looks like a washed out piece of paper? Light blue/grey on white is not a good text color, in my book.
Yes, we can blame it all on users. And I do. Whenever someone calls me up complaining about spyware, I force them to sit with me and hear my lecture about how to safely use their computer while I install and run Antispyware, SP2, and Firefox. The third time they pay me $30 and sit through my lecture, they don't have anymore problems!
Microsoft & co release bug and security patches, etc. in a seemly time, and it is up to the user to meet them half way!
First, if you're on Windows NT/XP etc the obvious solution is Microsoft AntiSpyware for removal; however, I have a better solution. If you like it, use IE for your normal browsing. BUT: if you see a link to a questionable site, open it in Firefox or Opera. If you follow those simple rules, and don't install anything stupid, you're good to go!
I just reinstalled my formerly out of date AntiSpyware, and ran it. I hadn't run an Anti-malware program since August 14th. NO ANYTHING! Not a single reference could be found to ANYTHING on my computer! No iffy cookies, no nothing! I use IE6 and 'Fox 1.5, and am unashamed to admit that I do indeed visit porn websites.
Microsoft is not an evil company doing everything they can to let spyware get to your computer, and if more Slashdotters would spend half the amount of time bitching about "Micro$oft" by teaching their mother-in-law how to use her computer properly, we wouldn't have these problems!
Slashdot Mirror
The difference is that I put MY camera outside MY house to see what's happening, not the police. I have a right to that data, but generally the police do not. If I do catch someone breaking into my car on my tape, would I give it to the cops? Of course. But would I cut out the part that has my buddy puking on my lawn at 2 in the morning? Definately.
It's not a matter of what information exists, but a matter of who has acces to that information.
At least, the first two paragraphs. Then the wonderful MSN formatting puts all the text BEHIND the links panel... Is it only me that this happnes? And it happens on EVERY MSN Article!
My point was not that one is better than the other, my point is that the general public percieves that is so. Your last paragraph touched on the point: it is (for better or worse) relatively easy to change a setting in windows; just about anything the normal user wants to do has a nice wizard. On the other hand, in linux, it actively tells me "Only do this if you know what you are doing". This scares most users, because most users still view their computer as a magical box that does magical things, and knows everything in the world.
An example of this comes from my grandmother and Juno. She used to always wonder why her phone gave this wierd noise. I picked it up, and heard a modem tone. She used Juno, and whenever you try to close Juno, it asks "Are you sure you want to exit?" with a yes/no. Of course, my grandmother (no offnse, Amah) is never sure about anything, so she always clicked no. Thus, she never got logged off.
Whether one OS is better than another isn't an argument for us techies here who know everything already, its the normal Grandmas and mother-in-laws to decide, and they continually go with what they know; in this world, that is Windows.
That is exactly what I said (or at least meant to). Thus, the company has nothing shameful in practices that are designed to benefit the shareholders. Further, they should not be questioned on this.
On the other hand, a Government is designed to uphold the best interests of its people. So, who should be questioning whom?
Billions of dollars that would become trillions if you switch to Linux. Why? Training. People "Know" (at least they think they do) how to use Windows, because they learned computers with Windows. All the money (~$100, educators license) for XP would be offset by probably 10-20 hours training and plenty of time wasted "Learning" this new OS, as opposed to just working (albeit at every user's own level) on whatever project is at hand.
Microsoft's monopoly with Windows comes from the fact that the general populace believes whether true or not, that it is the easier operating system, and don't want to take the time or the effort to learn or deal with somehting else. Suddenly, that $100 educator's license isn't looking like so much.
These companies are not and SHOULD NOT be ashamed. They moved to provide the best services for ALL parties. In order:
All the companies have worked in the best interests in order; first, the stock holders for providing ads (money) in these markets; second, the people they are serving in these markets (Google in my opinion the best, they tell what is being censored and provide alternative (though not foolproof) workarounds); third, the governments they are working with. They follow all US law (DMCA), and all Chinese law (censorship) as well as everything else. These companies have done the best things they can in the corporate sense, and while they may not be proud of having to censor their results, they certainly have NOTHING to be ashamed of.
Yes, I know... though (I thought) it was originally form Austin Powers.
I've always been a little confused with that- is it the sharks that are expensive, or is it training the sharks to use the lasers?
Truly strange. The first product from Yahoo I have ever wished Google came out with first... earily freaky...
And why is that?
If you google Google(1), the first result is of course Google. Then again, a search for Slashdot(2) gives us Slashdot. Looking at the next results, we get the interesting stuff: Google, Google News, Google Maps, etc. Slashdot, Slashdot RSS, Slashdot games.
We already know how Google ranks pages: First, find all pages with the one or more of the search words. More points for words in important areas (Head, H1, Strong, etc) and more points when they are together. Now, we have a numbered list of pages by topic importanct. Multiply that number by its page rank. To ge the page rank for X.com, multiply every link from n.com to x.com by n's Page Rank, add them together (and maybe add a secret sauce, but IMHO, I don't think so).By this strategy, of course Google.com comes out way ahead of the competitors. It's got the search term in the URL, the head, and (I counted) 5 other times in the body (it would be six, but the Google Logo alt is advertising Torino 2006). How many people link to Google? Google says about 3,750,000(3). I made it to page 7(4) when I found the first "Anti google" link(5), and it's not entirely anti-google. How many people link there? About 113,000(6), and that's to news.bbc, not the article itself.
So is it surprising that google show up first? Not really. The formula described above is what Google claims to do; I have seen nothing to disuade me of the fact for 99.99999% of the time. The few cases this isn't apparent are the Personalized search (but I have no idea by how much), and of course being de-listed. On the other hand, being de-listed doesn't really do anything to other pages (5-10 points really won't affect many PR's one way or the other).
Am I the only one who thought it would be a working PC, with the case made out of legos? That'd be a lot cooler, IMHO. The mouse might be a little annoying to hold, though...
Seeming to be a comon thread amongst MMOG's these days (Star Trek, Star Gate...), this looks like it has tremendous potential. I truly hope that this project succeeds in all the areas that the spunky 19-year old developer hopes. If this goes well, perhaps we may see some other games in this genre; Pre-columbian Native Americans, Han-dynasty China, Shogun-era Japan. I could see this becoming a major franchise. As for that 19 year-old head, I just wish I had a company to help me put my game ideas to code...
As far as I can tell from some presentations I've seen and articles I've read, the technology goes something like this:
When you enter the range of a cell tower, your phone sends it's number and 4 digit pin number. These are authenticated, and assuming everything works right, the cell tower updates your providers network that this tower can reach you. When someone calls you then, the telco looks up which cell tower(s) you are near, and tells them to connect with your phone. It does so, and everything is fine great and dandy, and you go on to assure your wife that you'll pick up the kids on the way home.
The tracking comes from triangulation of which tower(s) can reach you, and the strength of the signal for the calls you make. I live in a city of approx. 100,000 (Billings, Montana), and as far as I know, there are 7 100 meter+ cell towers. These are the ones that require a special permit in our (and from what I understand most) zoning laws.
From what I've been able to get from a buddy of mine that works for the major telco in Billings (sorry, not naming names. I don't know how sensitive this is.), their towers are able to determine how strong your signal is WHEN YOU ARE ON A CALL. The number of bars you see on your cell phone are determined by your phone, and are not communicated directly with the telco until you place/recieve a call.
My buddy claims that with just the seven towers, they can tell to within 3 blocks of where you are. When you are actively engaged in a call, that goes down to somewhere between 1/2 and 2 blocks, depending on where you are, etc. etc. etc.
Again, this information is entirely second to third hand, should be taken with a grain of salt. Still, I think this is very plausible.
As for the dangers, that rest entirely on how people use the knowledge.
As a gamer, I for one would love the opportunity to fly in a virtual vs. real race. However, I think I would lose...
But honestly, this looks a hell of a lot better than NASCAR, and I must admit I enjoy a good NASCAR race.
Is this new? Looking at the cookie, it's right there: Expires Sunday, January 17, 2038 8:14:17 PM. I am doing a bit of research of my own on Google Personalized search, comparing different search results with Personalized on and off, moderate safe search High med-low, different computers, etc, etc, and I'll post a link to it when I've got a bit more.
The entire "News" article is a combination of every major Google rumor in the last 6 months, most of the information coming from PURE SPECULATION.
From the article: It was also reported in November that Google was buying shipping containers and building data centres within them, possibly with the aim of using them at significant nodes within the worldwide cable network. (The link was in the article)
It was not reported, it was speculated. It has only been speculated, ever, about anything like this, and until Google actually says something about it themselves, with a human's name (none of this "Undisclosed source" crap), the article better have "Speculation (Everyone elses)" in the first line, it shouldn't be considered as valid as this article claims to be. Maybe if you renamed it "Google rumors for Dummies".
It's still a hell of a lot better than Sony.
Nice layout, decent results, but Google still has one thing you don't: detailed information about what I want when I search the internet.
I understand that you're trying to make a more private search engine, but in that effect, you're trying to put everyone into a one-size fits all. When I search for "Java", I am looking for Advanced-Expert ideas and tutorials on Java programming. You both give me java.sun.com as the first answer; Google goes on to the Java boutique and individual sections of the Java tutorial. Mozdex, on the other hand, goes into Yahoo and other people's Java games.
As for when I search Mozdex for C... I get C-Span, Dictionaries, everything under the sun EXCEPT references to programming (Google still gives me C-Span first, but goes immediately to Programming).
When I go searching for something on the internet, I want to be able to find what I want with the minimum of typing. Google knows that I am a programming; thus, I am probably looking for programming related articles. And they're right. I have never held that little concept that so many believe that their information is private over an HTTP (or any) connection. While many fear that, I accept it, and I truly do welcome our omnipotent Google Masters.
Google already does this... They tell the users of Google.cn that the results have been screened in accordance to the government, and Chinese users can still (theoretically) search google.com, google.uk, or the other google sites.
Am I the only one that thought this was a Slashdot interview? I know that "Interview" wasn't underlined, and didn't have an s, but still...
As for TFA: am I again the only one that doesn't see the point of "Tagging"? Or is it really just one more word in the "Web2.0" hype?
And again, am I the only person who thinks the del.icio.us looks like a washed out piece of paper? Light blue/grey on white is not a good text color, in my book.
I'm in Switzerland, and seeing it fine...
My tracert shows me going through:
bluwin.ch
bb.ip-plus.net
net.google.com
Don't know if this'll help, but the vid is shure as hell hilarious!
But what type of toy would the new Taiwanese be?
If Renoir painted a nud orgy, I'd be willing to download spyware to see it.
Yes, we can blame it all on users. And I do. Whenever someone calls me up complaining about spyware, I force them to sit with me and hear my lecture about how to safely use their computer while I install and run Antispyware, SP2, and Firefox. The third time they pay me $30 and sit through my lecture, they don't have anymore problems! Microsoft & co release bug and security patches, etc. in a seemly time, and it is up to the user to meet them half way!
First, if you're on Windows NT/XP etc the obvious solution is Microsoft AntiSpyware for removal; however, I have a better solution. If you like it, use IE for your normal browsing. BUT: if you see a link to a questionable site, open it in Firefox or Opera. If you follow those simple rules, and don't install anything stupid, you're good to go! I just reinstalled my formerly out of date AntiSpyware, and ran it. I hadn't run an Anti-malware program since August 14th. NO ANYTHING! Not a single reference could be found to ANYTHING on my computer! No iffy cookies, no nothing! I use IE6 and 'Fox 1.5, and am unashamed to admit that I do indeed visit porn websites. Microsoft is not an evil company doing everything they can to let spyware get to your computer, and if more Slashdotters would spend half the amount of time bitching about "Micro$oft" by teaching their mother-in-law how to use her computer properly, we wouldn't have these problems!