This week, a new broadside came from the World Association of Newspapers, which said publications should be compensated for use by Google News.
To the best of my knowledge, Google is not actually hosting the news. They provide snippets and a headline and link people to the newspapers pages. I would imagine that they are gaining more hits than they are losing due to Google News.
I would also guess that Google gives websites the ability to opt out of the service.
If they are getting away with paying social security tax on the $1, they are really shafting all those middle and lower class americans who pony up $12,000 per year on medicaid/SS taxes.
You're dead wrong. Those "middle and lower class americans" you speak of will pay the same amount regardless of how much Mssrs Bryn and Page pay. And since it's reasonable to believe that neither Mr. Bryn nor Mr. Page will ever need to use Medicaid nor Social Security, they will not be costing the system more money than they've already contributed.
In fact, the system is shafting them. They've undoubtedly paid tens of thousands of dollars into a system they will never need and I'm pretty sure they will not be receiving a refund.
Besides, the number of jobs they've created and the amount of money their very successful company is pumping back into the economy more than makes up for the minor amount of revenue that would be collected if they were paid industry-standard salaries. Think about the big picture of social & economic contributions of Google, Inc. and ignore for a moment the drop in the bucket that Social Security will never miss.
It does make sense if you think about the fact that Google is probably accruing much better statistics about what people actually want (via Google Local searches) without having to rely on guestimations and shaky demographic statistics.
When Sam's Autobody opens in South San Francisco and wants to advertise, here's how the scenarios would play out:
Traditional radio logic:
"Our signal is based in San Francisco, has a radius of 25 miles and covers 900,000 homes and ranks 1st in Arbitron ratings with males 18-25. Males 18-25 have lots of accidents so you should advertise with us."
Google radio logic:
"Google stats show that people who searched for autobody shops on Local were heavily concentrated in the San Jose area and also searched for cowboy boots on Froogle and Travis Tritt fan sites. We'll put your AdSense ad on the web and also run a 30 second spot on all the country stations near San Jose."
Ok, and if the car came with no features, no windows, no radio, no padded seats, no radio antennae, no... and it was impossible to be stolen, would anyone want to buy it?
MS seems to run into trouble because they try to incorporate too many features. Most of the "features" are bloat for the/. community but still provide a value for Gertie Grandma. Out-of-the-box networking functionality, remote assistance, etc. "Features" that help non-nerds connect to their yahoo e-mail account that would be described by most readers of this board as security gaps.
On another note... it cracks me up that the *nix fanboys rip MS for poor security all the time and then rip them for releasing a tool to help secure their OS. MS can't even win for trying to fix its own mistakes.
If somebody steals your car because you didn't lock the doors, is that the manufacturer's fault?
And if you were told that Ford F150s are involved in vastly more accidents than Volvos, would you be surprised? Could you then declare that Volvos are more safer/stable because they don't get wrecked as often?
Volvos have a reputation of safety partly because they are safe cars and partly because their reputation brings safety-conscious people into their dealerships - people who aren't as likely to get in accidents regardless of what make/model they drive. Windows has the widest desktop distribution on the planet and also has the most computer-illiterate people using their desktops.
Someone who is inclined to research a Linux build, find it, download it, and install it themselves is probably not likely to wire money to some Nigerian royal accountant who out of the goodness of his heart is going to make you a millionaire. But for each nerd who does that, there are 50 little grannies whose Dell came with Windows pre-installed. If Linux was more than 3% of the worldwide desktop market and non-computer-savvy people used Linux we'd be seeing a lot more malware aimed at Linux. And there *will* be malware that penetrates Linux - NO system is ever 100% safe. So STFU with your FUD about Windows and consider the possibility that they have the hardest market of all, a market that the open-source geeks don't seem to think is worth anything: non-techno-savvy people who just want their computers to work.
Slashdot Mirror
It gets even more ridiculous. From TFA:
This week, a new broadside came from the World Association of Newspapers, which said publications should be compensated for use by Google News.
To the best of my knowledge, Google is not actually hosting the news. They provide snippets and a headline and link people to the newspapers pages. I would imagine that they are gaining more hits than they are losing due to Google News.
I would also guess that Google gives websites the ability to opt out of the service.
If they are getting away with paying social security tax on the $1, they are really shafting all those middle and lower class americans who pony up $12,000 per year on medicaid/SS taxes.
You're dead wrong. Those "middle and lower class americans" you speak of will pay the same amount regardless of how much Mssrs Bryn and Page pay. And since it's reasonable to believe that neither Mr. Bryn nor Mr. Page will ever need to use Medicaid nor Social Security, they will not be costing the system more money than they've already contributed.
In fact, the system is shafting them. They've undoubtedly paid tens of thousands of dollars into a system they will never need and I'm pretty sure they will not be receiving a refund.
Besides, the number of jobs they've created and the amount of money their very successful company is pumping back into the economy more than makes up for the minor amount of revenue that would be collected if they were paid industry-standard salaries. Think about the big picture of social & economic contributions of Google, Inc. and ignore for a moment the drop in the bucket that Social Security will never miss.
It does make sense if you think about the fact that Google is probably accruing much better statistics about what people actually want (via Google Local searches) without having to rely on guestimations and shaky demographic statistics.
When Sam's Autobody opens in South San Francisco and wants to advertise, here's how the scenarios would play out:
Traditional radio logic:
Google radio logic:
Ok, and if the car came with no features, no windows, no radio, no padded seats, no radio antennae, no... and it was impossible to be stolen, would anyone want to buy it?
/. community but still provide a value for Gertie Grandma. Out-of-the-box networking functionality, remote assistance, etc. "Features" that help non-nerds connect to their yahoo e-mail account that would be described by most readers of this board as security gaps.
MS seems to run into trouble because they try to incorporate too many features. Most of the "features" are bloat for the
On another note... it cracks me up that the *nix fanboys rip MS for poor security all the time and then rip them for releasing a tool to help secure their OS. MS can't even win for trying to fix its own mistakes.
If somebody steals your car because you didn't lock the doors, is that the manufacturer's fault?
And if you were told that Ford F150s are involved in vastly more accidents than Volvos, would you be surprised? Could you then declare that Volvos are more safer/stable because they don't get wrecked as often?
Volvos have a reputation of safety partly because they are safe cars and partly because their reputation brings safety-conscious people into their dealerships - people who aren't as likely to get in accidents regardless of what make/model they drive. Windows has the widest desktop distribution on the planet and also has the most computer-illiterate people using their desktops.
Someone who is inclined to research a Linux build, find it, download it, and install it themselves is probably not likely to wire money to some Nigerian royal accountant who out of the goodness of his heart is going to make you a millionaire. But for each nerd who does that, there are 50 little grannies whose Dell came with Windows pre-installed. If Linux was more than 3% of the worldwide desktop market and non-computer-savvy people used Linux we'd be seeing a lot more malware aimed at Linux. And there *will* be malware that penetrates Linux - NO system is ever 100% safe. So STFU with your FUD about Windows and consider the possibility that they have the hardest market of all, a market that the open-source geeks don't seem to think is worth anything: non-techno-savvy people who just want their computers to work.