I just installed it on XP, and it didn't prompt me at all. It defaulted to Google, of course. It was changeable under options, with the three being Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
It also invites me to install "Angry Birds" from the Chrome Web Store when I open a new tab.
I agree, and my sentence incorrectly mixes up the two. However, as you say:
trying to separate their advertising services from their search service is bizarre
It was stated by my 1st parent that Google has a monopoly in Internet advertising, but not in search. However, as you have stated, it doesn't make sense to separate these two. One feeds into the other. Google spends tons of money on their search product.
To attempt to leverage their monopoly here in a Microsoft-like fashion, they would have to do something like make sure their search engine only works with, or only works well with Chrome, forcing everyone to use Chrome whether they want to or not.
The first issue with IE is that it came bundled in with the OS for free, and also promoted to become the default browser, thus using their desktop market share to win the browser market share. The same kind of thing is occurring with Chrome.
Second, while IE was tied to Windows, Chrome is tied to Google search. When you install Chrome, by default you are using Google's search services, reinforcing their market share.
Google have ONE product that is a monopoly and that is internet advertising.
This monopoly funds all their other efforts to dominate other areas, including the search service they give away for free. They are acting much like Microsoft did/does with their desktop dominance.
Go read the story of Gates and the first BASIC rom.
Yes, go read it. He was one of the key programmers to implement BASIC in 4k. They beat everybody to the punch with a good business idea and a solid technical achievement.
This whole idea that Gates was just a ruthless businessman is ridiculous. He was a ruthless businessman, but that's only half the story.
the individual rights are weighed much more lightly compared with the greater societal good
Where the "greater societal good" means "our power must not be challenged". It's the same in any government that fights their way to power in the name of the people, and then becomes that which they were fighting against.
"Communism is NOT an economic system; it's a political system!" [..] propaganda we received about "Capitalism vs. Communism"
What bizarre statements. The whole point of communism is to describe how the economy should be structured, and yes, it is fundamentally the opposite of capitalism. Of course it is a political system, too. You can't dictate terms of the economy without involving politics.
The problem is you're assuming a technical savvy that people just don't possess. Even an idiot knows sticking a random syringe in their arm is dangerous, and has virtually no incentive to do so.
A USB stick, however, looks harmless because normally it is. Also, wouldn't it be nice if you could plug in a USB stick without it being able to take over your computer?
At some point these "unnamed patents" that are allegedly being infringed need to see the light of day.
It took a surprising amount of searching to find it, as most of the stories did not list the patents, but I found a couple of sites ([1], [2]) that have them. Here's the list from [2]:
U.S. Patent No. 5,579,517 ("the '517 patent") entitled: "Common name space for long and short filenames." According to Microsoft, the patent generally relates "to data processing systems and, more particularly, to a common name space for long and short filenames.
U.S. Patent No. 5,758,352 ("the '352 patent") entitled: "Common name space for long and short filenames."
U.S. Patent No. 6,621,746 ("the '746 patent") entitled: "Monitoring entropic conditions of a flash memory device as an indicator for invoking erasure operations." According to Microsoft, the patent generally relates "to flash memory devices, and more particularly, monitoring when to perform an erase operation in a flash memory device."
U.S. Patent No. 6,826,762 ("the '762 patent") entitled: "Radio interface layer in a cell phone with a set of APIs having a hardware-independent proxy layer and a hardware-specific driver layer." According to Microsoft, the patent generally relates "to application programming interfaces (APIs) and, even more particularly, relates to a Radio Interface Layer comprising a set of APIs." Only this patent within the group relates to the product known as the "Motorola Charm."
U.S. Patent No. 6,909,910 ("the '910 patent") entitled: "Method and system for managing changes to a contact database." According to Microsoft, the patent generally relates "to mobile computing, and more particularly to updating a contact database within a mobile computing device."
U.S. Patent No. 7,644,376 ("the '376 patent") entitled: "Flexible architecture for notifying applications of state changes." Microsoft states in their patent that "Briefly described, the present invention is directed at unifying state and notification architecture across devices."
U.S. Patent No. 5,664,133 ("the '133 patent") entitled: "Context sensitive menu system/menu behavior." According to Microsoft, the patent generally relates "to the field of user interfaces for computer systems, and more particularly to graphical user interfaces wherein a user selects from a collection of graphical representations displayed upon a video screen corresponding to actual computer resources."
U.S. Patent No. 6,578,054 ("the '054 patent") entitled: "Method and system for supporting off-line mode of operation and synchronization using resource state information." According to Microsoft, the patent generally relates to "to the support of on-line and off-line transmission and synchronization of data. More specifically, the present invention relates to systems and methods that eliminate redundant data transmission and allow multiple copies of data to be synchronized so that incremental changes made to one copy of the data can be identified, transferred, and incorporated into the other copy of the data, regardless of whether the incremental changes are made on-line or off-line."
U.S. Patent No. 6,370,566 ("the '566 patent") entitled: "Generating meeting requests and group scheduling from a mobile device." Microsoft's patent abstract describes the patent this way: The present invention includes a mobile device which provides the user with the ability to schedule a meeting request from the mobile device itself. The mobile device creates an object representative of the meeting request and assigns the object a global identification number which uniquely identifies the object to other devices which encounter the object. In addition, the mobile devic
They can be in your way, they can make you jump though hoops, they can require you to create so much noise that you need tools to write anything in it (java is a prime example).
While I'll admit that Java has too much boilerplate, tools are good regardless of any language you use. You don't need tools to write in Java -- people managed before fancy IDEs came along. However, because Java is statically typed, it lends itself to more powerful tools. This is really helpful as projects get bigger.
I also have observed that most of the Java crowd never manages to get to the level of being even mediocre programmers.
Oh please, cut the bullshit bashing. I could say the same thing about Python programmers, but that's just throwing insults around.
Re:Fuck that, I've created Upsilon!
on
Happy Tau Day
·
· Score: 1
Check out what it does to Euler's Identity. That and the straightforward definition of radians has made me a convert, too.
This is compatible with the GPL because (IANAL) the GPL does not care about trademarks, only copyright.
I don't think it is compatible, at least with GPL2:
"7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program."
Trademarks are restrictive. There is no exception for them in GPL2, so according to the license, they aren't allowed.
Anyone trying to actually figure out who coined the term and thus who has a right to define it. Which is not the OSI.
An issue which you completely ignore for free software. This is the second straight reply you've done this. Also, just because a term was used in a minor fashion doesn't mean it can't take on a different meaning.
If that's what it's called when you insist on being correct instead of being a fanboy, then I guess I'm a douche bag.
That's what you are when you resort to ad hominem attacks.
If you need a perfect example, check out Adobe. They have some of the most pirated software on the Internet, and they're still raking in huge profits. Without these BS IP laws, you would likely see about the exact same percent of purchases vs pirate copies.
Who's going to pay for Adobe if they can legally copy it for free? This is especially true of commercial companies.
Summary: Criminals gonna crim, and buyers gonna buy.
But you're talking about completely removing the criminal element.
This is starting to change as the companies responsible for the content try to milk more and more and more and more from the viewer in terms of longer commercial breaks, more commercial breaks, and more product placement in the shows themselves. It's getting fucking ridiculous, and it should all just be made fucking illegal.
That's quite the entitlement complex you've got. First you want to toss out copyrights and trademarks, then you want to enact laws telling people how many commercials they can have. You seem to think the world should revolve around entertaining you for minimum value.
Partially, but the vast majority of that cost is artificial scarcity due to copyright. Don't you think your parent poster would like to put his scanned copy up on his web page? There are a lot of seminal papers in science locked behind paywalls and copyright, many -- if not most -- made with public funding.
The term "open source" is first used in print by Caldera for OpenDOS. I could give a fuck if the OSI promoted it into wide usage.
And "free software" was in use before FSF came around, which you conveniently ignore. Who gives a fuck about some abandoned OpenDOS project that was quickly reverted to closed source? Their "open source" announcement appealed to the success of the Linux model, but Linux was "open source" under FOSS model, which contributed greatly to its success.
Congratulations on sucking Bruce off most consistently.
Want to watch that YouTube video without paying your ISP for a "non premium visited site" fee, a streaming video fee, a fee per second, etc? The Afghan system may be the only way for you to see it, or any content not sanitized and sterilized by Big Media.
Good luck hooking up your homegrown Wi-Fi network to a backbone. How are you supposed to get to YouTube if ISPs won't talk to you?
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't download it from an ad. I got it from the main download page.
I just installed it on XP, and it didn't prompt me at all. It defaulted to Google, of course. It was changeable under options, with the three being Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
It also invites me to install "Angry Birds" from the Chrome Web Store when I open a new tab.
Wrecking havoc on the English language.
[search is] not an "other area"
I agree, and my sentence incorrectly mixes up the two. However, as you say:
trying to separate their advertising services from their search service is bizarre
It was stated by my 1st parent that Google has a monopoly in Internet advertising, but not in search. However, as you have stated, it doesn't make sense to separate these two. One feeds into the other. Google spends tons of money on their search product.
To attempt to leverage their monopoly here in a Microsoft-like fashion, they would have to do something like make sure their search engine only works with, or only works well with Chrome, forcing everyone to use Chrome whether they want to or not.
The first issue with IE is that it came bundled in with the OS for free, and also promoted to become the default browser, thus using their desktop market share to win the browser market share. The same kind of thing is occurring with Chrome.
Second, while IE was tied to Windows, Chrome is tied to Google search. When you install Chrome, by default you are using Google's search services, reinforcing their market share.
[Magneto] built a machine that could advance evolution too [..] 1960s I think.
Evolution machine in the 1960s? Old hat. Try Microcosmic God, 1941.
Google have ONE product that is a monopoly and that is internet advertising.
This monopoly funds all their other efforts to dominate other areas, including the search service they give away for free. They are acting much like Microsoft did/does with their desktop dominance.
Go read the story of Gates and the first BASIC rom.
Yes, go read it. He was one of the key programmers to implement BASIC in 4k. They beat everybody to the punch with a good business idea and a solid technical achievement.
This whole idea that Gates was just a ruthless businessman is ridiculous. He was a ruthless businessman, but that's only half the story.
the individual rights are weighed much more lightly compared with the greater societal good
Where the "greater societal good" means "our power must not be challenged". It's the same in any government that fights their way to power in the name of the people, and then becomes that which they were fighting against.
Popular music has always been formulaic. Good music, on the other hand, is not.
What a bunch of elitist crap.
"Communism is NOT an economic system; it's a political system!" [..] propaganda we received about "Capitalism vs. Communism"
What bizarre statements. The whole point of communism is to describe how the economy should be structured, and yes, it is fundamentally the opposite of capitalism. Of course it is a political system, too. You can't dictate terms of the economy without involving politics.
That's a very sad college education you had.
The problem is you're assuming a technical savvy that people just don't possess. Even an idiot knows sticking a random syringe in their arm is dangerous, and has virtually no incentive to do so.
A USB stick, however, looks harmless because normally it is. Also, wouldn't it be nice if you could plug in a USB stick without it being able to take over your computer?
All the excessive biblical literalism is getting pretty tiresome.
Very good. Now take the next step and apply that same reasoning to the New Testament.
I swear to fucking god - look at how my posts are modded on this thread.
Don't bring up Bush and claim your post isn't flamebait. I mean, seriously, this is what you said:
"I actually blame the parents (the Bush-haters) for breeding such a bunch of twats as LulzSec. Please don't mark this down as flamebait"
At some point these "unnamed patents" that are allegedly being infringed need to see the light of day.
It took a surprising amount of searching to find it, as most of the stories did not list the patents, but I found a couple of sites ([1], [2]) that have them. Here's the list from [2]:
They can be in your way, they can make you jump though hoops, they can require you to create so much noise that you need tools to write anything in it (java is a prime example).
While I'll admit that Java has too much boilerplate, tools are good regardless of any language you use. You don't need tools to write in Java -- people managed before fancy IDEs came along. However, because Java is statically typed, it lends itself to more powerful tools. This is really helpful as projects get bigger.
I also have observed that most of the Java crowd never manages to get to the level of being even mediocre programmers.
Oh please, cut the bullshit bashing. I could say the same thing about Python programmers, but that's just throwing insults around.
Check out what it does to Euler's Identity. That and the straightforward definition of radians has made me a convert, too.
This is compatible with the GPL because (IANAL) the GPL does not care about trademarks, only copyright.
I don't think it is compatible, at least with GPL2:
"7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program."
Trademarks are restrictive. There is no exception for them in GPL2, so according to the license, they aren't allowed.
Where good intentions are "make truckloads of money".
If it's any consolation, I made the same mistake upon first reading. It was poor pronoun usage by the original poster.
Anyone trying to actually figure out who coined the term and thus who has a right to define it. Which is not the OSI.
An issue which you completely ignore for free software. This is the second straight reply you've done this. Also, just because a term was used in a minor fashion doesn't mean it can't take on a different meaning.
If that's what it's called when you insist on being correct instead of being a fanboy, then I guess I'm a douche bag.
That's what you are when you resort to ad hominem attacks.
Grow the fuck up.
Take your own advice.
If you need a perfect example, check out Adobe. They have some of the most pirated software on the Internet, and they're still raking in huge profits. Without these BS IP laws, you would likely see about the exact same percent of purchases vs pirate copies.
Who's going to pay for Adobe if they can legally copy it for free? This is especially true of commercial companies.
Summary: Criminals gonna crim, and buyers gonna buy.
But you're talking about completely removing the criminal element.
This is starting to change as the companies responsible for the content try to milk more and more and more and more from the viewer in terms of longer commercial breaks, more commercial breaks, and more product placement in the shows themselves. It's getting fucking ridiculous, and it should all just be made fucking illegal.
That's quite the entitlement complex you've got. First you want to toss out copyrights and trademarks, then you want to enact laws telling people how many commercials they can have. You seem to think the world should revolve around entertaining you for minimum value.
They're selling convenience.
Partially, but the vast majority of that cost is artificial scarcity due to copyright. Don't you think your parent poster would like to put his scanned copy up on his web page? There are a lot of seminal papers in science locked behind paywalls and copyright, many -- if not most -- made with public funding.
The term "open source" is first used in print by Caldera for OpenDOS. I could give a fuck if the OSI promoted it into wide usage.
And "free software" was in use before FSF came around, which you conveniently ignore. Who gives a fuck about some abandoned OpenDOS project that was quickly reverted to closed source? Their "open source" announcement appealed to the success of the Linux model, but Linux was "open source" under FOSS model, which contributed greatly to its success.
Congratulations on sucking Bruce off most consistently.
Congratulations on being a total douche bag.
Want to watch that YouTube video without paying your ISP for a "non premium visited site" fee, a streaming video fee, a fee per second, etc? The Afghan system may be the only way for you to see it, or any content not sanitized and sterilized by Big Media.
Good luck hooking up your homegrown Wi-Fi network to a backbone. How are you supposed to get to YouTube if ISPs won't talk to you?