Did US and Pakistan have some kind of deal where they are not allowed to improve their technology with their friends if US happens to dump their trash all over the country? US would do exactly the same with UK or their other girlfriends.
Why the word "fall" for it? I'm sure there are people who understand it fully, and took the risk to gain some easy profit. That's true in this Eve case and in real life. They can gain good profit easily, while understanding that there's also a risk of never seeing the money again.
Unless the artists self-financed it and didn't make contracts with record labels, it basically is work for hire.
Lets take game series as examples - even if your studio created the game and the franchise, the IP rights to the name, characters etc belong to the publisher as they financed it and that was the deal made with the studio. Unless they make a deal with the publisher, they also cannot just leave and continue using that same name under another publisher. On the other hand, the publisher has the right to use the name even if they hire a new studio the make it. This is the case with Call of Duty series too. It's basically work for hire, and it's a decision creators make when thinking if they could finance it on their own or if they need a publisher to finance the initial creating part. Since publisher takes a risk, they also get to own the work done.
It's the same thing when you work for a software company as coder. You don't own the product or the code you made, as you were hired to do it for the company. If you want to keep it all to yourself (and also get larger rewards), you need to finance and handle all parts of it yourself.
Seriously, why is parent comment modded as flamebait? This seems to be trend on slashdot. No matter how well-made opinion and arguments are, if its even remotely against Google the fanboys will mod everyone down. That's constant abuse of the moderation system and it has been going on for years.
Re Nokia, I'm not seeing that much change in their stock price. Yes, they're up and a bit today, but that only covers the previous months decline... but maybe I'm missing something.
They're up 15% immediately after the announcement. That tells something.
I bet other Android manufacturers are even more worried, now that Google owns their own hardware too. Suddenly all the Android manufacturers are using a competitors product and then trying to fight against them too. This is also why Nokia's stock price is rising up. It's bad times for those other Android vendors, and I think they're already looking at something else than Android.
Of course companies are free to expand how they like. However, they cannot make deals with manufacturers that force competitors out or unfairly leverage their position in another market to another. Apple hasn't done that, Google has, and Microsoft did so in the past.
And it's still also pain in the ass, even if you know assembly. I do, but reading and perfectly understanding, and then commenting all that code is a really huge process. It doesn't even allow modifying it as easily as full source code, you have to make jumps to codecaves and you break stuff extremely easily. There's really no comparing the two, it's completely different league even for people who know it.
Yeah it's kind of interesting. Everytime when we're discussing people pirating proprietary software or games (or movies and music for that matter), people are saying copyrights should be removed and that it's somehow justified to pirate. But when it's about GPL, the company should be sued to oblivion, they should release all the code and pay millions in damages. Quite a hypocrisy..
Have you actually tried that, or do you just spin that old article while not understanding what is happening? Because it doesn't work like that.
Bing toolbar used to follow what links people clicked on search results. That way Bing also got the information about such nonsensical keywords. But if no user clicks those links, they don't get those results. Bing doesn't just scrape Google, they collect usage information (like Google does too).
It's always nice to see somehow spewing complete bullshit when he either doesn't understand the issue or knows no one will actually try it, and try to come off as wiser than he actually is.
You probably just search for some linux or other geeky stuff. There's no money in that so marketers don't target it. Normal people don't search stuff like that, most often they might search for products or some news. Google is full of junk with stuff like that, while Bing is not.
The claims of Hitwise don't explain why I keep finding things like Microsoft service pack download pages better through google than through bing.
That's because unlike Google, Bing doesn't favor its own services over others. Google favors their news service, maps, YouTube, shopping and every other service over others. Bing returns results objectively.
There are also differences in algorithms. Bing doesn't count so called junk-links while Google does. Bing prefers link inside good, relevant content. Google, on the other hand, counts all kinds of links. That's also why Google is full of shitty results, as SEO spammers game the system by spamming links to blog comments and every other place where they can get it. As Bing doesn't count those links almost at all it means their results are much more cleaner.
The problem Bing is facing is that they cannot get as much user data from searchers as Google. They miss a lot of long-tail keyword data that Google gets just because of their dominant market share. They also miss a lot of data of what result user thinks is relevant and good for the search query (both Google and Bing track which result user clicks on) and how much they spend on the site (both services again track if you return back from that result - if you come back quickly, it's obviously worthless result for the query). This is also the same reason why Bing toolbar gathers that data on users who use Google - the same thing that somehow got twisted in slashdotters heads as Bing scraping and stealing results from Google. The only thing they do is collect that click data.
Judging by the usual slashdot response of "but they should just improve their algorithms", people don't seem to get how immersively complex current search engines and their algorithms are. It's not just about following links on other websites - we have been past that for almost 10 years now. Algorithms are the base of the search engine, but they're almost worthless without all the keyword and usage data that really powers them. That is also why Google is so keen to collect every single piece of information they can get their hands on.
Microsoft has done a lot of things correctly with Bing. I would say their algorithms are even better than Google's, as they're able to compete with much smaller market share and data against Google and actually provide better results. It has come a long way from the Windows Live Search days.
You know, someone has to do research and invent those things. You can't just copy everything off someone else. If you look at past and current communist countries you can see they're not exactly the most advantageous countries in the world, especially without copying things from other countries where they are first developed. I agree that some of the patent issues are completely ridiculous, but removing the patent system (and in a slightly related note copyright system) creates more problems than it solves. People should just try to find the best balance.
Actually, mobile phone patents are one area where the patents indeed are very specific. Most of the oldest companies in the industry (Nokia especially) had to do significant amount of R&D to get the whole industry to where it's now. It's far from the likes of software patents - mobile phone patents are deserved and the companies that have them have spend billions to develop the technology. It's only fair that someone who wants to profit from that research pays some of the costs via patent licenses.
Google knew fully well what will happen. That's why they don't provide any shield against patents or license them. They took the wise (if slightly evil) route of just giving out as "free" and not mentioning that other companies have patents that affects anyone using Android. Companies stupidly believed the whole free hype and are only now starting to realize that they would actually need to pay something for Android. When you license a mobile OS from other provides, for example from Nokia or Microsoft, all the relevant patents to the OS are included within the deal, the costs are known upfront and it's just simpler. They can only blame themself for not seeing thru the Google marketing.
Narcism isn't a personality disorder. There are many good things it brings to a person. You could just as well say that anyone with good self-esteem is narcistic. People seem to make up "disorders" for every kind of behavior nowadays..
There also weren't any ActiveX standards, but people still seemed to hate when Microsoft added non-standard features to IE. Just when we seemed to get a standard web browsing experience Google comes in and starts adding its own features. Soon were back to the web where one site works with one browser and another site works with other and you have to switch between browsers.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it's really trivial to patch human stupidity, which nowadays leads to most malware infections.
Counter-strike players also make themselves vulnerable to death.. Come on, it's a fucking game.
Did US and Pakistan have some kind of deal where they are not allowed to improve their technology with their friends if US happens to dump their trash all over the country? US would do exactly the same with UK or their other girlfriends.
Why the word "fall" for it? I'm sure there are people who understand it fully, and took the risk to gain some easy profit. That's true in this Eve case and in real life. They can gain good profit easily, while understanding that there's also a risk of never seeing the money again.
Unless the artists self-financed it and didn't make contracts with record labels, it basically is work for hire.
Lets take game series as examples - even if your studio created the game and the franchise, the IP rights to the name, characters etc belong to the publisher as they financed it and that was the deal made with the studio. Unless they make a deal with the publisher, they also cannot just leave and continue using that same name under another publisher. On the other hand, the publisher has the right to use the name even if they hire a new studio the make it. This is the case with Call of Duty series too. It's basically work for hire, and it's a decision creators make when thinking if they could finance it on their own or if they need a publisher to finance the initial creating part. Since publisher takes a risk, they also get to own the work done.
It's the same thing when you work for a software company as coder. You don't own the product or the code you made, as you were hired to do it for the company. If you want to keep it all to yourself (and also get larger rewards), you need to finance and handle all parts of it yourself.
Why you took out the last comment? By the way, they all four are almost identical comments. It pretty much looks like Google told them what to say.
Seriously, why is parent comment modded as flamebait? This seems to be trend on slashdot. No matter how well-made opinion and arguments are, if its even remotely against Google the fanboys will mod everyone down. That's constant abuse of the moderation system and it has been going on for years.
But weren't Comcast and Verizon evil?
Re Nokia, I'm not seeing that much change in their stock price. Yes, they're up and a bit today, but that only covers the previous months decline... but maybe I'm missing something.
They're up 15% immediately after the announcement. That tells something.
I bet other Android manufacturers are even more worried, now that Google owns their own hardware too. Suddenly all the Android manufacturers are using a competitors product and then trying to fight against them too. This is also why Nokia's stock price is rising up. It's bad times for those other Android vendors, and I think they're already looking at something else than Android.
Of course companies are free to expand how they like. However, they cannot make deals with manufacturers that force competitors out or unfairly leverage their position in another market to another. Apple hasn't done that, Google has, and Microsoft did so in the past.
And it's still also pain in the ass, even if you know assembly. I do, but reading and perfectly understanding, and then commenting all that code is a really huge process. It doesn't even allow modifying it as easily as full source code, you have to make jumps to codecaves and you break stuff extremely easily. There's really no comparing the two, it's completely different league even for people who know it.
Yeah it's kind of interesting. Everytime when we're discussing people pirating proprietary software or games (or movies and music for that matter), people are saying copyrights should be removed and that it's somehow justified to pirate. But when it's about GPL, the company should be sued to oblivion, they should release all the code and pay millions in damages. Quite a hypocrisy..
No it doesn't. Since they both do it, they cancel each other out. Bing still has a higher percent of good results returned compared to Google.
Have you actually tried that, or do you just spin that old article while not understanding what is happening? Because it doesn't work like that.
Bing toolbar used to follow what links people clicked on search results. That way Bing also got the information about such nonsensical keywords. But if no user clicks those links, they don't get those results. Bing doesn't just scrape Google, they collect usage information (like Google does too).
It's always nice to see somehow spewing complete bullshit when he either doesn't understand the issue or knows no one will actually try it, and try to come off as wiser than he actually is.
You probably just search for some linux or other geeky stuff. There's no money in that so marketers don't target it. Normal people don't search stuff like that, most often they might search for products or some news. Google is full of junk with stuff like that, while Bing is not.
The claims of Hitwise don't explain why I keep finding things like Microsoft service pack download pages better through google than through bing.
That's because unlike Google, Bing doesn't favor its own services over others. Google favors their news service, maps, YouTube, shopping and every other service over others. Bing returns results objectively.
There are also differences in algorithms. Bing doesn't count so called junk-links while Google does. Bing prefers link inside good, relevant content. Google, on the other hand, counts all kinds of links. That's also why Google is full of shitty results, as SEO spammers game the system by spamming links to blog comments and every other place where they can get it. As Bing doesn't count those links almost at all it means their results are much more cleaner.
The problem Bing is facing is that they cannot get as much user data from searchers as Google. They miss a lot of long-tail keyword data that Google gets just because of their dominant market share. They also miss a lot of data of what result user thinks is relevant and good for the search query (both Google and Bing track which result user clicks on) and how much they spend on the site (both services again track if you return back from that result - if you come back quickly, it's obviously worthless result for the query). This is also the same reason why Bing toolbar gathers that data on users who use Google - the same thing that somehow got twisted in slashdotters heads as Bing scraping and stealing results from Google. The only thing they do is collect that click data.
Judging by the usual slashdot response of "but they should just improve their algorithms", people don't seem to get how immersively complex current search engines and their algorithms are. It's not just about following links on other websites - we have been past that for almost 10 years now. Algorithms are the base of the search engine, but they're almost worthless without all the keyword and usage data that really powers them. That is also why Google is so keen to collect every single piece of information they can get their hands on.
Microsoft has done a lot of things correctly with Bing. I would say their algorithms are even better than Google's, as they're able to compete with much smaller market share and data against Google and actually provide better results. It has come a long way from the Windows Live Search days.
This after Google themself take a broad patent like this?
Patents are a bad idea and everyone is just getting them to sue other companies.
They aren't paid forever, patents last for 20 years.
You know, someone has to do research and invent those things. You can't just copy everything off someone else. If you look at past and current communist countries you can see they're not exactly the most advantageous countries in the world, especially without copying things from other countries where they are first developed. I agree that some of the patent issues are completely ridiculous, but removing the patent system (and in a slightly related note copyright system) creates more problems than it solves. People should just try to find the best balance.
Actually, mobile phone patents are one area where the patents indeed are very specific. Most of the oldest companies in the industry (Nokia especially) had to do significant amount of R&D to get the whole industry to where it's now. It's far from the likes of software patents - mobile phone patents are deserved and the companies that have them have spend billions to develop the technology. It's only fair that someone who wants to profit from that research pays some of the costs via patent licenses.
Google knew fully well what will happen. That's why they don't provide any shield against patents or license them. They took the wise (if slightly evil) route of just giving out as "free" and not mentioning that other companies have patents that affects anyone using Android. Companies stupidly believed the whole free hype and are only now starting to realize that they would actually need to pay something for Android. When you license a mobile OS from other provides, for example from Nokia or Microsoft, all the relevant patents to the OS are included within the deal, the costs are known upfront and it's just simpler. They can only blame themself for not seeing thru the Google marketing.
Narcism isn't a personality disorder. There are many good things it brings to a person. You could just as well say that anyone with good self-esteem is narcistic. People seem to make up "disorders" for every kind of behavior nowadays..
There also weren't any ActiveX standards, but people still seemed to hate when Microsoft added non-standard features to IE. Just when we seemed to get a standard web browsing experience Google comes in and starts adding its own features. Soon were back to the web where one site works with one browser and another site works with other and you have to switch between browsers.
It's Visual Studio. Intellisense is the autocompletion feature...