Yes it doesn't mean, but when it says "google", your data land at their servers. And from a security standpoint, they have control.

No, the sensors are already there. The 'internet of things' hype is about giving control over machines and private information from sensors to large companies.

yes, but once your software becomes open source, your service can be replaced by that oss part and a off the shelf server. Usually, thats cheaper than your price. If its not cheaper, then you don't make money with your service, because your service will use that off the shelf server too. If you open source, you basically give away the additional value of your service for free.

You can do what facebook and google do of course, and only publish parts of the technology you developed: google published protobuf, facebook a php compiler.

Exactly my thought too.

In 100 years, there will be singularity. In 2084, when the singularity takes over the world, your area was scheduled for destruction by nuclear missile, because uploading its control virus onto your brain implant chips (mandatory by international treaties since the 2076 terror attack on google city (new name of mountain view since 2060), pushed by US president Bush junior junior) would have required too long.

The goal is to kill off flash and silverlight plugins for videos, which is long overdue. Fat plugins are far worse than just DRM plugins. My only hope is now that that adobe DRM really costs money, so that it isn't adopted at much websites.

Both false positives and true negatives come with a cost. Calculate the probability with which a system is right, and you only have to do basic math to find out whether the prediction system gives you an economic or humanitarian advantage. As the humanitarian cost for false positives is very low compared to the economic one, it is very possible that there will be an unbalance between "most (economically or humanitarian) profitable strategies". Deciding between those can be I guess cause for some political debate.

Somebody might own copyright on your ideas or core, but copyright ownership doesn't force anybody to produce content, or "writing it down".

And what if your only objective is price, and you give the keys to the shady guy who claims to offer a free service?

Discoveries are made very irregularly, and are hard to plan. Therefore, its better for a company in the long run to "sandbag".

Wrong, its really verizon.

The joke may be old, but you shouldn't underestimate me.

Seems to involve alot of sleeping.