Amazon has deep pockets and they could be bullying an employee here. Many non-competes are thrown out when court challenged. This case could come down to how poorly Amazon may have treated this employee. A non-compete is not a writ of slavery.

Computers will fix this kind of thing by default.

People aren't evil. The simple fact is if a publisher sells a book at a fair price people would rather pay money than simply download the book.

Case in point against DRM are the musicians and comedians who are offering a "pay what you want" model that is so successful these guys make MORE money than they would through a traditional publisher, with less advertising and less overall effort. Time is money.

So yeah some guy will offer the book for free... and a few people will see the link and realize they can BUY the thing, and they'll do that instead. The people who download it wouldn't have bought it anyway. How many books do you read at Chapters? Do you buy EVERY BOOK?

Nope.

I use vim almost exclusively (windows or linux), and use it for PHP, Perl, and C++.

It just works, why get all fancy?

How unfortunate that 3668387 is not a prime number as it can be calculated by 19. 56 isn't prime either. :D

It would be nice if big corporations were self-policing, but it's unlikely they ever will become like that since the quick-buck-patch-job is short term better for investers and investers only tend to care about fast rewards, not long term gains. Google has to consider that stalling their growth will cause a giant swing downward.

You're right. Wherever our information is, Google is there. They have the potential for good or evil, just like any other company. The tendency though in fortune 100s is to rape and pillage the bottom line. That's not just a silly idea.

https://www.fisheadmovie.com/

You can't have it both ways, though. You either support the narrow religious dogma based "trust us" approach of the big corporation or you require proof before believing what these fortune 100 companies say.

Science means we reject everything that is not demonstrable.

You either allow men like Neil Degrasse Tyson lead your mindset or you follow the Ballmers et al.

Don't be fooled. Google did a 180Â on their net neutrality stance.

Unless Google is willing to embrace open scrutiny, we have to assume they will prioritize their bottom line and to suggest otherwise is ludicrous. But by all means let's succumb to group-think while we have our net neutrality stripped away one service at a time.

You are a fool if you believe otherwise.

Okay I'll bite. Google have set themselves up as the front door of the internet. They manage a huge chunk of email, and they index the web to provide access to the web on a search basis. Google is therefore in the business of ad sales because businesses want to be visible on the web and if the majority of people are using Google to find things and send email about things, then Google is in the perfect position to earn money while providing a valuable service.

Nothing says evil like monopoly. Google offering domain registry will lead to Google offering hosting. Now then you have the official position of Google on Net Neutrality in theory but you have an all encompassing reality where it is very easy for Google to fudge the rankings in favour of those companies who pay them money for hosting and domain registry. Those domains will get priority indexing. That's the opposite of net neutrality. There is no way to prove that Google won't give priority indexing to domains it registers.

This is what we call a conflict of interest, and that is evil unless Google is willing to become completely transparent and verifiable, which will never happen because they are a traded company.

Shark attacks typically end in blood loss deaths far more often than someone being eaten. They simply don't like the way humans taste and most times when they attack a human it's because they think we're a seal.

The owner must have known because in order to build they have to survey first and the surveyor would mark the property lines. They are making the guy move or demo his house because he knew and was trying to force a redraw of the property lines, thinking it would go unnoticed. It's also possible the surveyor made a mistake but less likely. I know a lot of people like this, who would try and get more land if they thought they could get away with it. It's kind of the way things are especially with 1%ers.

Microcosm/Macrocosm... you think the home owner didn't know? haha he was trying to annex extra land.

Like that guy who built his house on public property, these islands will just be removed if they aren't part of China. That's kind of sociopathic of them to pull that kind of a stunt unless the dispute is resolved, cooperatively.

I know we don't push the traffic we did in the old days, but so when a site goes down, you think, "Let's Slashdot it too!"

Sharkdotted.

Visiting/emmigrating to a martian colony would be a 'real reason' to go to Mars; so that's what we need to build.

Isn't that self-affirming fallacy?