Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:slow news day? (Score 5, Informative) 631

As a Googler, I can tell you we ARE taxed for meals, to the tune of $4,650.00 in 2012. The company then pays a 'gross up' to make it a non-event for the employees. So all this complaining about 'free lunches' is entirely off-track, and this Professor of Law has demonstrated he doesn't know how to do basic research before talking.

Comment Re:How Is This a Good Thing? (Score 3, Insightful) 150

How can one circumvent copyright law for books in the "public domain"? If they are in the public domain, they are free to anyone.

What you meant to say, was they are making previously unavailable books that are still under copyright available to everyone. They are even providing competitors with access to the works that Google spent a fortune to scan. Nothing prevents Amazon or Microsoft from scanning these books themselves and working out a similar agreement with the authors guild, but they don't want to invest the money since they are already so far behind.

In the end, everyone (including the authors) benefits because these books will once again be available to the public as they were intended.

Comment Re:Google's not interested in our email/calendar. (Score 1) 480

This is such tin-foil crap, and has been debunked many times. Every mail server, router and switch reads your email by your definition, it has to in order to route a message, or copy data from one buffer to another. Just because gmail targets an ad based on a word or two in an email does not mean that someone is READING your email. Every time you search for a message in Exchange, Microsoft processes are "reading all your emails", right? Get real dude.

Most importantly, ads are only displayed in the "free" versions. If you get the $50/yr version there are no ads so your entire point is moot anyway.

Comment Re:Umm What? (Score 2, Insightful) 843

Sure Word wasn't the first, I used SpeedScript on my C64, WordStar, and others. But the author has a very valid point. The whole original purpose of word processing was to replace the type-writer, which only produced printed documents. With a word processor, it was easy to make edits, print multiple copies, save copies, etc.

The "Word" processor was never intended to be a format or procotol for transferring electronic documents, which is how its being used today.

Backed up the system lately?