Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: Would this kill Google? (Score 1) 237

by BorgAssimilator (#48477495) Attached to: Google Should Be Broken Up, Say European MPs
It seems to me that this would either kill or severely wound Google. I'd assume that all of Google's services work hand in hand (search, apps, etc) to generate revenue or information needed for Google to generate more services / better the existing services.

Disclaimer: I say the above not really knowing about Google's revenue stream or any specifics really, so it's possible there's something going on that I completely missed, or don't understand.

Comment: Isn't this a bit conflicting? (Score 1) 144

by BorgAssimilator (#41240257) Attached to: Why Apple Should Stop Censoring Apps

The article says Apple should restrict its bans to apps that have terrible functionality or a poor UI, and 'get out of the business of censorship.'

TFA explains the difference between quality control and censorship, but isn't it kindof the same thing? I understand that yes, there are differences, but why ban an app with a bad UI? Who decides whether it's good or bad?

It seems that if they're against censorship, they'd be against apple banning a third-party app (with no affiliation to apple other than being sold on an Apple market) just because it's not "quality".

Personally, I think apple should let the consumers decide what's good or bad, but it's their company, and it's their prerogative to make that decision.

Comment: Re:So from here on out ... (Score 1) 2416

by BorgAssimilator (#40481479) Attached to: Supreme Court: Affordable Care Act Is Constitutional
I still have the ability to choose to drive a car. Yes, if I want to drive a car, I need to do certain things, like pay for insurance.

If I don't drive a car, I shouldn't have to pay a tax for not doing so, to help with the people who get into accidents that can't pay for it. Same principle.

Comment: Re:So from here on out ... (Score 1, Insightful) 2416

by BorgAssimilator (#40480173) Attached to: Supreme Court: Affordable Care Act Is Constitutional

Bullshit. The tax is only on those who refuse to get insurance. That will be an infinitisimally small number of Americans.

While I agree that not having health insurance is really risky and dumb, taxing someone for not buying / wanting something goes against freedom.

The government does has the right to tax, but that should only apply for the things that the government should take care of, which is 1) providing national defense and 2) the legal system, not telling us which insurances to get.

Comment: Re:Interesting (Score 4, Insightful) 215

by BorgAssimilator (#40444527) Attached to: Google Vs. Microsoft: a Tale of Two Interviews

Not saying that Google doesn't want money, but it doesn't seem to be all that matters to them.

Playing devil's advocate, you could also say "Not saying that Microsoft isn't technical, but it doesn't seem to be all that matters to them".

To be fair, a lot of companies underestimate the ability for tech people to have good communication skills, for both inside the company and without. When you have big companies like Microsoft and Google, to have a good infrastructure, you need good communication. This just shows that, for one reason or another, Microsoft has chosen to focus on this in their current hiring process.

Honestly, they both want / need money and tech to stay in business.