iLand

Meaningless. As Google has argued itself, an API is not subject to copyright, therefore you cannot impose TOS on someone writing code that uses it.

Do you have any idea how stupid you sound right now? Copyright has absolutely nothing to do with terms of service.

How about getting mail for your ex-wife's deceased father,
- who never lived in your state
- much less your home?

How about collection notices to your workplace for a guy living in Chicago,
- a place you have never even visited,
- but his first and last name are the same,
- so you call to tell them about the mistake, and they send you another one the next year anyway?

How about getting tax forms from the town you used to live in,
- and when you call they ask that you send annoying amounts of proof of where you live just so they'll stop sending you forms,
- and you do it anyway
- and they still send forms the next year?

FedEx and UPS screw up too. I got a delivery confirmation once, where they delivered it to the wrong address and then FAKED THE SIGNATURE. I informed them of the issue, and they said they would send someone out to pick it up and take it to us. Of course, it was hours later and almost 7 PM with no delivery in sight. The guy who got it was nice enough to bring it to us himself by the point-- and we hadn't even met him before then.

People can pick their own house number where you live?

Why would he be saying this now?
I'm guessing this is a clear sign that Google are heading off into doing something with sharing medical records next.

Most of the posts here are making arguments and suggesting actions that were exactly the same as the ones that generated loud complaints on Slashdot when it was about Microsoft using proprietary crap to lock out Linux/Open Source.

I don't like Microsoft at all, but supporting Google acting more like them is no answer either.

Is your car's speedometer an "accurate scientific instrument"? How about the gas pedal, and its linkage? How about your foot: the bones, tendons, and muscles?

Expecting a driver to maintain an exact speed to the MPH, much less the km/h, is stupid.

Pancreatic cancer is no joke, but can be survived. My dad did, and one of the factors his doctor attributed it to was his good overall health despite being in his 60s. Jobs was health conscious from early in his life, and should have been able to beat this.

It was a pretty lousy one. It was basically like criticizing Apple for releasing the inferior Apple I, II, IIe, and III before the Macintosh.

Perhaps if they had experienced whatever similar changes occurred in the USA to cause crime to fall every year since 1993-- despite the fact that the assault weapons ban was in effect from 93-2003 and not in effect from 2003 until now.

During WWI, you were convicted of sedition if you criticized the US's entry into the war. Apparently that is OK, because it was the law.

0.05 is unreasonable. It is de facto prohibition, and unconstitutional.

These are also the geniuses that mandated seat belt interlocks, and a year later had to repeal the regulation and allow people to disable them because they were universally impractical. People's cars were dead in the water because a sensor stuck, or it was too cold, or they had a package on the seat. More and more people were using their seatbelts even without this regulation. Meanwhile, the rest just buckled their belts behind them anyway.

These same geniuses mandated passive restraints, which (since airbags were initially too expensive for an average car) resulted in everyone being strangled by automatic seatbelts.

When auto manufacturers started putting airbags in everything, in a big to make themselves useful the NHTSA uselessly MANDATED them. Of course, they mandated that the bags work on a 180 pound male, which had the unfortunate consequence of injuring or killing people who were much smaller.

These are the geniuses who held back aerodynamic engineering because they insisted headlights had to be round, because... ???

So will total prohibition. Neither is acceptable. Drunk driving is deadly, but this is a step too far when even the government admits a limit this low this is de facto prohibition. Unless we also want to outlaw other distractions, like screens, radios, cupholders, pets, and passengers, we're just choosing what rights we're OK with giving up.

Are their releases really called CPUs?
If so, that is so amazingly stupid it appears actually designed to confuse.

We may make ourselves into cyborgs, and not the ghoulish, creepy Borg of STNG, but more like various comic superheroes such as Wolverine.

I don't think many people set out with the idea of being evil for evil's sake. If we become the compliant automatons that the world's governments demand, we'll be much more like the Borg.