Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: IP does not identify more than the bill player (Score -1, Flamebait) 100

by SupportLine (#39599583) Attached to: California Judge Denies Discovery In Bittorrent Case

The core issue is that an IP does not identify more than the bill payer — the good cause standard therefore is not met because the actual infringer is not identified.

I think this is sane. And with a decision like this, we can extend it to cover terrorists, child porn collectors and other criminals. Because IP does not identify more than the bill player and the good cause standard therefore is not met because the actual infringer is not identified.

Comment: Re:More iffy Slashdot editorial (Score 0) 159

by SupportLine (#39599517) Attached to: Larry Page Issues Public Update On Google Changes

The fact that Google made it exceedingly easy for you to delete the information it has on you did not make you a fan?
And it was not an all or nothing thing either. I could choose what to delete and what to keep.

Wait, what now? You do realize that the "delete" is not deleting the information from Google, it is just deleting what is visible to you (and others who might use your computer)? It is similar to the privacy modes in browser. All the logs of what you do will still be there for servers and advertisers, but it deletes the info from someone who also uses the same computer.

Comment: Re:More iffy Slashdot editorial (Score 2, Interesting) 159

by SupportLine (#39599233) Attached to: Larry Page Issues Public Update On Google Changes

Google realised this with Google Talk, which is a federated XMPP deployment. On its launch day, Google Talk users could talk with millions of existing XMPP users. The XMPP installed base was probably smaller than AIM or MSNM, but it was already fairly large.

Google didn't really "realize" anything. They used XMPP so they could quickly throw together something they needed. Facebook also uses XMPP, do you think they also realized the potential of having open IM networks, or do you think they used that to minimize costs, effort and work needed to create their own protocol and all associated things?

Google has a long history of leveraging (i.e, abusing) open source code for their own benefit. With things like Android they are required to publish their code because they used GPL'd software, which of course benefits others too. However, it is fairly stupid to think they did this to help the world or shit like that, they did it because they have to. Google also abuses lots of open source software which they have built their custom software upon, but because they only host it on their servers they don't have license problems with GPL. May I ask, have you ever seen Google open sourcing their core products - which are built on GPL and FOSS software - like their search engine and advertising platform, YouTube, or anything like that? Of course not, because they don't have to. I am a big supporter of FOSS and open source software and movement, but in my eyes Google's abuse is much larger problem than lets say Microsoft, who at least spends their own resources, money and work to create their software from the beginning, and not abusing those who have contributed their code from their good heart.

Comment: Re:More iffy Slashdot editorial (Score 0) 159

by SupportLine (#39598441) Attached to: Larry Page Issues Public Update On Google Changes
IE wasn't really beaten with standards-supporting strategy, it was beaten with heavy marketing.

During Firefox days this was mostly done by fanboys. I'm sure you have seen those fanboys shouting out how great browser Firefox is (was) and even going out on their way to install it on all computers at their schools and other places, usually without permission. The most nerdy ones in my class did it too, and the whole internet was heavily spammed with "get firefox" shit back in 2005 or so.

Now during Chrome days, the marketing is handled by Google on their search engine, YouTube, ads on television and even billboards and newspapers, and by paying computer manufacturers and software authors to bundle it with their products. As most people are clueless this has greatly increased Chromes market share.

IE9 is also actually a really good browser. And, One of the largest research centers on Earth is Microsoft Research, and in my honest opinion they deserve some credit for that. No other company on the planet spends billions on R&D.

This lines well with Bill Gates support for helping the humankind. Did you know that Bill Gates has actually spend more on curing the world than U.S. spends on foreign aid? Since 2007 he has given out $28 BILLION for saving lives and improving actually necessary things.

Even if you hate Microsoft and Bill Gates, you cannot ignore the fact that for once there's a billionaire who has actually used his cash reserves for great good. Compare this to the Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin who use their shady money got from selling your private information for buying 193-foot long yachts and marrying models (Lucinda Southworth), similar to what MPAA/RIAA/record label executives do.

Comment: Re:here's an idea (Score 1) 159

by SupportLine (#39597973) Attached to: Larry Page Issues Public Update On Google Changes

Yep, another thread of poster whining about a non problem. You can turn all of that off. They would rather be haters then take 2 minute to figure out how to use the product they have.
IT's like listening to old people be angry because their VCR flashes 12.

This is quite true for all the complaints about Facebook, too.

A committee is a group that keeps the minutes and loses hours. -- Milton Berle

Working...