Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Well that validates the 'weasel word' disclaime (Score 3, Interesting) 180

Google et al. said something, IIRC, like 'we do not collect and pass on any info to the NSA'. Technically true, but also completely irrelevant to whether or not the NSA was actually collecting data.

They didn't mention the NSA: That post is unequivocal, and is in direct contradiction to statements by the post like:

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court does not review any individual collection request.


The FBI uses government equipment on private company property to retrieve matching information from a participating company

Which directly contradicts a statement here: Unfortunately, all such statements in the Post's article aren't on the slides; they are the Post's annotations on the slides, and the author doesn't provide any evidence to support them. Take from that what you will.

Comment Re:Microsoft (Score 1) 661

And care to link some of those anti-google and anti-apple marketing or patent trolling Microsoft is doing? Because they are not.

Uh, what? It's pretty easy to find these: (Microsoft funded, run by Burson-Marsteller of the facebook fiasco.). "When evil needs public relations, evil has Burson-Marsteller on speed-dial." - Rachel Maddow

Comment Re:Yet more FUD (Score 2) 154

Why does slashdot keep posting [INSERT-PERSON-AGAINST-COMPANY-X] inane anti-[INSERT-COMPANY-X-PRODUCT] ramblings? Surely if there is such a looming threat, someone besides a repeatedly discredited hack has to be writing about it.

All fans of company X and their products, please copy and store for future use. You're welcome.

Now that you're done with a sarcastic response, perhaps you'd actually like to respond to the issue. Florian Muller has, in the last week alone, tried to scare up a bogus "serious Linux copyright threat" and got roundly slapped down as inane. He clearly no understanding of copyright law, patent law, Linux or Andriod. Why slashdot keeps posting his blog as if he was an expert on these is baffling.

Comment A better source... (Score 3, Informative) 122

Here's a better dissection of Google's letter:

Some choice parts excluded from the OP's articles:

> materials identified by Oracle as infringing in fact created by a third party and released into the public domain

> the only two files allegedly containing "copied" code were created by Google and provided to Oracle for use in open source releases of Java

Comment Re:I agree (Score 2) 596

Except Google did offer real searches where they thought they were the deciding factor: "torsoraphy". The "Bing String" showed that Microsoft's algorithm would republish Google's search results as their own. There's no way outside of reviewing Bing's algorithm and logs how many real search results are "powered by Google".

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.