If it's so loud and proud, how about you show me where Google states it will be selling it's location and traffic information? They do use this data, but it's Opt-In. You can chose to send none of it. Also, they have the same motivations as Apple does to keep it to themselves. It allows Google to provide a better product than it's competitors.

That's incorrect. Google profits off you, yes. But they profit off you by you using the internet. They are going to make money off you if you use any OS because they have a large advertising marketshare. If you don't want information synced with Google you don't need to sync it. With the exception of Blackberry, you aren't forced to keep any data in "the cloud". It can all be kept locally on the device or synced with one of your computers or even synced to your private Exchange or IMAP server.

What's wrong with casual gameplay? Plenty of people play casually on their consoles with friends and then play competitively on their PCs.
It'd be good if they had 2 lobbies. If using a KBM you go to the KBM lobby and if you use a gamepad you go to that lobby. It'd let you play however you damn well please.

A term I saw Cyanogen use around the time he got a tablet. So uncomfortably accurate.

Producing New works... I'm fine with that I suppose.
I think it sucks when IP laws hurt creativity by letting stagnate IP owners sit on something and then sue when someone actually tries to create something. If they are actively creating, as a consumer, I'm totally fine with that.

I don't know... Thinking about it, it almost makes sense. Disney is still actively using Micky Mouse. Betty Boop on the other hand, only exists for merchandise. I'm fine with that. It's like a troll shouldn't be able to sit on a patent without using it, but if Microsoft is using Kinect technology they should have a right to it.

I was thinking the same thing!

That would be hilarious.

Do it for the lulz!!!

This sort of logic doesn't really apply to other industries though... I can't look at the Billboard top 100 and then take all the top songs that people are buying and just copy them.

And then there are those of us running AOSP ROMs like CyangoenMod who will likely have fixes on our phones in no time. Hopefully manufacturers see how well Open Source responds to issues like this and realize that what they are doing puts a lot of phones at risk by making the process so tedious for updates that they move from "releasing source code" to maintaining a Git/SVN server that regularly pulls in updates from their team as well as the Android trunk. I think TMobile is already moving towards this. Last step would be to actually allow users to compile and install the ROMs of their choosing without having to worry about gaining root access.

I think that'd be pretty sweet. Also, when Google TV goes Open Source that'll be cool to see integrated by way of some app or something.

Yea, but you don't HAVE to manage your files all the time. Many applications just work out of your home folder or some nested folder in there and Open dialogs work fine. Other web apps work just fine as well.

The advantage here is that you have the OPTION to manipulate the files. Too cumbersome to do with touch? Sit down and do it with your KM since in the end at least it has a full featured OS.

My Citibank credit cards offer this. I go online and I can get a temporary number and use that just fine.

That's great, but the issue here is how Best Buy is going about it. They aren't just providing a service. The image that was posed looked like it was made with the intent of ripping people off.

The customer you had clearly KNEW that he could install updates by himself. You think any parent buying the PS3 for their child for this holiday season is going to know these things? They are going to see signs like that and think, "Oh I should probably get it updated while I'm here anyway!".

Other than that, if someone wants to pay for free software to be installed, so be it. Just don't trick people into it. It should be clearly noted that the Firmware update is free itself. Or, if the customer asks how to install it themselves they should be provided the information.

Nope. No argument here.

I agree with you that I'm not seeing it either in public instances. I think that you're right that there is little chance of corruption in a case of government run fire depot.

In fact, I'd prefer my fire depot run by my county as well rather than privately.

I don't get it...

We're not talking about this specific case. I'm just saying that Private and Public fire depots would be equally able to run such a racket. In both cases you'd have a house burnt and someone extorted and then someone (hopefully) prosecuted and sued.

The case of what actually happened is akin to someone not paying their taxes (it was a fee in this case because it was not the homeowners county) for their public service and therefor not receiving their service.