I am twitter and I agree with this post.

What? For agreeing with you that Failbook is similar to M$ in terms of privacy? Fact : Failbook is in bed with M$.
Fact : M$ also owns the data on Failbook

Fact : Failbook is attacking software developers using imaginary property laws to give M$ a bigger monopoly. All paid for by Failbook l-users

That is the tip of the iceberg for the partnership between Failbook and M$. The FTC needs to investigate the whole deal between M$ and Failbook, revoke corporate charters, then shutdown both Failbook and M$ for numerous privacy violations and for abusing a monopoly. Even non users must deal with less privacy due t0 M$ and Failbook.

You hit the nail on the head. Failbook is in bed with M$. So much so that Failbook was nearly aquired. M$ even addmitted that Failbook is similar to M$ back in the day. Even though it didn't go through M$ still invested $240 billin to Failbook. Is it any wonder M$ addicts trust Failbook so much they will not only use it but also stand by Failbook's side similar to a battered wife does with her abusive husband.

This sounds like an M$ astroturfer is trying to confuse people into thinking Google is the same as M$. M$ is a convicted monopoly for a reason. How much has M$ paid you to troll $lashdot using multiple names?

One of the perks of being an M$ astroturfer is never having a problem with spam on Windoze Dead. M$ will ensure their astroturfers, those such as yourself, won't see any problems with M$ junk so they won't go to any free services that won't tie you into anything.

The Seattle Times wrote up the story of this extoriton. Of particular note is Microsoft lawyer Gutierez's response to Microsoft extoring HTC on April 27th:

HTC and Microsoft have a long history of technical and commercial collaboration, and today’s agreement is an example of how industry leaders can reach commercial arrangements that address intellectual property,

They had nothng to say about the news that Microsoft is officially a patent troll.

I wonder why Slashdot does not tag stories about Windows malware with "Windows". I know why ComputerWorld and other publishers that deal with WE and take Microsoft advertising money are cowed and don't Call Out Windows. Slashdot should be better than that.

I wonder why Slashdot does not tag stories about Windows malware with "Windows". I know why ComputerWorld and other publishers that deal with WE and take Microsoft advertising money are cowed and don't Call Out Windows. Slashdot should be better than that.

Thanks, Joe, for such amazing display of hypocrisy. Readers can tell for themselves what I wrote above and what they think about me if they care to make that an issue. People interested in the astroturf account jwilcox154 should visit my troll zoo. It is interesting that this account and the AC still follow me so closely though I have only posted in Slashdot a few times over the last two years.

Florian is not a normal Slashdot user. I have put together this time line of Microsoft patent extortion against free software and this analysis of Florian Mueller's defense of the same. Florian tries to portray Microsoft's use of patents as "cooperative" rather than exclusive. To do this he uses the term "livable" and spins any case where Microsoft cooperates with a rival as a case of common cause and beliefs. The above 16 stories in less than a year and Florian's defense of software patents speak for themselves.

US spectrum auctions are inherently corrupt and are a bad idea even if they were not. Google made one attempt to buy spectrum but was quickly out done by incumbents that conspired to keep them out by running up any bids made. Even if it were possible to prevent collusion, a highest bidder wins system will always lead to unreasonable prices.

The solution is an immediate deregulation of all spectrum because licensing is not necessary. See David Reed's Open Spectrum notes for more information.

It's also an article that fails to call out Windows. Directors Desk is run on Windows, so the violation is not so much a case of NASDAQ not being able to "secure their network" as it is a case of no one being able to secure Windows. Most people know by now that sane stock exchanges use GNU/Linux, so they might think this was a GNU/Linux problem. NASDAQ, being very Microsoft/Madoff/crook friendly, did not mention the OS of the failed application either. Perhaps they were belatedly ashamed of being dumb enough to use IIS.