How can you fuck up producing CDs? At their current state, the product is well-established, and no design work needs to be done by Google. Plus, if they took the music industry, they'd take the contracts with the factories that produce the CDs already.

They can only go up. Any new features they add to CDs will be welcomed.

You are surely disrespecting those with one eye by suggesting they can't recognize objects.

For the same reason bank robbers can rob banks.

You say this as if it wasn't their intention.

OCR and voice recognition are interesting problems, but they've been done very well before. The breaking ground is the natural language processing and knowledge engine. ArtDent was pointing out that those things were absolutely trivial, and would require only the processing power of a good desktop computer. They need not reinvent the aerosol can to show they have achieved something real.

The worst publicity stunt is one without innovation or interesting achievement. I believe IBM has done both, and also made a good show of it. I think many here are nitpicking menial details to death, an interesting achievement we see a lot on Slashdot.

I could do with some more Jackson Browne.

Oh, it's completely agnostic of the site the user is currently visiting? Then I did misunderstand. My bad!

In effect, Google does all the tough work of calculating the PageRank and using it to display relevant results. Then Bing comes along, shortcuts any real work, and simply takes the end result of Google's work without their permission, then sticks their name on it.

If I spent years putting together a list of data from millions of sources all over the world and finally released it, then you put it on your website without giving me any credit, I'd be pissed and everyone would agree it was wrong of you to do.

(That rebuke only applies to how I interpreted what you say Bing's doing. I could be wrong.)

Frankly, I want the Old Corp back.

Freedom to travel is an inalienable right, and though there are many laws that apply to driving on public roads, they do not apply to private roads. Forcing someone to not be able to drive drunk on their own property is taking away their freedom.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with car manufacturer's adding this feature without nudges from the government. I'd still complain, but it wouldn't be illegal, I just wouldn't buy that car. The second the government steps in and makes it mandatory is when there's a problem.

What about the natural right of revolution spelled out in the Declaration of Independence? The key word not just being "right," but "natural right," meaning no matter who tells you otherwise, just by being a human you have that right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Independence_(United_States)

Because it requires skill, intelligence, and patience to work a mailing list.

Mod +1 Inconceivable.

No, Tai.

We were looking for Hitler.