As I said, I didn't start the rumour.
And yes you are correct, you don't understand.
The simple fact is that the spying is legal. What's not legal is using the data gained from a warrant-less search aka spying.
2528 posts • joined 11 Apr 2006
As I said, I didn't start the rumour.
And yes you are correct, you don't understand.
The simple fact is that the spying is legal. What's not legal is using the data gained from a warrant-less search aka spying.
It was the Germans who bombed Pearl Harbor. Some of us remember watching Animal House in the movie theatres and "Kool-Aid" is a trademarked product hence the misspelling is intentional as not to confuse the likes of you who had their brains rotted out by the sugar content. :-P
As evidence... the bombs were dropped well after VE day. And the Russian's tactics treated their soldiers / civilians as cannon fodder. (Battle for Stalingrad as an example). And there's more to it too.
But seriously... The conferences at Casablanca which led to the Yalta conference made it impossible for the US to allow for a conditional surrender. So if we were to estimate the US casualties for an invasion of the Japanese mainland, based on the cost of taking Iwo Jima, along with the fact that every Japanese citizen would have fought to the death... That number would far outweigh any other battle's casualties on both sides. (And I would never had known my Uncle who would have been leading a platoon in the second wave of the invasion.)
1) If I had proof, it wouldn't be a rumor. And no, I didn't start it.
2) I'm not one for the cool-aid crew. I'll leave that to you.
You just don't understand what is happening and why its not a good thing.
How many people have died in Syria?
Now how many people died in Syria under Assad's oppressive rule?
The despot is the lesser of two evils.
Its weird but until you do the math and understand why is going on... it doesn't make sense.
To give you a historical example... The US dropped two bombs on Japan to end the war. They intentionally targeted cities that had civilian populations. (Oh and of course some military value.)
But the truth is that it would be considered a war crime. Yet what would have happened if we hadn't dropped the bombs?
Again its the lesser of two evils.
BTW, you don't seem to get it... the snooping isn't illegal. Its the actual use of the evidence uncovered from snooping that is illegal. And that's a quirk in the law that will take time for you to get your head wrapped around it. All while you accept your freeware from Google not realizing the true cost of what you get for free.
Actually that's a bi-product if that happens.
The truth is that they are kept secret longer for that reason but not why they are made classified and secret.
Look at Arab Spring. Something that was credited to Wikileak's leak of Manning's docs...
Are we more secure or less secure from having the North African governments of Libya and Egypt in turmoil? Syria, Qatar in the Middle East?
And lets also give credit to Obama and Bush for not having an exit strategy in Iraq nor following examples found in Marshall's post war Germany plans. ( I have to post that because if I didn't someone else would accuse me of being ignorant. ;-)
And that's the point. The leaking of sensitive information made things worse. Beyond having incompetent fscks in office to begin with.
Rumor has it he was FSB.
And the trouble is that Snowden like Manning don't understand why secrets are kept. In truth they are done to protect you. Yes, you. But many who will down vote this comment will never understand why or how they protect you.
Those who look towards Arab Spring as a good thing, look again. Look at what happened in that power vacuum.
All of their internet properties are linked together.
Anyway you split it... Google's properties would fail on their own.
YouTube doesn't make money, but it does help gain data on those who link and those who view videos on YouTube or on sites that link to YouTube.
Search can't be pulled from ads. Its a bit more complicated.
There's a large deposit of dark matter in the black hole?
As someone in the know... no the hype cycle isn't over and your conversation makes no sense.
2 years ago and even in the past year, your CIO has been saying that they want or need to experiment in the Big Data space.
There's more to this and it is more of a question of what really is Hortonworks. Hint: Its a professional services company. That's where the revenue comes from and not the Hadoop licenses.
And no, if done properly, its not shelfware.
Speed is relative.
And yes, several things got dumped in to HBase which should have core components rewritten.
I was saying that HBase will run on a lot of platforms and even without the native Intel additions, its fairly fast if you know what you're doing.
W.R.T encryption... and security... I'm unfortunately not allowed to talk about that. Maybe in a couple of months... ;-)
My point is that outside of Linux, only Windows is a 'viable' platform thanks to Hortonworks working with Microsoft. And while that's possible, its not recommended. No Power PC or Sparc chipped versions exist although they could. Even on the mainframe. (Which can run a Linux partition (LPAR) )
I've had customers move away from HBase because it wasn't stable (Still isn't) and you really need to have an admin who knows both Hadoop/HBase but also is a software developer and knows distributed systems. (That's a lot of things to ask and besides myself... maybe a handfull of people can do it. )
Jonathan Gray comes to mind.
The real trouble of HBase is that people don't understand what it is, how to use it and why you shouldn't consider it an RDBMS (Sorry Splice Machine guys...) ;-)
And yes, we're in violent agreement. ;-P
I have to ask.. you in the UK? If so, I'm pretty sure I know who you are, even though we haven't met.
(And if you're in Germany, the odds are we have met. ;-)
The only 'extension' to Hadoop / HBase is the use of encryption that came from Intel. Compression is either Java or native. So if you compile the native compression you can link to it.
You can run HBase out of the box on any Linux X86 platform which would include AMD chips.
If you want, you could run it on Hadoop that runs on Windows, but only Hortonworks would probably support that. (Microsoft funded that project.)
Hadoop hasn't been ported to other OSs although in theory you could port it to run on the mainframe in their Linux distro...
But really, who's running PowerPC or Sun boxes these days that isn't running a Linux variant?
"HBase is a non-relational, distributed database for Hadoop – itself written on the blueprint of Google’s MapReduce."
HBase has nothing to do with Map/Reduce.
Although you can use it as an input or output to a map/reduce program.
"It doesn't matter where the Snowdens are. You saw what everybody did in response. They made some brief, loud disapproving noises and then slumped back into their Barca-Loungers and La-Z-Boys and shoved more episodes of Amurican Idull and Big Brother into their flaccid brain-holes."
The irony is that Google, FB and others are doing what you have accused the US Government of doing. But you seem ok with it.
So who really has the flaccid brain?
"An unmarked grave in the desert?"
No, if the rumors my friend heard were true, Snowden was FSB so that graveyard would be in Siberia, Not a salt flat. (Fixed the desert part for you.)
"The reason HTTP/2.0 does not improve privacy is that the big corporate backers have built their business model on top of the lack of privacy. They are very upset about NSA spying on just about everybody in the entire world, but they do not want to do anything that prevents them from doing the same thing. The proponents of HTTP/2.0 are also trying to use it as a lever for the "SSL anywhere" agenda, despite the fact that many HTTP applications have no need for, no desire for, or may even be legally banned from using encryption."
And if we did remove the cookies and put the onus of privacy back on the user, it would force companies to have an opt-in model. The larger issue is that the sucking sound would be all those digital marketing companies losing the bulk of their business.
The patent is for a mechanical object.
Its not software and its not a business process.
In short... its a better mouse trap that fills a gap from what came before it.
You may not like Rim suing another company... but this case holds water.
I think its unlimited, considering that its probably 1Gb/s down 10MB up or something like that.
However to your second point... per the article:
"It remains to be seen how many of buyers are wowed by the prospect of paying $348 a year for privacy. "
I think that El Reg is being a bit unfair. They are matching Googles price and most likely the same T's and C's where Google is monitoring the traffic for their $70.00 offer.
So why get irate with AT&T when they are being a bit more transparent about their offering than Google.
How easy is it for scammers to walk along with a backpack full of tech gear reading your NFC and Blink cards?
Think about it.
"He WOULD be free now, and yes the charges are that trivial. But once he's on Swedish soil, and he's free, they can do whatever they want to him. And that includes extraditing him to the United States, where he could conceivably receive the death penalty as a co-conspirator to a traitor."
And this is patently false.
He goes to Sweden. Faces the music. They charge him and there's a trial, if found not guilty, he's sent back to the UK to face charges. Then he's put on a plane back to Australia. That's his future travel plans.
Unless of course the UK waives the right to try him for jumping bail, then Sweden sends him back to Australia.
In Australia... that's where you can bet the fun to begin.
As to the US. Sorry, the fantasy of facing a death penalty is not real. Manning faced far more serious charges in a military court and the death penalty was off the table. At worst, Assange faces a long time in prison if your fantasy holds true.
"He has not been charged at all. An arrest warrant has been issued so he can be questioned in relation to alleged sexual offences. "
And again... this is incorrect.
He was about to be called in for formal questioning and then to be charged. (That's their procedure) But with the help of his lawyer, he fled the country. So they need to bring him in for 'questioning' so that they can charge him. And that's actually on the record as part of his appeals hearing. They do intend to charge him but they need to bring him in for questioning.
"What Assange was charged with in Sweden was not rape. The sex was consensual. The charge was for not using a condom when the girls thought he was. That's some sort of crime there apparently!"
While I doubt many will read this...
Assange is charged for non-consensual sex. And that is by definition RAPE.
She consented to sex, iff (if and only if) he wore a raincoat.
He didn't wear a raincoat. Thus it became rape.
While its a nice analogy... do I need to tell you that Cuba doesn't have an embassy in the US?
(Unless you talk about the UN ambassador.)
Had Assange not been granted bail, this wouldn't be an issue.
Had he been smart, he could have dyed his hair, use false papers to get out of the country to France, jump a ship leaving Europe and then hop a flight to Ecuador. He would have had plenty of time to get papers ready and in place.
That would have been the smart move.
"Costs? He didn't ask for the siege."
Uhm. He was out on bail and jumped bail.
The UK government which granted him bail is responsible for him and by law is required to do what they can to honor their end of the treaty.
In short. He jumped bail, UK is honor bound to do what it can to capture him.
(And to deter others from being this stupid.)
Did you ever think that they were also there for his protection too?
Seriously... do you know how many people would consider tossing a brick through the window?
(Or something else for those who are less evolved.)
Just add it to his tab.
After Sweden he still has to deal with the Jumping bail charge...
I don't know why he doesn't go to Sweden, get that over with, he comes back to the UK, faces the jumping bail, and this expense... he gets a cot, 3 square a day, plus a free health plan thanks to the NHS. He'll also get a chance to get out and stretch his legs around the prison yard.
Dont blame IBM. Blame the USPTO.
I doubt that Jeffy.
(Build it from scratch.)
Just because you don't like the fact that IBM is suing someone for protecting their IP.. tough.
First Priceline... then Google... ;-)
The point is that IBM isn't a patent troll, they still make and sell products.
If you don't like the lawsuit, maybe you should figure out why the patent itself should be outlawed. Software Patents was a bad thing. Patent reform was blocked by Reid in the Senate under Obama. Maybe now we could move ahead?
CIO are management types who manage the bottom line and try to make rational decisions on tech that they don't really understand.
Having said that... I do happen to know some very good CIOs who actually do get it. While they are so many years and steps away from getting their hands deep in the code, they are still techies at heart.
But those are the types of CIOs that would say no thanks to Obama who's gone through 3 CIOs while in office and still hasn't launched a decent tech program. Can you say Obamacare's Healthcare.gov roll out.
WHAT A JOKE!!!
In Chicago, there are a couple of companies that had been collecting data.
Nielsen Media, Symphony and a couple of others...
The difference is that when you make a purchase from a store, they capture the data. but they aggregate it and its not your, Matt B's purchased a pack of condoms (I won't say the size ... ;-) , but at Store X in City Y, n number of condoms brand XYZ was sold.
Pretty big difference from that in to knowing that
You bought the following: condoms, duct tape, a ski-mask, rope/cord and a flashlight.
And then Uber knows you scheduled a ride service to take you from your home to where your ex lives.
Now the funny part. Many would assume that you may be out for revenge, yet you bought the duct tape, flashlight and rope/cord, to fix some duct work in your loft and the ski mast because you live in the North Midwest and its cold out. Yes, the condoms are for you and your ex because... welll, you got back together for some make up sex.
(Shame on those who jumped to conclusions. ) ;-)
But you see Matt, that's the point. Thanks to Google, they know what you bought, (everything), where you searched online, and if you have gmail. Your emails have been read. (By a machine of course.) What you read online.. websites visited.. etc ..
All your thought belong to them... ;-)
You visit the p0rn site.
You are being tracked by Google.
Even if you log in to said p0rn site with an identity associated to a hotmail account. Google knows its still you and now associates said hotmail site to you as an alias.
Google doesn't need cookies anymore. They already know who you are, even if you've switched to a different machine, as long as that machine touched an account affiliated with you.
Yeah, you have no where to hide.
I don't have an android phone.
I don't use chrome.
I don't use FB
I don't use google search.
Yet Google and FB can still get information about me without my approval.
That's the issue.
You can't actually delete your FB account.
Once made, it exists.
Just in case you change your mind.
"people don't seem to value that data, that information, about who they are, where they are or what they do - or not very much."
I believe they do, or would if they knew the extent of tracking undertaken by these Internet giants. The fact that much of this is done (effectively) by stealth, or "permitted" by terms buried deep in the T&C muesli rather undermines this argument.
I have to agree with you that its not a question of our valuation of the data.
Its that we don't have control over the data being captured.
Suppose you're like me. You don't have a FB account.
Yet unless you install a script blocker in your web browser and stop certain scripts from running, if you visit a site that FB has an agreement with, FB would now have data about you and will build a profile about you.
Same for Google.
So I may choose to avoid using a service from FB or Google, yet they still capture information about me. And here's the rub. A company may not sell or have a contract in place to share this information, but that they may do so because their IT guy grabbed some code that embedded scripts from FB and Google.
And it gets worse.
Its a catch-22.
Google uses data collected from these tools to help do page ranks so if you're El-Reg, you might want to take out the google analytics code. But in doing so, you may no longer show up in their web statistics.
Which hurts the site so that they have an economic reason to run google analytics.
But from an end user... we have no control over the capture and sharing of this information, regardless of the data protection laws.
Fresh produce - farm shop?
You mean you don't have your very own victory garden to grow your own?
You live in the city and you didn't convert your building's flat roof in to a food plot to help with the environment?
What sort of hipster are you?
Wow. Trying to be politically correct?
Zog, Aldi and Lidl have marketed themselves as discounters. Its their business model.
The truth is that many corporations have latched on to the term 'Big Data' and have yet to truly understand how to use it, or when best to use it.
To use the example of pricing. Amazon doesn't have a physical storefront. The price displayed could be calculated on the fly whereas in a supermarket, you would need to spend $$$ to upgrade the store shelves and the registers to do this. Yes it can be done and the technology is pretty straight forward.
Yet, here's the rub.
What do you buy on Amazon and what do you buy in the supermarket?
Big difference in terms of price margins and when it gets down to price optimization... it doesn't work in the grocery store....
In your neighborhood, there are at least 2-3 grocery chains close to you that you have a choice as to where to shop. You most likely shop regularly at two of the three if not all of the stores based on quality of product, choice of products and convenience. So if your favorite cans of beans is 5p lower at tescos but you're close to Sainsburys, are you going to go to Tesco to save 5p a can?
The issue is that the grocery business is low margins, high traffic. Not a lot of wiggle room. For most of the products, the price optimization within the margins where a store will make money is too small to sway the average consumer.
When you start to put certain products on sale to get customers in to the door, your competitors may match the price (potentially losing money) and will counter with other products where they have better margins or deals with manufacturers and will force you to match and you potentially lose money.
Amazon doesn't sell products that have that small a margin. They aren't selling perishables and shipping direct from manufacturer on some products, they can reduce their holding costs. (Again holding perishables cost more because usually they have to be refrigerated or frozen.)
There's more, but in general the cost of trying to optimize prices is going to exceed any tangible benefits.
Aldi's does their discounting, but its more 'old school' and its much simpler math. You can bet your bottom dollar that when they do run a special on product X, its because they got a deal on product X and have some wiggle room.
Depend on the package, role and division.
I was in S&D where if you quit, you could come back. If you took a package, you were gone and couldn't come back. But if you took a package, and went to work for a company IBM bought, you were allowed back in.
Learned a lot from my time within the Borg. Some good, some bad...
But life truly is better outside the Borg.
If you opt to take a package... you're no longer allowed back in.
Speaking of which... anyone who's escaped the borg... why would they want to go back unless they are mentally ill or challenged.
Weird as it sounds, the only way to get a monopoly to make changes is to force them to do so.
The have no competitive reason to do so unless they are forced to do it.
Govt PUC: hey Comcast, you need to improve you broadband offering beyond 4Mb/s down.
Comcast: why, we are already offering Broadband services...
Govt PUC: Not anymore...
Yes there is a difference.
Bribe == gift to congress critter in exchange for a favorable outcome on a vote.
Lobby === paying a high priced spokesman whom the congress critter trusts who will explain the issue to the congress critter in such a way that the congress critter will vote in his/her favor.
Bribe == filling a brief case with $10,000.00 cash and giving it to Congress Critter to vote X on issue Y.
Lobby == giving me $10,000.00 to sit down w Congress Critter over an expensive lunch explaining why he should vote X on issue Y. Of course I put the spin I want on the issue and gain Congress critter's trust.
Consider a Lobbyist as a trusted advisor that corporations buy and Congress Critters use for free. They help break down complex issues so that Congress Critters can understand them. ;-)
There's actually a larger market if you can put mesos and spark on it. ;-)
The point of the article is that the rise in temp is less than the margin of error.
In short. Its bad science to suggest that it means anything in either direction.
Shouldn't we all agree that BAD SCIENCE doesn't help anyone?
Lets face it. I'd love to get rid of pollution and smog. But there isn't enough research in to fusion and nuclear energy has a slight problem Bad people will want to do bad things with the waste product.
A couple of theories...
1) It was a test of sorts.
2) It was done to silence critics that it was a total waste of money, creating an air superiority fighter with no one left to fight.
"What you mean just like the US isn't building the F22 as well?"
Actually no, the US is not building new F22 aircraft. Too expensive.
That doesn't mean if / when the Russians or Chinese can catch up, we couldn't build more.
To the best of my knowledge, only one F22 combat mission has been flown, or rather publicly acknowledged. This was in Syria.
Want to guess why? ;-)
I think you need to do a bit more homework.
The B2 is stealthy, even by today's standards.
You have to understand how the terrain impacted its stealth capabilities.
The funny thing... there's this company Informix that was sold to IBM around the turn of the century... which had this database IDS.
It was originally a relational database, but when Phil bought Illustra in '95, they got some cool object relational technology.
To net it all out... Its the only relational database which could be used to store unstructured/semi-structured data.
Of course had the orginal Arrowhead project been allowed to be completed... it would have been extremely scalable.
Just a footnote in history... even though IBM still sells IDS.
The problem was that nobody understood its potential, or how to sell it outside of a few.
Oh and one more tie in... Mike Olsen used to work for Stonebraker's Illustra and then Informix. ;-)
Before you bash Apple,
How do you believe this to be patentable?
The patent should be denied on the grounds that its neither new, nor innovative.
We should flog those in the Patent office and in Congress. Bring back the reforms and vote! Harry Reid is no longer in charge and the Trial Lawyers haven't gotten enough money in to the pockets of the Republicans.
This is yet again more reason for Patent reform.
That's an interesting example.
Lets talk about PC BIOS.
Its called developing the code in a clean room.
You have one group of engineers who are tasked with writing specifications as they reverse engineer the original product.
Then you have a second group of engineers who are tasked to build the new bios from the specifications with no communication at all with the first group.
That's what Google was supposed to do. But somehow they screwed it up.
Yes, Oracle wants money. They are a company. As a human, you exist to procreate and play video games. As a company Oracle exists to make money.
Google walks away from Java? That would mean writing a whole new OS and use a whole new language that doesn't use the JVM.
Google won't do that.
If Google loses, they will pay the royalty. They will indemnify the telcos that Google agreed to indemnify when the lawsuit came out.
Google will do the math, something you didn't do, and come to the conclusion that its cheaper to settle and then make money off the data they get from you, someone who uses an android phone. You are their product.
If you thought Uber's God View was scary... Google's potential is much worse.
You've missed the issue.
Using the APIs, that's one thing and that's not at the heart of the argument.
APIs were created so that you, the developer can make use of their product in your app.
Google is creating a derivative product to compete with the product.
If Google wins then you're just made IP dead in terms of software.
It would mean that anyone who creates anything, publishes the API, has no way of protecting their IP from people reverse engineering their code.
If Oracle wins, its still BAU, Google wins... You have the world of cheap knock offs. Buyer beware.
Its a good thing you're not a lawyer.
The API is not just like an 'index to a published work' .
Its more like the cliff notes. You don't get the meat of the argument, but a general idea of what's going on. ;-)
In terms of copyright... the argument is that Google created a derivative work.
They caused harm to Oracle (loss of revenue).
If Oracle's lawyer(s) have a good day, and Google's lawyers dont, Oracle stands a good chance of winning.
IMHO Google played fast and loose. The could have just licensed it. They have the cash.
They're making money because with 'droid, they have more ways to watch what you do and to influence your purchasing decisions.
Sorry, you missed a few things.
When Sun created Java and Then the ME version, the capabilities of the phone were much more limited, so you had to reduce things, hence the ME. Sun didn't license Java for the desktop because they wanted people to adopt it. Then make some money off the ME version.
Oracle came much later when they bought Sun.
Turns out if Larry thought about it. By Buying SUN, they became the next IBM in terms of software,hardware and services.