242 posts • joined Friday 28th August 2009 17:06 GMT
Re: Did the Patent "Industry"...
perhaps other groups just out bribed them.
Re: Get rid of crappy google+
Google Reader got a few million users a month, Youtube gets billions of unique users a month.That why reader was scrapped.
Bob's army seem to have been crushed on the videos I have watch and read the comments sections on. Seem to get a lot less my sister makes a 7000 dollars a month spam as well.
Re: Reliable IT.
Paris seem to survive just fine with driverless trains, so do the Danish and their driverless copenhagen trains, Gatwick Innovia APM 100, Milan, Toulouse Metro, Nuremberg U-Bahn and many others. An Britain will have driverless cars in Milton Keynes by 2015, getting cars driving on a road is much harder than getting a train to drive itself.
An I am sure our IT will be more reliable than drivers all deciding to take a holiday (strike) for a working week because they don't like the changes.
It is a monopoly but monopoly are legal unless they are abuse. So far no one been able to prove Google are abusing theirs in a court of law, in fact Google won every case ever brought against it in the US on the ground that it was abusing its monopoly.
Re: Absolute power corrupts absolutely
In this case Google had the balls to take on the authors and publishers and deserve the power and the head start it gives them by winning the case. Microsoft was going to launched a similar project but lack the balls to take on the publishers and authors in the court rooms.
A case of He Who Dares, Wins.
Once all the appeals go through and presuming Google win them, they will have open up the way for Microsoft and anyone else with a few hundred million dollars spare to build themselves an electronic library.
Of cause they can appeal, but each level it get less and less likely they will win
The publishers can, they made an agreement with Google.
The authors can't because hey they didn't make an agreement with Google and loss. Once all the appeals have been process and presuming Google keeps winning then it likely the authors and Google will be able to come to some sort of arrangement.
It was balance when this mission was launched, thanks to Bill Clinton presidency.
woooo, 80,000 petition.
The video that earning Google money got more views than that, and Youtube get hundreds of millions of visitors each month. The petition demonstrates how much people really care about Google+ integration and it says they don't care that much about it.
The girl in the video is cute though, which is probably why most people viewed the video.
I doubt GCHQ would be stupid enough to leave a "copyrighted by GCHQ" in their code. Linking such Malware back to the UK will be next to impossible. if GCHQ were feeling particularly sneaky I am sure they could have laid a false trails so that it look like it was the Russians, Chinese or even the Israelis that were responsible for the Malware and for subsequent hacks.
Re: Heads will roll
The US pay GCHQ at least a hundred million pounds a year, according to Snowden. I doubt even the US would want to see that investment go up in smoke. An GCHQ were providing help and services to most EU nations as well, even Germany.
Google management, who decisions have triple the price of the stock they gave you when you sold youtube to them 7 years ago.
Re: They're going to do it!
By and Large have also register, Bal0100, ship number 4
Bal0100 Ship - By and Large Llc - San Francisco, California - Ships
There is no ship number 5 registered so far. An I have tried to find a ship zero, a prototype vessel but so far no luck.
I would hope Google would have added a few more windows to the design if they were meant for Google new corporate headquarters.
There these two registered to By and Large as mention in the article,
An then By and Large also owns this one as well,
Cannot find anymore, but its seem Google has secretly built itself a small fleet. All built to the same spec. If Google has built more they are using different code names or holding companies. One would think Google would launched a prototype version using a ready built vessel.
Google may well already have one operational, a second barge owned by By & Large. The question becomes how many more does Google own.
upgraded, all went perfectly fine.
I am sure in the days and weeks to come there will still be thousands writers writing blogs moaning about something through.
Re: Not Funny!
I found it extremely funny when I sure it. I am sure the weeks of moans will make me laugh even more.
If you mean about changes to data protection act currently going through EU, I doubt they will apply to Google and the changes it made last year, it very unlikely they will make the law retrospective, large parts of it are already facing legal troubles, it apparently incompatible with German constitution for example, Britain and among others are trying to water down the proposals.
If you mean that other EU countries currently running separate enquiries into whether Google breach their own data protection laws, then I say it extremely unlikely that all of them will get past the investigation stage, even few of them will survive the courts, it hard for example to see what Google did wrong under the UK Data protection act of 1998 for example.
Re: All your translations are belong to us
I don't think it will be that hard for Google to develop a way to analyse a context of the text. It not that hard to tell a poetry from legal document from a love letter and then apply the correct translation or the translation most likely to be use to deal with that document. I did read once that Google were asking users to describe document they want translating, whether it was legal,poetry, formal, informal but I never seen this option on Google translate.
Handling real time voice to voice translation may be trickier to do.
Re: Use The Force, Lukin
Now you mention it, this does sound like the foundational technology Holodecks in Star Trek, it would be a bit chilly in their through.
French regulatory authorities have failed repeatedly to get their punishments against Google pass their courts and declared legal. I don't believe this case will be any different.
Re: Colour me surprised? No.
No they are arguing that the French law doesn't apply to online services. Given that French data protection law was written and past way back in 1968 they may have a point, depending what the specific language use in the law.
If they are right, the law wouldn't apply to any French online company or indeed any company on the planet until the French updated the laws.
These guys are spooks did anyone expect them not to cheat. If he such a security expert then he should have design his security systems with cheating in mind.
GCHQ, MI6 don't play fair, it not in their job description, they will lie, cheat, bully, and bribe who ever they need to, to achieve their goals, which is in their job description, , something I would have thought a security expert would understand and respect and certainly design into their security systems to prevent. There job description also includes intercepting, decrypting stuff, whole and developing new encryption technologies to hide their own secrets.
""One set of evidence supports the theory is that this is partly about industrial espionage. ""
Which is perfectly legal for GCHQ to do, intelligence act of 1994 give them the legal right to protect the UK economy prosperity. US senators have made accusations in the past about UK stealing US stealth technology, never presented any proof through.
One got to wonder if that just the tip of a very large iceberg. An did the NSA ask American companies to do what itself was doing and routing traffic around UK territories to avoid GCHQ intercepting data.
Google never promoted this device as a device able to play local content. I was surprise the API even included such capabilities as it seems quite clear from Google announcement that they wasn't intending to support local content with this device. That was one of the complaints about the device.
It not unheard of for multinational companies to argue about where a trial should be heard. An this has been use by claimants in other countries to get their cases heard in UK courts instead of their own courts.
This is showboating by the claimant lawyers, I don't think they would bother with media briefings if they didn't think Google had a good chance of having the case dismissed by the courts on these grounds.
how would we know if it has been missed use
May be Ellison would like to us how we would learn whether this data have been misuse, as everyone involve have to swear secrecy and are barred from talking about such programmes.
Re: Malaria? Isn't that Bill's monopoly
So the Gates Foundation isn't PR so that he is remembered for something other than running a company that found guilty multiple times of violating antitrust laws?
So just an upgrade, I think Sony needed more innovation if it was to remain competitive, we shall see what the likes of Google, Apple, Samsung come out with in the next few months but it seem like the market for smart watches is still wide open for the taking.
Re: Sensible judgement IMHO
Actually I think Google was smart not to answer the letter, if they did acknowledge the letter they be admitting that Article 29 Working Group actually has any powers in law to investigate Google to begin with, which they don't, the EU has no enforcement powers over the data protection.
By allowing this to go down to each country legal systems, Google can then pursue divide and conquer tactics, Google not going to win every court battle but it will win some if not most of them, I certainly see them winning in the UK, if it wins enough, then it can negotiate with the group from a position of strength.
Which is why the group have chosen France to go first, there lower courts judges have normal ruled against Google, they are hoping a early victory will force Google to the negotiating table, it wot because Google have a high success rates in France higher courts and will automatically appeal any decision by the lower court. An the group have probably decided if they cant win in France they not going to win anywhere else.
Re: Seems pretty sensible
I do think employment laws needs to be tighten up to prevent potential employers from going on fishing exercises on the internet with candidates names.
Anyone that names a rape victim, which is protected by law, should have a tonne of legal bricks thrown at them anyway, which did happen recently involve in fans of a footballer who named the rape victims being arrested and it could be argue that Google and Twitter and other sites owners, being publishers and all, should have the responsibility to take such content if it turns up on servers they own.
I wouldn't actually mind the same protection being given to anyone who commits a crime under the age of 21, with judges having final say if the crime was committed between ages of 18 and 21.
But this goes into a bigger question, should a private entity be involve in policing the internet, we wouldn't expect a private company to police our streets would we, in fact their active campaign to fight the privatisation of police forces, so why do we expect private corporations to police the web, especially stuff that isn't even on their servers, let alone expecting them to police the whole internet.
I think there is an effort by the government to shift the burden of policing the internet onto private companies with virtually no or very little discussion on whether the public actually want policing duties being carried out by private entities or do that want it carried out by the police force, like most crimes prevention and investigation is done.
What I don't get is why websites are still calling this super fast, when it a pathetic 2mb they are promising deliver.
This is make or break. I don't think Sony can afford another just a minor upgrade, or do I think it would launch such a sustain campaign if it wasn't a little bit more than an upgrade of existing watches. This is there one and probably only chance to dominate this market before Apple, Samsung and possibly Google. An Sony needs to do something to surprise everyone.
After they humiliated Microsoft at E3, perhaps that can spur Sony to achieve another victory by dominating the Smart watch scene.
A 7 day battery life and an OLED bendable display, NFC to allow hooking up to phones easier, integration with other products such as Xperia phones, smart television, PS4. some basics sensors such as a heart beat monitor, heat sensor, a selection of high quality apps to go along with those.
Re: Risky? Surely not
They were given to developers, at least most of them were, a few were handed to PR people, and tech influencers to neutralise at least some of the hostility to them in the market.
And some developers gets new hardware months ahead of their competitors, which means they can developed apps on them months before their competitors.
Re: Another fail
An being British and a supporter of Arm, I hope they never learn.
Google had a pair or two running at it I/0 and I would take a guest that they may be providing some technical support to the project, they certainly are working together.
Re: Is this before or after
This will help with that by providing them with decent communications systems we can provide them with weather reports, drought warnings, which could increase crops yields.
Cattle farmers can get access to veterinary services, learn how to look after their cattle better, arrange cattle trades over a wider area.
One a wider note these services would be use to better communicate problems with corrupt local officials, report bandits, problems with roads. Better communications allows for better education.
Re: I can hardly believe
Apple reportedly paid big dollars for access to the APIs. So far no rumour of Microsoft being willing to hand over money to get access to the APis.
The FTC are much more likely to succeed at prosecuting Google Doubleclick for antitrust violations than Google search business, it a much simpler case , as Google will not have the 1st amendment defence that it would have use if it search business was attacked in America, or the FTC prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Google search results are bias and manipulated to support Google Business.
Why were the posts remove, they were just reporting rebels crimes in Syrian civil and informing FT viewers of videos of rebels crimes exists on Youtube, something the FT should be doing themselves, if they weren't pandering to their own ideologies that the rebels can do no wrong, and giving the rebels 100% backing with little to no criticism.
Guest you going to be punching a lot of police officers. Because it almost guaranteed they will be some of the first people to adopt this equipment.
There already been trials of head mounted cameras in the UK, the consumerisation of the technology will only bring down costs and increase the speed of roll out.
Re: It runs Android?
Chrome OS ;)
That a good solution, but all companies should be require to do it, not just Google.
Re: I don't think you understand...
This has nothing to do GWT.
This is about the technology Google developed in house to build their databases and server management software, such a HADROOP and MAPREDUCE, all of which have been replicated by various open source projects, using research papers published by Google. These have been and still are use by companies like Facebook and Twitter and many others in their own server farms.
Google has never given permission for these technologies to be replicated by the open source communities, and until now there was nothing stopping Google from simply sending cease decease notices to any firm which use these open source versions of this technology and to shut down the projects themselves, as mention companies like Yahoo, Twitter, Facebook.
Google has now basically said that its cool that everyone using its technology without paying for it and that it will not be suing anyone with these patents unless they sue first. Obviously I expect those open source communities will examine those patents closely to see if there are ways to engineer around them, but that will likely take years and Google likely kept some powder dry just in case.
A lot of large websites uses open source versions this type of technology, which was originally developed at Google, so this is good news for a lot of companies that Google aren't going to come knocking at their doors and start demanding they stop using Google technology or license it.
Not according to the European Commission, who boss has stated that they not be pursuing Google on charge of manipulating it search results to make them bias, as it an argument they know they will lose as soon as Google shows the judge all of it products that doesn't appear at the top when using the appropriate search term, for example email doesn't result in Gmail coming top. An probably detail history of how maps or any other products you wish state, that only got to the top in search once it became the most popular use product in the market, I am sure Google got the data to back that argument as well. lots of data.
I would bet ten quid that the EU is about to issue a statement or even sign an agreement with that is roughly opposite of what Microsoft wants. These statements always magically appear in the media just be proceeding goes against Microsoft and it friends, one almost would think they have a spy or two working at the EC and the FTC.
I do wonder whether Seattle licensing department allows establishments that encourage violence against people to keep their license to sell licker. I wonder if they still have customers if their license was suddenly withdrawn.
- World's OLDEST human DNA found in leg bone – but that's not the only boning going on...
- Lightning strikes USB bosses: Next-gen jacks will be REVERSIBLE
- Pics Brit inventors' GRAVITY POWERED LIGHT ships out after just 1 year
- Storagebod Oh no, RBS has gone titsup again... but is it JUST BAD LUCK?
- Three offers free US roaming, confirms stealth 4G rollout