Re: More inclusive?
Non vegans will NOT be represented by that salad
3439 posts • joined 3 Sep 2007
Well yeah. There's things in life that cannot be bought, such as love, or control of Facebook. That's a fact that outsiders should have known from the start. It makes no sense to complain about it.
Outsiders shares give no power, but they do give money. Well, theoretically; in practice they don't give dividends, so you only make money from them if you sell them higher than you bought. Luckily, the actions are at a historic high, so if you don't like the voting arrangement you can sell them right now.
It's amazing to think people might soon start using global warming as a reason to make bitcoin mining illegal.
It has happened four times since 2011 that the bitcoin price went 10x in a few months. If it does that again, it's going to have such an impact that I think governments will intervene.
They also told the world about Google recording the cell mast the phone is connected to:
Were it any other company than Oracle, you'd think they're trying to act for the public good! However, since it's Oracle, I can only conclude they're still pissed off about Java.
Ultimately, there is a point to what Timmy is saying. If you're a baker, you're not allowed to refuse baking a cake for a gay wedding, but you're allowed to refuse baking a cake which says "Hang all the N***"
And Timmy doesn't get why those cases are treated differently by the law.
The reason the payment was so low is that the data "leak" was rather trivial.
It used to be that when you clicked on a Google result, the target website would automatically receive as referer link the URL of the Google results page. Now this is pretty much exactly what the referer link was defined for. The problem is that the URL of the results page contains your search query, and so the target website would learn the search query that had returned their website.
For instance, if you searched for "nytimes" and clicked on the New York Times website, the New York Times would know you had just searched for "nytimes". And the porn site would know the exact fetish which had brought you to them.
I guess people didn't thought about privacy when they defined the referer link in HTTP, but now it would be a non-starter. In any case, that's why Google ended up having to pay so little.
Why con artists? Madoff was a fraud from the beginning, but they're actually making money, and more money every year. They have a stranglehold on the online advertising business in much of the western world, and that business is booming. It's going to take a very long time for that to change. Putting more regulations on data privacy would actually benefit them, because it would make it harder on new entrants to break the market.
They are accusing Google of "taking money from one pocket and putting it into another". But that would mean Google is taking money from its own pockets rather than accepting the money from its rivals. There's no advantage for Google to do that. If the rivals were super good and Google Shopping was not competitive, Google would just happily shut down their own product and take the money from the rivals instead. It's not like they've never shut down products before.
But have you seen how the rear doors of a Tesla X open?? SO COOL!
Joking aside, I think Tesla are the only cars where the dashboard computer display is worth a damn. As far as I've seen, all the competition use roughly the same quality as in-flight entertainment systems.
Not that I'll buy any electric car soon, because I don't feel like planning on advance where I'll plug my car during road trips.
I'd like to give a special mention to iPhones for this gem: In order to save a PDF of an email, you need to use a "3D touch", aka press harder, on the print preview:
As a bonus, this only works for phones that support 3D touch, so if you have an iPhone 6 or older, you can't save a PDF of an email.
Ok, for the people who still didn't get it, there's no need to use the Wayback Machine. Everything is still on the web for the world to see. The articles just won't show up in Google when you search for the man's name, but might still show up in other search results.
I frankly doubt that the EU courts will have the balls to force Facebook to balkanize its data into independent units. The recent US law makes it very clear that as long as Facebook US keeps control over the place where the data is stored, they have to cough it up to Uncle Sam whenever he asks. So the tech giants would have to set up separate entities, which cannot even exchange data if they want to... Even storing emails becomes a huge problem if they're sent across the Atlantic.
I'm fully expecting the EU authorities to give up and admit they are unable to protect our privacy from the US government.
I would say it differently: Working unit tests means everything is fine, if you will never need to change it. If you know you will need to change the code, but you don't understand how the code currently works, then you have a problem, and working unit tests are not going to help you.
The court ordered the internet advertising behemoth to cough up US$9bn to the database giant
Not quite. The court ordered that Google would have to pay Oracle damages that must be determined in another lawsuit. The $9bn is Oracle's own estimate of how much they should get paid, and they might be biased.
I find a bit pathetic that politicians insist on talking to the CEO of the company, when he is obviously not the most competent person to talk to.
By the way, is this the first time that EU bods ask for an American CEO to cross the Atlantic? Meetings must happen all the time, but I don't recall there was a similar invitation for Bill Gates in the 90s.
If I understand correctly, they are accusing YouTube of tracking children, because they show videos for children on the main site, which children are not supposed to watch, and which tracks all users. And the solution is... Removing all content for children from the main site?
That's an interesting strategy. In this way, you could also argue that Google Search is clearly tracking children, because it tracks all users who access the web, and the web contains a lot of stuff for children. Ultimately, you would not be allowed to track any user at all unless you're a porn site. PH because porn site.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019