anxiousest

9 ms·

31.
by anxiousest 13y ago
s/Google/search engines/
32.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Nope, not paid: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23926938 it's just a bit of fun.
33.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Google told the BBC that it had come up with the idea and that neither side was paying the other. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23926938
34.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Distributed systems aren't immune to DMCA takedowns: http://www.chillingeffects.org
35.
by anxiousest 13y ago
I'm getting fed up with these nonsense notions and governments feigning victimhood to route citizen to their honeypot schemes. Brazil is a country that wants sovereignty over its citizens' digital lives, mainly to spy on them: ht
36.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Brazil wants the servers within its borders (officially) to snoop on drug traffickers and other suspected law breakers without having to ask for permission: http://internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2013/08&#x2
37.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Don't delude yourself, Brazil wants servers inside their borders so they can spy on them without resistance.
38.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Not every feature is about the NSA nor every upgrade is a "PR move", this is a standard feature that Amazon also offers, and keeping law enforcement out isn't its main objective although it would make things a bit difficult
39.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Other branches of government can, relying on NSA intelligence. Just to be clear that example you offer is a case of an employer monitoring employee activity on company equipment, which is another can of worms: http://www.wired.co
40.
by anxiousest 13y ago
That is an extreme point of view that I don't agree with. I'd like to point out that these abuses weren't committed by the data holders but by the government, the same entity tasked with regulating data abuse, also as long as
41.
by anxiousest 13y ago
These companies can't detain you in an airport or throw you in prison, there are massive benefits to be had from this data for the user, not to mention that you have a contract in place with these companies that don't have with th
42.
by anxiousest 13y ago
I agree that it's ultimately a policy issue that needs to be mended by congress, what I disagree with is the needless "dig" at companies that store and analyze large amounts of data, as if that somehow is invalid conduct. The
43.
by anxiousest 13y ago
I have nothing against the entities involved but reading the comments here I get the impression that many simply ignored the "cooperation" bit i.e: Cooperation: It's been some time now since we were first contacted by DuckDu
44.
by anxiousest 13y ago
No worries, unsupported platforms will fallback to the plugin: http://gigaom.com/2013/08/28/hangouts-hd-vp8-webrtc/
45.
by anxiousest 13y ago
The have yet to enforce it, not even once, they are just reserving the right as to better shield themselves from potential legal liabilities.
46.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Videos of interest would be tagged accordingly.
47.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Thunderbird, mail.app.
48.
by anxiousest 13y ago
http://googleblog.blogspot.com2013/03/transparency-report-sh...
49.
by anxiousest 13y ago
That is untrue, daring fireball one-liners shouldn't be your only source of news: http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Google-Fiber-Server-Neutr...
50.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Basically an update broke undocumented functionality that doesn't meant there won't be an option to stream local media, as Google explains: We’re excited to bring more content to Chromecast and would like to support all types of
51.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Only if you don't mind to be reminded of your own foolishness when similar functionality is enabled through SDK. I don't understand this animosity towards Google, it's like every little change to the status quo triggers a hat
52.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Not sure how you went from "an update that broke undocumented functionality" to "evil".
53.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Your comment reads like an entry in daring fireball, just trollish nonsense. They pushed an update that broke some non official/supported functionality, I'm not sure what "business interests" you're babbling about.
54.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Now that Google insists on a payment method all of the sudden "we need" third-party solutions?! no one had objections about Apple and Amazon doing so, at least Google allows third-party app stores and sideloading.
55.
by anxiousest 13y ago
I was thinking about less granular grouping i.e city or state level.
56.
by anxiousest 13y ago
I'm just guessing.
57.
by anxiousest 13y ago
Usually via graph, a "six degrees of separation" sort of thing, you don't have to directly contact each other, but it's enough to contact some of the same people to assume a connection. Also similar use patterns or geo l
58.
by anxiousest 13y ago
He went in part to meet with an American citizen imprisoned there, also worth noting that the state department didn't approve of the visit: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/08/world/asia/bill-rich
59.
by anxiousest 13y ago
None of it is convincing. There is nothing extraordinary about the government showing interest when even a private citizen is contacting and meeting to interview someone who is wanted by said government on national security grounds. Google&