|
Authored by: designerfx on Friday, May 25 2012 @ 11:08 AM EDT |
This is almost comedy. Windows phone beats iphone at first
glance probably makes people think windows is significant, and
misses the fact that android has the lion's share of the
market.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: feldegast on Friday, May 25 2012 @ 11:10 AM EDT |
sjvn @sjvn
'Odd That Microsoft Demands Google Take Down Links That
Remain In
Bing | Techdirt' http://www.techdirt.com/
articles/20120524/18190719071/odd-
that-microsoft-demands-google-take-down-links
-that-remain-
bing.shtml Me: This IS odd. --- IANAL
My posts are ©2004-2012 and released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0
P.J. has permission for commercial use. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 25 2012 @ 02:10 PM EDT |
News pick:
http://www.readwriteweb.com/hack/2012/05/improvements-in-new-york-times-fech-mak
es-it-easier-to-follow-the-money.php
I don't know about NY Times APIs.
But I sure know I will miss Google Maps.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 25 2012 @ 09:14 PM EDT |
Now I'm worried. I always mute the commercials. Do you suppose
someone may report me, like a neighbor? I don't want to go to jail.
I also try to be good. Am I bad because I ignore the commercials? Is
that immoral?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 25 2012 @ 10:56 PM EDT |
I don't understand the basis of this SC decision. I accept that it may be
convenient to sometimes treat corporations as people when the law does not
specify otherwise, but where does that convenience become a right? Corporations
are not people. They are created by law. Why wouldn't they be subject to limits
defined by law? The US constitution says "We the People." Where do
corporations get inalienable rights? Corporations do not have a right to vote!
Why should they have a right voice themselves in elections?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 26 2012 @ 09:32 AM EDT |
The plaintiff wants Google to be de-trademarked so he can use their brand for
his own gain
I claim www as my own . click here [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: tiger99 on Saturday, May 26 2012 @ 02:16 PM EDT |
All very good, but due to their use of the Footgun®™, Oracle are going
to see their share of API usage diminish. It is not a good move to alienate
developers. Meanwhile, others are finding that their business is flourishing....[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 26 2012 @ 03:43 PM EDT |
[link]
It's not the other regimes I'm worried about, it's
ours. As
Naomi Wolf says In her book "The End of America: A Letter of
Warning
to a Young Patriot", there are 10 steps to creating
an efficient fascist state.
'Control The Press' is No. 8. I
count the Internet in that category as well.
It's easier to
close the pipe than to monitor hundreds or thousands
of
'dissidents'. Opportunities for the abuse of Internet
freedom are countless in
any country. Laws and rules are for law-abiding people, not
for criminals.
Nothing the UN or ITU can do will change
this.
10 Steps... [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 27 2012 @ 02:20 PM EDT |
OK, I understand naked short selling is selling stock without owing it and later
assuming the price drops actually buying some. If the price don't drop then you
declare a 'failed trades`. What I don't understand is how 'naked shorting` can
artifically force down stock price and what are the penalties if any for these
'failed trades`?
Accidentally Released Documents Show How Goldman et al
Engaged in Naked Short Selling[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|