Ambulance chasing lawyers seem to have focused their efforts on large tech. Reminds of that joke "Why do robbers go after banks?". "That's where the money is". Wonder what the lawyer vs individual split is in these cases....most of them land up settling any way.
A tad "holier than thou" attitude pointing a finger at your competitor and to a large extent the entire internet economy. It would be nice to dial down the spin/FUD machine esp when you're the CEO. Ad targeting will and has evolved. Good things happen when you understand the user and their needs - I for one am willing to trade my privacy for USEFUL features and products (to paint this as only ads is injustice). Just like I'm willing to trade my $s for good devices.
The irony of your comment is that most ad companies play the victim and moralize how blocking ads is akin to murder.
Ad targeting has evolved alright, but not in a way that has helped consumers one bit.
It's become an arms race to the bottom, essentially. To coddle ad companies as if they are mom and pop shops that are struggling is not only naive, but dangerous.
Ad tracking has certainly evolved - Google, Facebook, et al have built successful enterprises out of tracking every detail of people's web browsing. But targeting? AdWords still only coughs up ads that coincidentally include a random keyword I was searching for, devoid of context, or attempts to sell me something I've just bought.
Awesome news and thanks for standing up to a dual-standards company and CEO. You can't be for NN in the US and against it elsewhere. Internet.org is purely a vehicle to get more users on to FB....not the internet.
DDG is a little ways from being a full Google replacement. Apple can ill afford the backlash they saw with maps happen again. Remember your simply shifting the notion of anonymity and data from one large company (Google) to another large one (Apple). All device makers gather your data and will use it (if they aren't already) hopefully for the benefit of the users. Instilling fear isn't the solution, clarifying the use and usefulness of data is.
Apple hasn't proven itself to be a dick. We trust them implicitly because they have reliably proven that they have our interests at heart, and we pay them to be trustworthy.
Google has proven to be a dick. We distrust them implicitly because they have reliably proven that when faced with a choice between the interests of their nonpaying users and their paid-up clients, they invariably work in the interests of money.
We all still view Apple with some degree of suspicion because they're in the USA and thus NSA happens.
What I'd prefer to see in addition to iCloud is either nationally-hosted iCloud for non-US countries, or self-hosted iCloud services for people who want to be in control of their own security.
For me it's been a Google replacement. The results have become really good recently.
At this point I feel the main difference is the personally ranked results. Once you get used to the page you want being 4th or 5th on the list rather than first, you realize the trade-off is worth it.
if it's any help, would love to host the site on hpcloud.com (hp's public cloud). drop me a line if you're interested pratik.jhaveri(at)hp.com. Not saying this is an issue with your hosting provider - but perhaps it could help.
* I work in the hpcloud team. this post does not reflect HP's needs/opinions.
Just donated. What an awesome cause and an amazing effort by the team. I'm asking other organizations that I donate to, to follow Watsi's example in transparency.
Google is badly managed but they're not going to subject a heavyweight like that to their typical nonsense (blind allocation, manager-as-SPOF) and if they do, I'm sure he'll be just fine.
Is there any evidence that PJ is not a paid blogger herself? At least Florian was honest to declare on his blog that he was paid by Oracle to do some work and his blog might be tainted by that.
Your ad hominem is rather disgusting. Put up evidence or shut up.
I called Florian as a corporate shill here more than a year ago based on publicly available information. I believe him "outing himself" is more recent.
PJ called it alright. No offense but Groklaw's behaviour against Florian has been nothing short of disgraceful and extremely immature.
Who cares if Florian is being paid by Microsoft et al ? It happens all the time amongst bloggers and doesn't mean jack to me. EVERYONE is biassed in some way. Whether through money, previous experiences or external pressures. As a reader you should always consult multiple sources.
It's been really disappointing watching the great work that Groklaw do be sullied by all these personal attacks.
The problem with Florian Mueller is that he positioned himself for a long time as an independent analyst and has continued posing as such with many various media outlets and continues to be quoted that way. We all expect Oracle and Microsoft's lawyers and PR team to argue their case and nobody blames them for it. But somebody who deliberately tries to distort and influence a public issue through misinformation and deception - they absolutely deserve to be called out for it and criticized.
(And for what it is worth, Mueller actually provided genuinely informative coverage of many of the issues - which made him all the more effective).
Florian wasn't just an anonymous blogger before he was outed.
His "bully pulpit" was the blog once named "Free and Open Source Patents" (FOSS) and he leveraged some earlier open source advocacy to lend credibility to his shilling in the present case.
(Notice that the name is now seems to be changed at the site). One can however, easily find references on the web billing Mueller as an expert on "Free and Open Source Patents".
Part of the taunting now is in response to his past behavior.
Florian repeatedly refused to talk about his funding and insisted it was irrelevant (he has a history at lwn.net among other places). Now that we know the full context, people on the other side of that argument naturally want to underline it.
>I called Florian as a corporate shill here more than a year ago based on publicly available information. I believe him "outing himself" is more recent.
So if Florian made up a pseudonym like PJ did, and posted articles only with it, he would have avoided your scrutiny of publicly available info and "outing" and all that, right?
>Put up evidence or shut up.
There is no way for the common person do that,
So the moral of the story is there is that Florian should made sure that there was no public information about him like PJ very successfully did and he would've been shielded from all the shill accusations like PJ is now? It's funny to to see Groklaw lob the accusations while not revealing anything about PJ that will allow someone to do some research like you did.
The thing about the Internet and anonymity is that an anonymous web of trust really can tell you who someone is better than some single professional achievement. Both Florian and pj have a "trail" because if you work with people you can't avoid a trail. Pj's trail will tell you basically who she is just as Florian's will. Florian may have a blog titled "open source patents" but his trail of activity as corporate consultant tells a different story. Further, Mueller's efforts to spin information using his supposed open source credentials required that his identity be known and touted. As far as I know pj has always let her research speak for itself.
> but his trail of activity as corporate consultant tells a different story.
So.. as I said, if he hadn't associated his blog with his corporate consultant activity, he would be doing just fine right? The pseudonym's trail would've simply not have his original identity in it.
>As far as I know pj has always let her research speak for itself.
Mueller could also have just let his research speak for itself while hiding behind a pseudonym.
If an anonymous blogger posts what Florian does, his named would be dragged through the mud by the same people who are commenting here who would be asking him to disclose who he is and who pays him. Yes or no?
PJ isn't a pseudonym, it is her initials. Also, we have known that Pamela Jones was PJ since 2005, long before Oracle even bought Sun, let alone sued Google.
So basically, and please excuse the language, you appear to be talking complete and utter shit.
Slight;y off topic, but I'm confused. I thought PJ was retiring from Groklaw and yet most of the postings in this case have been signed PJ. Is "PJ" now just a moniker for an admin account on the site or is Pamela Jones active again?
For this case, it looks like things were split roughly half and half - PJ commenting on the transcripts from the court room, and Mark commenting on the filings on the docket. This is more activity from PJ that I would have expected given her semi-retirement, but it was always clear that she would be maintaining at least some level of activity with the sit.
Well, the postings have been signed 'anonymous', but the title has been signed PJ, so I doubt that it is an admin account unless their servers are setup really weirdly and wrong and back to front and stuff.
But yes, Pamela was reactivated specially for this case. It took a little over three days to warm the reanimation capsule back to room temperature after retrieving it from the catacombs beneath Geneva Airport. Apparently Pamela was extremely annoyed. She had been hoping to stay dormant until at least 2063, so that she could make a killing on some SpaceX investments. Or so I am told.
Perhaps not, but I'm pretty sure that the firm of Boies, Schiller & Flexner should have been able to find some evidence by now, since this is the second trial where PJ has documented their loss in exquisite detail.
Why, exactly is it OK for you to make up a pseudonym and libel Ms. Jones?
I demand disclosure. Your full name, your address, your phone, bank, and tax records for the past year, social security statement, and a sworn affidavit that you have never been paid by, had any financial interest in, or were related to anyone with an interest in, IBM, SCO, Oracle, Google, Novell, and any media outlet that has ever given critical or favorable coverage to any of these companies.
If you don't comply within 24 hours, I'll assume you're simply a troll and paid shill.
Edit: Downvoters may want to consult "cooldeal"'s other comments on this very page for context. I'm simply demanding of him what he demands of others.
See, this is the exact attitude I am talking about. Anyone even questioning PJ's funding sources is immediately vilified, hated on and modded down to death. While the same about Florian are modded up to the sky and it's totally okay to do that since he's not batting on your side, even if he's the one that has disclosed his interests.
Florian pretended to be a FOSS advocate for a very long time and refused to disclose his clients, when it was clear for all that he was being paid by Microsoft.
I don't know if PJ is paid by any of the parties involved, but I do know that PJ has actual legal experience as a paralegal, which is the main reason I think that her analysis carries weight when compared to those with no professional legal experience.
Also with no evidence of PJ being paid by Google, it would seem to be an unfair assumption to make.
