Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26
[#] Thu May 06 2021 17:04:37 EDT from zooer

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

...Well if the Chrome browser tells me my Chrome browser isn't tracking... it must be true.



[#] Tue May 11 2021 19:37:30 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

It would be silly to expect the entire Android ecosystem to behave as if it were a single vendor. If they had locked everything down and sold it themselves they wouldn't have beaten Apple.

[#] Tue May 11 2021 22:19:30 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

They would have *been* Apple - only, without Steve Job's Apple Sauce for the faithful to guzzle. 

 

 

Tue May 11 2021 19:37:30 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar
It would be silly to expect the entire Android ecosystem to behave as if it were a single vendor. If they had locked everything down and sold it themselves they wouldn't have beaten Apple.

 



[#] Tue Jun 22 2021 10:39:06 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I doubt it. The original Android prototypes looked more like a Blackberry than an iPhone. Google won by using a design largely imagined by Apple but with an open ecosystem. They were fortunate in capturing that side of the market at a time when Microsoft still had their minds stuck in the idea that people would be willing to use a phone with an interface that looked like Windows.

We're fortunate that mobile evolved the way it did. It was one of the things that broke the monoculture computing was in at the beginning of the new century.


[#] Tue Jun 22 2021 15:16:57 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Windows would have won with the device with an interface that looked like Windows, if they had embraced leisure computing instead of avoiding it. 

That is the #1 reason Apple won. They imagined it as a consumer device, while Microsoft insisted that it be branded as a professional device and distanced from casual and leisure computing. I worked for Intel back then, and had discussions with Intel and Microsoft about this. Microsoft did not want Windows Mobile/CE to be perceived as a "gaming" platform or an "entertainment" platform. 

Apple started with a music player and then made it a portable video player and gaming platform and then all the consumers who had them insisted that they be able to use them for business. 

It was like the Indians not realizing until too late how many white people were going to be coming. I was ahead of the curve with this - having HP and Compaq iPaq PDAs and really pushing the limits on them, then writing for Tech Republic as a mobile device content contributor. I had a direct relationship with Verizon and got devices to test and review months before anyone else.

I was all on board. 

In the long run, it just changed the dominant evil bastards - and Google is far worse of an evil in your life than Microsoft ever achieved. They're far more invasive, they're abusing things far more important to you, their values are further away from yours. Microsoft was just a greedy capitalist Yuppie values company that embraced ruthlessness in success. 

Google is a Political Action Committee that wants to *control* you and what you can think or say. Android is a link in that goal.  

 

 

Tue Jun 22 2021 10:39:06 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar
I doubt it. The original Android prototypes looked more like a Blackberry than an iPhone. Google won by using a design largely imagined by Apple but with an open ecosystem. They were fortunate in capturing that side of the market at a time when Microsoft still had their minds stuck in the idea that people would be willing to use a phone with an interface that looked like Windows.

We're fortunate that mobile evolved the way it did. It was one of the things that broke the monoculture computing was in at the beginning of the new century.

 



[#] Sat Jun 26 2021 11:46:46 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I don't know if I'd agree with that.  Look at the kind of god-complex things Gates is doing now.  Microsoft was just as evil as Google is now.  Google is just more successful at it.



[#] Sat Jun 26 2021 12:53:44 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Absolutely not. 

This is the same kind of "whataboutism" that Democrats make about Republicans - in the sense that, "If the Republicans HAD the capabilities to be as corrupt and authoritarian as the Democrats, they WOULD be." 

That *may* be true - but the present threat of authoritarian evil does not come from the Republicans - they do not have the influence or political power to enact their most oppressive desires. 

Likewise - Google is a far bigger evil in the world than Microsoft ever was. Microsoft may have had evil AMBITION - Google has manifest capability to execute their evil on an unprecedented scale - along with Facebook and Twitter. 

Your last sentence says it all... 


Hitler minus *success* is just your local serial killer. Hitler *with* success is - HITLER. Evil isn't just about the ambition to do evil, but the success and scope of actually doing it. 




Sat Jun 26 2021 11:46:46 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

I don't know if I'd agree with that.  Look at the kind of god-complex things Gates is doing now.  Microsoft was just as evil as Google is now.  Google is just more successful at it.



 



[#] Sat Jun 26 2021 15:55:33 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

If you're suggesting that Microsoft's evil was limited by its conscience and by less-evil ambitions, and not by the amount of evil they were capable of performing ... you're totally off your rocker.



[#] Mon Jun 28 2021 00:32:45 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Not at all what I am suggesting. 

I'm saying that they had LESS ambition to achieve evil. 


Maybe as a Christian you think that those who take part in evil are restrained by their morality - that their conscience *prevents* them from being as evil as they could possibly be. 

I think most frequently, the evil do not achieve their full potential for evil because of - incompetence at being evil. 

Microsoft was actually fairly mediocre at being evil. Oh, maybe it didn't seem that way at the time - but in the long-haul - they were second rate at all of the "evil corporate excesses of 80's tech companies." They peaked out at um... killing Netscape by bundling IE and generally being incompetent about enabling user experience at the sacrifice of sound security. That is their major claim to fame among the hallowed grounds of evil corporations. 

Which pales in comparison to the evil of a company building its reputation on "Do no evil," then dropping that motto as soon as they were powerful enough to go, "Oh, no... we were planning on fucking ALL of you, the whole time... in ways you can't even imagine being fucked, yet - but - you'll know soon enough..." 

And - back then - you had Microsoft... and maybe Intel. Sorta. 

Now you've got Amazon, Google and Facebook and together - they've expanded it from just corporate productivity and nerds like us - to 

THE ENTIRE WORLD as their target. 

"Sure, China - we'll accommodate you - censor topics, silence dissent, filter results, supply web search tracking back to you... whatever it takes to get you to buy in. Because you'll be like everyone else - once you buy in... we won't be beholden to you... you'll be beholden to US..." 

Bill Gates and Microsoft can't hold a candle to that kind of evil. 



Sat Jun 26 2021 15:55:33 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

If you're suggesting that Microsoft's evil was limited by its conscience and by less-evil ambitions, and not by the amount of evil they were capable of performing ... you're totally off your rocker.



 



[#] Tue Jun 29 2021 17:14:07 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Maybe as a Christian you think that those who take part in evil are
restrained by their morality - that their conscience *prevents* them
from being as evil as they could possibly be. 

I don't subscribe to watered down interpretations of Scripture. People are sinful by nature and the further they turn away from God and the more they attach themselves to evil, the more evil they can become.

Quite frankly, I think Google's evil is opportunistic. I think their intentions at first really were "don't be evil" but the money and power attracted lots of power-hungry people.

Gates has been pure evil from the very beginning. Born with a silver spoon in his mouth, spent his whole life having ambitions of dominating everything, largely succeeded at it. And after his career in technology he now spends his days finding ever-larger swaths of the world to destroy.

[#] Tue Jun 29 2021 17:48:49 EDT from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I agree, the founders may have been ok, but between getting a piece of the golden goose, and staffing changes over the years, the "evil bar" got moved a bit.

They are still not as bad as some of the others, as i agree its mostly money driven and not "social engineering", but i still dont trust them and any transaction i enter with them, i go in with that understanding.  Same for Amazon, its about the cash for the most part. As long as Bezos' market value goes up, i dont think he cares about you personally. And unlike a Gates, neither want to kill you off, as cant make much money off dead people... and even that money, is basically one shot, not ongoing income.

Tue Jun 29 2021 05:14:07 PM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar
Quite frankly, I think Google's evil is opportunistic. I think their intentions at first really were "don't be evil" but the money and power attracted lots of power-hungry people.


 



[#] Wed Jun 30 2021 10:10:17 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Mmkay. 

Wait. 

We'll talk about it in the Alphabet City Corp Re-education camp in China while we're doing forced labor for Amazon. 
"That Bill Gates was TERRIBLE, man. Now, pick up the pace on packing those boxes!" 

 

 



[#] Wed Jun 30 2021 11:22:19 EDT from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Not sure anyone said they were *good*, just its a different kind of evil. One is about world domination, eradication of most of the life on the planet and total control over who are left.

 

The other, "we want more money" go forth and breed more customers..



[#] Wed Jun 30 2021 15:46:38 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

There are so many problems with your and Ig's position. 

First, you're consistently conflating Gates with Microsoft. Microsoft - everything they did that you dislike about them - was about corporate GREED. Solely. Being the dominant player in every technology market - if not by bringing a better product, then by torpedoing your competition in some way that makes you the only alternative - was only done for the WEALTH of the corporation. Bill Gates wealth was a side effect of that. They and Intel are the poster children of every "Greedy Technology Corporation" in every 80's movie ever. 

Second - Google, Facebook, Amazon - all buy into all the SJW, Environmental, Earth First, Fair Trade, blah-blah-blah sustainable vegan Identity Politics boolsheet philosophy of eradication of most of the planet and total control over who are left... 

And they're actually executing the technologies to put that into place. 

And they've built this FAR MORE EVIL and authoritarian empire's framework on *Linux* - which is also a socialist model of software distribution and a community that frequently embraces these kind of progressive causes of "equity, not equality." 


Which I think is why you're both kind of in denial about this. Everything about the modern tech companies is worse, exponentially - than Microsoft. Microsoft is following, not leading, in IT Evil, and has been for a while. 



Not sure anyone said they were *good*, just its a different kind of evil. One is about world domination, eradication of most of the life on the planet and total control over who are left.

 

The other, "we want more money" go forth and breed more customers..



 



[#] Sun Jul 04 2021 16:22:10 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

You've got it exactly backwards, of course.

Google's success attracted people with a lust for power.  Larry Page and Sergey Brin were probably authentic when they first said "don't be evil" but they were corrupted by the power and wealth, and then they became surrounded by people who continued curating evil within the company.

Microsoft's evil came directly from Bill Gates.  Gates was born evil, became more evil, and continues to be evil.  He has been a power hungry God-wannabe his entire life.  The market dominance of Microsoft allowed him to consolidate and expand his evil.  Eventually, he outgrew Microsoft -- which has undeniably become LESS evil after his departure.  And he is now doing even BIGGER evil things, like culling the global population.

It is undeniable, inarguable, irrefultable FACT that Bill Gates is the Worst Person In The History Of The World.  More evil than Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Obama, and Bin Laden combined.  Google's evil is opportunistic.  Gates' evil goes to the very core of his being.



[#] Wed Jul 07 2021 13:13:34 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Possibly. Gates certainly has evil ambition of inexhaustible supply. 

But he has become a caricature, himself - and exposed. Regardless of what you think of Gates - Google, Facebook, Twitter and Amazon are the actual threat. 

It is actually quite disturbing that your fanatical hate for Bill Gates is so complete that it has distracted you to the present and worse threats to your ideals. 

 

Sun Jul 04 2021 16:22:10 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

You've got it exactly backwards, of course.

Google's success attracted people with a lust for power.  Larry Page and Sergey Brin were probably authentic when they first said "don't be evil" but they were corrupted by the power and wealth, and then they became surrounded by people who continued curating evil within the company.

Microsoft's evil came directly from Bill Gates.  Gates was born evil, became more evil, and continues to be evil.  He has been a power hungry God-wannabe his entire life.  The market dominance of Microsoft allowed him to consolidate and expand his evil.  Eventually, he outgrew Microsoft -- which has undeniably become LESS evil after his departure.  And he is now doing even BIGGER evil things, like culling the global population.

It is undeniable, inarguable, irrefultable FACT that Bill Gates is the Worst Person In The History Of The World.  More evil than Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Obama, and Bin Laden combined.  Google's evil is opportunistic.  Gates' evil goes to the very core of his being.



 



[#] Wed Jul 07 2021 13:51:10 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I find your lack of hatred for Bill Gates disturbing. Let's just agree that I am right.

[#] Wed Jul 07 2021 20:05:45 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Oh... I was hoping to be there when the gates of his mansion are stormed and he is forced to watch his entire family dispatched. 

Evidently, his family is not hip to being part of that party - so we'll have to settle for him and whatever intern he is banging that night, as it seems his supply of Jeffery Epstein supplied playthings has probably dried up. 

 

Wed Jul 07 2021 13:51:10 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar
I find your lack of hatred for Bill Gates disturbing. Let's just agree that I am right.

 



[#] Thu Jul 08 2021 00:09:18 EDT from nonservator

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

If I could choose to eliminate Bill Gates or Google, I would absolutely choose Google.



[#] Thu Jul 08 2021 00:24:20 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

💯

Thu Jul 08 2021 00:09:18 EDT from nonservator

If I could choose to eliminate Bill Gates or Google, I would absolutely choose Google.



 



Go to page: First ... 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26