alextingle

I mean Facebook should put a web bug on the target page.

I think it tells you everything you need to know about how much faith Facebook have in their own product.

They should put a web bug on the target page to confirm the redirect was completed.

Yeah, and the 1.23 billion is going to be mostly ghost accounts anyway. People who check their FB once a week, if ever.

'watch' is so awesomely useful. Everyone should know it.

Get yourself a proper computer.

Well strictly speaking, modern money is "debt" while originally money was a commodity such as gold.

Both types of money function in the same way, as a form of payment, but they differ significantly in implementation.

Thank you for the monkey fairness video link. Made my day.

AdBlock?

> IMO Intel's on-chip RNG would probably be a good source to use

Only if NSA contractors don't play online poker in their spare time.

What worries me is that the mechanisms for government slowly adapting to changing situations have been eroded. Massive public protests are now far less effective than they were, because the authorities are using new technologies, such as mass-surveillance, to suppress them.

The result is an ossifying system of government, that is slowly, but surely diverging from consent of the people.

In all fairness, every mail server discards mail from some senders. Your junk folder would explode if everything got through.

If being rude and wrong were a sacking offence, hardly anybody would have a job. This police officer should be fired for abusing his authority.

Except Google's version seems to be missing all of the new roads they've built for the Olympics.

That's why you use OSM, not because it's prettier, but because it has more detail, and it's more up to date.

OCP?

http://robocop.wikia.com/wiki/Omni_Consumer_Products

I'm not really prescribing a solution, just identifying a class of problem. However, that said, here's an idea:

I'd like to see Google forced to provide a minimum level of support to their customers and suppliers. For example, if they decide to cut someone off (as in this case) then they must explain their decision with a certain minimum level of detail. I'd also like to see a formal appeals system, possibly with an independent ombudsman as a court of final appeal.

This kind of enforced service level is common in the UK. Banks, utilities, insurance companies, etc. all have similar conflict resolution regimes. Usually paid for by the industry itself, via (mandatory) fees.

Obviously in Google's case, their profit per customer can be very low, so I think if would be reasonable to expect complainants pay for the cost of failed appeals. That would keep a tight lid on frivolous complaints, but provide a fair avenue for more serious grievances to be resolved.

Far more importantly, it would encourage Google to pay closer attention to their day-to-day automated communications, which currently feel like half-finished student projects. I'm pretty sure that with the right incentives, Google could resolve 99% of the ill-feeling against them by simply putting more effort into this part of their business.

Did it work?

In my experience, I fixed the problem they reported, but then they still refused to reinstate the site. I was left playing 20 questions, trying to guess which other policy I might have violated.

But not the last, I'll wager.

It is frustrating how few Android developers make their .apk files available directly. I don't use the Google play store, and I often have to hunt around to find .apks on "dodgy" download sites, when the author clearly wants to give the app away.

With Google, I fear that depends upon the day of the week and the wind direction.

Don't give them ideas, now.

You are right, but whatever the details, Google behaviour is unfair both to its customers and to its suppliers. They (together with Apple) are using their dominant position to control this marketplace, to the detriment of everyone but themselves.

Full credit to them for creating these markets in the first place. They deserve to be rewarded. However, there is a line (however fuzzy) that they should not cross. If they start abusing their position, then regulation is needed to ensure a level playing field.

Well, when there are 1000 apps to choose from, you can install/uninstall a lot of apps before you find the one that's actually the best value for money.

The OP is essentially complaining about a lack of price transparency. And he's 100% correct.

It's sad to see Google go from "Do no Evil" to "Pray we don't alter the deal any further" in just a few short years.

It's sad to see them go from "Do no Evil" to "Pray we don't alter the deal any further" in just a few short years.

Cute quote. Now explain how it relates to my point. Here it is again, for your convenience: Evil may be inevitable, but that doesn't mean it must be government funded.

I've been the technical guy in a meeting where this kind of nonsense was decided...

Me: The customer has asked for security measures to stop unauthorised employees from subverting the system and defrauding them. Your solution uses clear-text passwords, so anyone with a copy of Wireshark could crack it in seconds.

Management: Yeah, but they're only asking for the appearance of security. They don't care about the details.

Me: What will they say if someone cracks our "security" and steals millions of dollars from them?

Management: <shrug>

Me: ???

Of course there will always be bad guys out there trying to subvert freedom. I think it's reasonable for those of us in the "free world" to expect our governments to help defend us from these bad actors, not use our taxes to fund them!

"Blocked in your country" (UK)

I'm not sure that's enough for this level of classified. I can imagine fairly large sections of the drive platter surviving more or less intact from that. Theoretically, quite a lot of the data might be recovered.