HN user
I think in this case it's a blurred line. In the case of Youtube even more. True, they don't want to create their own content, but when they republish it and making money by doing so, we're in the middle of the copyright discussion. The question to answer in each of Googles (or others) businesses is, when is Google presenting it's own work (search results, etc.) or the work of others.
There's a difference between Google Search and Google News.
It is already an achievement to write the headlines of the news and to rank the importance of a piece of news. I consider this and all the editorial also as content.
With Google Search, Google does the ranking etc. and provides a substantial own service on demand to a specific search. People always go to the original site if it fits their search request. All good here. But with Google News they just copy the headlines and parts of the articles. They present it, kind of republish it in opposite to creating a search service.
Personally, I'm a bit pissed by the Google, Microsoft, Facebook, etc. because of their sneaky busines concepts. So my post is hostile (which it shouldn't be, but happens ...), but not insulting towards Google.
I think I took this into account, but I admit I didn't see something else, which you pointed me to:
> This new legislation requires every Spanish publication to charge services like Google News for showing even the smallest snippet from their publications, whether they want to or not.
In Spain it's not possible for publishers to allow Google to post without payment.
So, yeah, in this case I missed the point ...
If it's the substantial part of the content, yes. But in the case of most of the web search results it is not, so no.
However, you've asked the tricky question. Is it necessary to go to the website or to the original news article or not?
That's just my moral based evaluation, I guess from the perspective of a lawyer it's seen differently, much more strictly.
It is a long long time ago when Google could be considered innocent (acting ethically). Actually, they're acting the opposite way for ages by ignoring copyright, privacy and by manipulating.
Generally I agree, however. The ethic mostly seems to be gone. And it has to be taken care of by enforcing copyright and privacy protection laws. I had my wake-up moment when Facebook started copying whole Wikipedia articles instead of linking.
This is remarkable, as we could conclude that Google News can't or don't want to create content on their own, but only copy from other sources.
That's exactly how it has to be done. Google can't be allowed to copy the content or parts of it without permission of the creator. We shouldn't forget that they're making huge amounts of money by selling others work here. On the other hand Google claims to create "real value for these publications by driving people to their websites", which is often true in the short run. So the publisher can consider allowing copying parts of their articles. And Google could even consider charging them for this service.
E.g. here:
http://board.jdownloader.org/showthread.php?t=44832&page=16
It seems to occur only using the web-installer, which is the one you're offically prompted at by the creators of JDownloader.
Well, I removed JDownloader and manually fixed the start page and search engines of firefox to remove the sweet-page stuff, but somehow my firefox is still screwed.
Questionable decision by the maker of JDownloader. I can't imagine that the money he gets for this is worth the damaged reputation.
Edit: I just ran an adware scanner. Besides the Sweet Page stuff, WindowsManagerProtect and Hold Page was installed. Several Registry Entries and Firefox setting were infected. Unbelievable ...
DON'T FOLLOW THIS TUTORIAL!
Unless you like Adware or what else ...
(JDownloader installs some crap Adware.)
Here's a great interpretation of the yoga sutras ...
What I've written is nothing that I've thought of be myself. I've tried to describe the goal of traditional yoga, which really contradicts a lot of the modern interpretations.
The goal of meditation is not to get a better brain. As the goal of yoga is not to get a sexy body. These articles and even more the countless yoga ads with young beautiful ladies are really counterproductive from the viewpoint of yoga. They might be helpful from another perspective.
I can't summarize the real goal of yoga properly (meditation is one of the important exercise beside contemplation; the asanas are for preparation only), but it's more to be able to let go of the selfish desires like becoming smarter, getting a sexier body, getting more money, fame, admiring ("Oh, you look so good lately" ... "Yes, you know, I'm doing yoga."). The goal is more to be able to coordinate (not suppress) the desires to avoid doing harm and at the end creating harm for yourself. Meditation gives us insight to where the desires are coming from. Are they essential? Do I need to fullfil them? Or do I need to eat another snickers just because the last one has made my blood sugar go like a rollercoaster?
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5B1627ADAF657A2C
The scenery looks a bit odd ... he is sitting on a couch and the studends on the floor, kind of looking up to (admire) the master. But he is in his talks the opposite of a self-salesman.
Anyway, this is very systematic and in itself the best approach I've seen so far. There are practices that need to be done and learned in a specific order.
In this spirit it all starts with the basic step:
Regular time and place! If we fail this, it won't happen! Followed by the other practices (inner dialog, sitting, breathing ... inspecting thoughts later on ...) in the required order.
Really, the best I've seen so far.
Also, very recommended his podcast "Developing Determination for Enlightenment", where he's talking about the paradox of letting go while being determined to aim for enlightenment.
I know we're not historicans here, but I'm German, so I am quite sensitive when it comes to the Stasi: Please be aware of the thousands of people who have been killed, tortured, inprisoned and repressed by the Stasi in the DDR. The Stasi took the freedom of a whole nation. They destroyed so many lives. You can compare the spying techniques but not the wrongdoing (not saying the NSA is free of any wrongdoing). It's another dimension, better, several dimensions.
Actually it is free and open. It's not private, however.
The internet was never a private place and it will never be.
Edit: It's important that we don't loose the freedom and openness. That's what the discussion is all about. Not about the lack of privacy.
Agencies have been spying forever. From opening letters to eavesdroping phone calls. I'm not saying it's right, just that the agencies have not become worse with time.
However, I totally agree with you when you're concerned about the diminishing privacy. I think the advance of technology is the key factor for this. Agencies are as ruthless as always and use this new technologies.
Most people are totally fine to tell Google, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, etc. everything about their private lifes in exchange to ... distraction. Think of all the health shit ... they gonna make furtunes selling our data to the pharma and insurrance industry.
this is just a bad joke
Would you prefer Obama to call for a closed internet?
You are confusing different things. Just because someone might be wrong with a lot of things doesn't mean he's not allowed to be right with something else.
As other's said: The world wide wrongdoing by the secret agencies is no invention of Obama. Not even an invention of the US. I'm German and even the BND did whatever it could to gain for it's purpose useful information. They did under governments of all kind of political orientation.
And then you're confusing things again. The downvotes most likely come from your indifferentiated opinion about net neutrality and spying activities. Not from your dislike of Obama.
I am not American (feel free to ignore my opinion)
Why did you post it?
Same here, FF 33.0.3, Win 8.1 ...
After having seen the buttons, I've seen enough. I'm not bought so far.
That's the inevitable consequence of being overambitious. This pattern is the same, regardless of the area within which these folks try to become more powerful, rich or famous than others.
At BMW a former director told some trainees that he's the most lonely person in the world. Lost his wife, kids and friends. Hobbies? None. Money? More than can be spend. Power? You bet. "Too soon old, too late wise" is true even for extraordinary achievers like this guy.
I always like to point out to those younger folks that they need to be aware of their true motivation. To 99 % in the startup scene or at the big companies it's not to make the world a better place. It's not to be creative and productive. The main drive is ambition. That's OK, it's human. But it needs to be controlled. When you are aware of your true selfish motivation, it's easier to stop when it's all too much. You do it for yourself, not your family (you would choose a solid 9 to 5 job) or the world.
Nails it. Great quote. And you can't reverse the damage of this economic system overnight, especially when almost all of the young people willing to build and create something new have moved away.
I'm always annoyed that while pointing out that the right-wing extremist parties are stronger in the east than in the west of Germany, they really don't matter at all. Look at their numbers[1]. However, the left-wing extremist party "Die Linke" is a direct successor of the SED, which was the communist party of the DDR, is surprisingly strong [2]. Clearly, it shows the disappointment of the reunion of quite some people in eastern Germany. The disturbing fact here is:
The difficulties these regions face are a direct consequence of the exploitation done by the communist dictation (the SED). It took billions of euros to alone fix the environmental damage, e.g. in Bitterfeld [3](unfortunately in German). Also, the industry there was not on level to compete in the world market, how should it? State-directed economy might have theoretically advantages when applied worldwide by humans without human flaws, but in our real world it has been proven wrong again and again.
The damage done to a region by 40 years socialism can't be fixed within 25 years with 0.95 ... 2 trillion (!) [4] euros. But people still vote for the party who has done all the damage. (And I haven't talked about the personal damage that has been done by prosecution, murder and torture by the Stasi (the secret forces of the DDR).
[1] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationaldemokratische_Partei_De... [2] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Linke [3] http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/20-jahre-umweltunion-m... [4] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosten_der_deutschen_Einheit
I prefer to talk to my wordprocessor than typing
I'm on the opposite site. If I have a keyboard at hand, I'd never think of using voice recognition. For most people who have ever used a keyboard voice recognition is not an advance, it's a limitation of damage that the lack of a proper keyboard is doing.
However, my father hates typing on his iPhone, so he proudly talks to his phone. Works surprisingly well. Sometime the mails are really funny :-). But it's nowhere as fast or easy comapared to my sister typing at good speed (also on an iPhone).
No. I don't think Ubuntu can be installed with all required drivers to run properly. But that's more a guess. Also, the GUI of Windows 8.1 is quite nice for hybrid touch/mouse usage. So, for best and easiest GUI (touch or mouse)interaction Win 8.1 is better, but:
Linux shines with it's shells. The bash is by far the most productive environment I've ever used. Just install Virtual Box and run Ubuntu in it.
Damn, recently MS nails it with their web design.
I agree to the extend, that it sounds like Microsoft is in any way special here. Actually, for some time it's opening up pretty much. Apple is even worse, Google will certainly not support MS products in any way if they don't benefit massively.
It's important to understand that all companies are big machine-like systems that have only one purpose: Make as much money as possible. Microsoft have been (and Apple is still ... or is the Apple watch usable with Android?) trying to lock vendors in. Totally OK. Those tech companies are no better than Kellog's who is selling sweets to our kids as cereal. As we all love tech so much, we tend to forget :-)
But as people will still be people, ability to get what we want easily also drives culture.
Deep inside we all are shockingly selfish and lazy little animals. We all take the easiest road, at least what for our selfish desires seems to be the easiest road. Sometimes, it's looks like a hard or unselfish road on the outside, but needed to fullfill our own selfish needs. Even buddisths are selfish, as they try to be free from selfish desires for the selfish reason of reduce pain in their live.
There's always a melt down of higher cultures. People having all the tools to fullfill their basic needs loose the drive to achieve. That's why I generally see this "we make the world a better place with all our great services" direction quite sceptical. It was never easier to distract ourselves with mobile devices, but do we benefit? No, Apple, Google, FB, MS and Amazon do.
BTW: One of my favorite movies is Idiocracy :-)
I've recently bought an Experia Z2. Stunning piece of hardware, but I regret not have given WP a try. The usablity of Android is at best "quite Ok". And so much app crap ...
Then you've done it too hard. Ideally one should work-out at an intensity and volume (reps) that allows to be recovered after round about 48 hours. If the training is too hard compared to the fitness level you miss the point of supercompensation for the next training session. So, you have to build the ability to train hard up.
True, but the other has no effect for people with an average fitness level. It lacks intensity.
Well, you know ... Mr. Brin and Mr. Page recently succeeded in persuading me to activly support Google's business ... that's the style how some collegue told me about his new job :-). Yes, it's a bit tiring and part of the whole "we want to make the world a better place" marketing bullshit of the tech giants. At this scale, it's brutal business, nothing else. So, it would have been refreshing to read in the blog post: "We just took the heaps of money." Which is perfectly fine.