Comment

I think this quote from security-expert Bruce Schneier sums up the current situation quite well.

The current surveillance state is a result of a government/corporate partnership, and our willingness to give up privacy for convenience.

If the government demanded that we all carry tracking devices 24/7, we would rebel. Yet we all carry cell phones. If the government demanded that we deposit copies of all of our messages to each other with the police, we’d declare their actions unconstitutional. Yet we all use Gmail and Facebook messaging and SMS.

4 days ago on Google opts out of FISA disclosure deal made by Facebook and Microsoft, calls it 'a step back for users;' Twitter agrees 1 reply 1 recommend

Comment

The article says ‘below cost’ rather than ‘free’.

If open-source developers work for free, the cost of the project is zero. In this case, the project is not making a loss. In effect, the developers working on the project are bearing the loss by working for free.

Ubuntu need to balance the books. i.e. only spend as much money as it they raise.

For Android, professional developers are being paid to work on a mature platform i.e. not balancing the books. If Android was a standalone company, it could not have sustained its business model.

4 days ago on EU committee to probe Google over alleged anticompetitive behavior with Android 1 reply 1 recommend

Comment

Indeed. Haswell increased battery life in the above (light-usage) test by 58%. The rest was caused by the bigger battery.

With the old battery, would have been 379 vs 240, which is still an impressive increase.

10 days ago on Acer S7 tested (Haswell) 1 recommend

Comment

I think the slides look like an internal training document for the NSA, possibly a training course for a computer system that they call ‘Prism’. The slides are clearly genuine and show what is currently happening – there is little doubt about that.

The slides seem to have been written by someone non-technical, who doesn’t really understand the details of how the data is being collected. Trying to extrapolate technical details from this non-technical document has probably caused confusion.

10 days ago on New slide from leaked PRISM presentation promotes directly collecting data from servers

Comment

It’s an opt-out for seeing personalized ads. If it was an opt-out for data collection too, don’t you think it would say this?

11 days ago on Google: 'we cannot say this more clearly,' no government access to servers 1 reply

Comment

I took it to mean that if you email someone in Australia, the US Government can see your email in the Australian person’s inbox. They can potentially see communication that you’ve had with people outside the US by looking at the foreign person’s stored data.

11 days ago on Phone spying and PRISM internet surveillance: what's the difference?

Comment

= Betteridge’s law of headlines

11 days ago on Was a subway terror plot really foiled by the PRISM surveillance program?

Comment

I think the argument would be:

1) Any information that you give to these companies may eventually end up in the hands of the US Government. Even if this proves not to be the case now, the Government will keep pushing for greater access.

2) Google’s business model requires them to collect and store much more information about you than, say, Apple. Google generates 95% of its revenue from advertising, so ‘needs’ to collect a lot of information about you.

As a result of 1 and 2, the Government can get more information about you from Google than other companies. ‘Good guys’ and ‘bad guys’ is irrelevant.

11 days ago on Google: 'we cannot say this more clearly,' no government access to servers