1379 posts • joined 29 Oct 2009
"So GO! GOOGLE! and *STRESS* Micro-shaft into fixing their browser!"
Yeah, publish the details so that the black-hatters can take advantage of the problem! *STRESS* them and force them to fix it as fast as possible - maybe they won't have time to test the patch properly, so it causes more problems than it fixes, thus giving the "because it's Microsoft" brigade more to write about in with lots of capital letters!
Really responsible behaviour and use of power there...
Re: Intel issues
"I find it irresponsible of Google to still release information before the patch is released."
But then, as the Intel issue proved, this is nothing to do with altruism and making the web a safer place - although it's dressed up as such.
As has been pointed out, this is about attacking a competitor and spreading FUD - exactly the same tactics Microsoft themselves were renowned for some 25 or so years ago. The fact that Google's own browser, which has its own share of issues, reached its market leading position largely because of it's being plastered all over their search pages only strengthens the case for anti-competitive behaviour.
An interesting parallel...
"... an iOS and Android duopoly... "
This raises an interesting situation: Back in the late 90s-early 00s, the vast majority of desktop hardware, regardless of brand, ran Windows - except for Apple, whose computers ran their own OS. And then Microsoft tried to tie their browser to their OS and got the crap sued out of them for anti-competitive behaviour.
Fast-forward 20 or so years: the vast majority of smartphone hardware, regardless of brand, runs Android - except for Apply, whose iPhones run their own OS. And these Android devices ship with Chrome installed, and are largely tied to Play and the other Google services...
Yeah, I suppose the only good thing to come out of this is that we won't get the usual suspects posting the same old tired "both of them" comments any more...
Re: 'Without notifications Windows Phone's "Find your phone" feature won't work'
"Alas, I never did see one in the wild, so nothing changes for me there."
So basically, what you're saying is that all your judgements and comments were based on third-party information?
The advertising industry is probably one of the few entities with enough cash and connections to take Google on in a legal battle - Google probably realise that with their effective monopoly on search and how they have used this to push Chrome to the #1 browser position, an anti-trust action would have a similar effect on them as it did on Microsoft all those years ago.
Pity. I'd just gotten the popcorn all warmed up.
"Google's goal... is not to filter any ads at all but to improve the experience for all web users."
Le sigh... as usual, hiding behind the wall of altruism. This is again about (ab)using a dominant market position (itself gained largely by similar activity in another market that Google has a practical monopoly in) to attack potential competitors and acclimatise the end users towards increasing acceptance of Google's control over what web content is easily accessible (ie: that conforming to Google's criteria), and what will be buried away or potentially censored.
"Google has grasped the depth and breadth of the resentment created by the ad industry's unrepentant bad behavior." - however, they're still doing their level best to condition the end user against their control and data-slurping.
Sod office, try Unity
Until something has the chops to run game dev tools, it's no substitute for a workhorse PC or laptop
"the politicians accused the companies of hypocrisy, failures in their duty of trust to users, and of caring more about
ad revenue than...
A thief expects everyone to steal.
And full marks to AC for the B5 reference... :D
The long game...
Let's back away from the good vs bad aspect for a few moments and have a look at the bigger picture.
By this action, a significant number of organisations are left in a position where they have to either comply or risk losing business and/or audience. And the entity forcing this choice upon them is not an international council, a standards body or regulating agency - it's a corporation, answerable to it's shareholders alone.
Of course, with the current state of frenzy about cyber crime etc., people are going to buy into this. But in a similar manner, people are buying into AMP - "because it's faster". The danger here is that little by little, people will become increasing more accepting of Google's dictating how the web should work - which is exactly what Google want in the long term.
Re: Dumb move
"Just for fun, why not have your site browser sniff - and if it detects Chrome, display some appropriate text about the slurp-tastic nature of Google."
Wow. Now I know we've gone full circle - anyone here remember "Netscape crippled" sites?
Maybe it's because I watched Apollo 13 once to often back in the day, but I read "Hot Mic" and think "always on" - which, knowing Google, would not have surprised me in the slightest.
Maybe I just fell for click-bait...
"GOOGLE INVENTED KUBERNETES"
Um, yeah. Here's something else for you: Microsoft "invented" Windows - they also "invented" Internet Explorer. And then they got into a lot of trouble by using the fact that the vast majority of desktop PCs run Windows to push people into using Internet Explorer. It's called anti-competitive behaviour, and it's illegal in a lot of places...
"... the Google-spawned cloud orchestration system has gained major traction in the past year."
Any system can gain traction when the company behind it has wide-scale control of web search results. Try sticking "docker container orchestration" into Google's search vs other engines: unsurprisingly, "Kubernetes" is plastered all over Google's top results.
Re: Scary ...
I wonder how long it will be before we see an Alphabet-backed SSL cert provider...
"Googler saves Grammarly nazis from hacker invasion"
... with a four-day turn round from reporting to patch release. Am I the only one concerned by the speed of this, and whether or not it has been properly tested?
With that in mind, it's probably a bit premature to say "Google saved" anyone from anything.
Programmer, not developer...
I got into programming as a kid in the 8-bit days. It was a lot of fun: making the computer tell rude jokes, make noises at random intervals, or appear to crash upon pressing a key (got kicked out of my local computer store for putting that one on their display machines). Then I discovered game development - which at that time was still some way off becoming the 3D-fully-orchestrated-days-to-play-online-DLC-fest that it is now... yeah, I had to pick up some art and design skills, but I was still writing a lot of code.
Fast forward 25 years to now - "developers" are expect to be "full stack" - back-end, front-end, this JS framework, that ORM, these server architectures, those cloud infrastructures, agile methodology, continuous integration and deployment... the list goes on. And - here's the real kicker - nine times out of ten, we're expected to learn this all on our own time; either because promised training has never materialised, or time to train simply doesn't make enough profit.
Sure, I've learned enough to keep my head above water. Some of it I've continued to enjoy. But this expectation that all "developers" want to spend the entirety of their waking lives trying to keep on the bleeding edge of everything is a blight on the art of creating software.
"We did ask Google for comment, but as usual we didn’t really get anything useful back."
A bit like their search engine then - unless you want adverts...
Re: What's a
On your average 8-bit machine:
10 print "Bombasic Bob woz ere!"
20 poke(rnd(0,65535), rnd(0,255))
30 goto 10
I think that's right - it's been a few decades...
"You clearly don't get it. Opensource OS tends to draw Opensource apps and drags in closed source free apps"
Okay, let's have some links to ratios of open to closed source apps on both major platforms please. Because the funny thing is, from my experience, the vast majority of app developers - regardless of OS - are more concerned about making enough to keep a roof over their heads that contributing to the open source community.
Also, the vast majority of mobile apps are games. Is Unity3D open source? Is Unreal Engine?
And you have clearly missed my point that the vast majority of mobile users are average people who don't care whether their app is open or closed source. They don't give a rat's backside about the enrichment of the developer community. However, they do care about the contents of their wallets and bank accounts and - again, regardless of what OS they use - they will generally go for a free application as opposed to a paid one unless they are looking for something highly specialised, or the paid app has a reputation of being vastly superior to any free app offering the same functionality.
So no, I don't think that Android owners are plebs - nor iOS owners. I do however think that people are easily lured by the promise of "free" stuff, be it apps, TV channels, online services, membership to organisations, whatever. I also believe that most people are still not very savvy when it comes to online privacy, and because of their far greater reach, I believe Google is a far more dangerous entity than Apple in this regard.
At the end of the day, "nobody wanted my apps" (on Android and iOS) because I did not market them very well; I fully admit that I underestimated just how saturated the mobile market - again on both major platforms - has become. My decision to jump out of developing for mobile - and indeed, developing on mobile for profit - was largely fuelled by the number of people trying to sell me "user acquisition" at a B2B conference I was exhibiting at - "Only 50c per install, you'll probably need a minimum of 10-20,000 installs to get some traction".
But then this is not really about market success or failure, is it...?
" it's clear your favorite platform is fruity."
It's about the fact that I have dared to criticise Android - made abundantly clear by the knee-jerk "you prefer iOS and think that Android owners are idiots" remark. In fact, my mobile platform of choice is the Nokia 1100 - no spyware (either fruity or robot-y) and a removable battery with a life of around 10 days. Alas, I need a smartphone for my day-job (not writing mobile apps, incidentally).
But this is just knocking my head on a wall, isn't it? By disregarding my comment about "all mobile markets" (drawn largely from the aforementioned UA agents, whose offerings were for both iOS and Android) and deciding to tar me with the "iOS" brush, you have clearly placed yourself in the opposite camp, singing the song I have heard from many of its faithful about open source, and ignoring how the current marketing model is hurting devs, regardless of platform.
... and let's have some links to those apps while you're at it.
Re: RE: RyokuMas
... in which case, I salute you; you are one of the few.
"Whilst you can sell any old shite on Apple's marketplace and braindead plebs will buy it, as 99p is nothing to someone thank has spunked a grand on a phone."
Having spent a significant chunk of 2011-2015 making games for mobile - both paid and ad supported, on iOS, Android and Windows Phone - I can assure you that all mobile marketplaces are equally shite.
"Android will have free alternatives to your tat. The free version might ever be better than your tat...
It's not that users aren't willing..."
"it's that opensource OS has lots of opensource apps, and a generally free culture, and your tat isn't worth paying for not unless you put some real effort in."
Next time there's a big football match on the telly, go into your local pub and ask a random selection of those watching it how they feel about Android being open source and having open source apps. I would be very surprised if a single soul cared - heck, I'd be surprised if more that a handful even knew what being open source meant.
Basically, you are trying to justify the worst offender in what is a ridiculously over-saturated sector by assuming that the average person has a developer's viewpoint towards open source, and by assuming that Android buyers behaviour is driven by market-savvyness and not greed. But Google's entire public- facing offering is built on the premise of everyone going after the "free" option - gmail, web search, google docs, youtube, google drive... the average person does not give a crap that they are giving away their privacy, all they care about is that they do not have to pay money for it.
I sincerely hope that if you ever consider releasing any software, you get someone else to do your market research.
@Tigra07 - stop and think for a moment: when was the last time you installed a "paid" app?
The sad fact is that the undercutting mentality has led to a culture in which a lot of people are unwilling to pay for apps, especially on Android (I have had Android owners openly and unashamedly admit that if they find an app they want has a price tag associated, they will look for a free alternative rather than pay). Ultimately, this has put us in a position where most apps rely on adverts to generate any kind of return.
Now factor in that above all else, Google's business model is based on selling advertising space on anything they control, and in recent times they have demonstrated time and again that all they care about is their profit margin: long gone are the days of "don't be evil"
So yes, they could put such a restriction in place. Similarly, they could put some better form of curation on their store. But they won't.
Depends whether you classify "Pay to win" as rotten or not.
"outside the court in Luton tomorrow"
There's far worse than trolls in Luton...
Re: The WinTel Cartel...
"They should properly test their patches before they deploy them en-mass
Bit difficult when you've got the self-appointed owners of the internet threatening to air your dirty laundry based on their own timescales...
Re: The WinTel Cartel...
"... but bring up Microsoft on security with this isn't fair."
Since when has fairness ever stopped the average "because it's Microsoft" commentard bitching on here?
Never underestimate the ability of a human being to be irretrievably stupid.
"Detection rates are abysmal."
Links to comparison stats, please.
"Thing is, virtually everyone uses Windows, which is why so many people get upset by its data collection."
"Virtually everyone" uses Google (either for web search or via Android) in some capacity and, judging by the activity I have seen on these forums over the years, the amount of people who even give a shit is a fraction of those howling over Microsoft's telemetry, so this is hardly an argument.
"“a new cybersecurity intelligence and analytics platform that we hope can
help enterprises better manage and understand their own security-related data. more easily locate, flag and ultimately censor non-Alphabet-approved data.”
It is inevitable...
This is just another step in the lifecycle of the IT mega-corporation: they've hit the stage where they are now driven by greed as opposed to any desire to innovate, and projects that are not making money are sidelined or dropped. At the same time, it becomes harder and harder to kick off anything new or innovative because the board/shareholders need proof that the new project is going to be profitable to a desired level within a given timeframe.
Next up will be that opportunities get missed, simply because they are perceived as "not profitable enough" (Ballmer and the internet, anyone?), and someone else will get the landgrab. And round we'll go again.
Re: Ultimate Play The Game
"Forward 35 years and here we are with a £1,000 phone"
... and the vast majority of people unwilling to pay even a single penny for the games that run on it, alas.
Oh, boo hoo....
So Google have no compunction about airing everyone else's dirty laundry all over the web, but go crying when someone refuses to recognise their efforts? Cry me a river.
"And it opens up really complex application development to people who never could have done this before."
I've seen what happens when you do this: when Unity3D, Unreal Engine et al were made free, it abruptly opened the floodgates to people who previously had been unable to make games - in the first instance this was due to the technical knowledge barrier, which put off the people who could not be bothered to learn, and in the second instance, it then removed the financial barrier ie: people had to be willing to pay for these engines.
The result was a flood of shiteware into the marketplaces, resulting in a lot of good games that had had a lot of time and effort poured into them vanishing beneath this deluge of crap.
Now what would be interesting...
... would be if Google unearthed a security issue in Linux and did their normal "you've got 90 days to get the fix out before we tell the world" thing.
"The Register hopes that the next time the City needs a software developer it does so with a BASIC program."
The average BASIC programmer of yesteryear is miles ahead of some of the stack-overflow-copy-pastas I have heard calling themselves "developers" in more recent times. Especially in game development.
Current project: users testing the new environment baffled at why the data on the UAT server is different to that on the production servers...
Re: Store benefits
"It's Google's that keeps coming up repeatedly"
They're also a victim of their own success - regardless of how they managed it, Chrome is currently the most popular browser, and thus the biggest target. The same for Android on mobile, and Windows on desktop - if Google manage to raise Chrome OS's market share above a rounding error to something with a bit more presence, I'd wager that will be targeted too.
But right now, the spotlight is very much on Google as more and more people are starting to realise just how far they have descended from their "Don't be evil" ivory tower into the pit of money-grubbing corporate greed, and just how much control they potentially have over the information we can access.
Re: Skygofree spreads through web pages
"*Be using a mobile device"
... well, duh....
Re: First hand experience...
"How do you get your other half to do that stuff?"
She's too god-damn stubborn to let it beat her. And she doesn't trust me - or anyone else - to get it right!
First hand experience...
Having seen my other half wrangling with this site on a monthly basis (until recently, when we pulled the kids out of childcare), and as a web developer by trade, I can fully confirm that the bunch of galloping cockwombles who built this have plumbed new depths of fuckwittery. Virtually every month resulted in our having to send an email of apology to the nursery about why our payment was late, and my poor long-sufferring other half was frequently reduced to outbursts of rage at whole evenings wasted attempting to get the site to cooperate.
So I would humbly suggest that whoever came up with that 2% stat is talking utter bollocks.
"Google, an erstwhile champion of the open web"
Please tell me that this is supposed to be sarcasm. It might have been that way once, but now Google doesn't give a shit about anything except its own profits and how much data it can gather these days.
My favourite has to be when these people start whining about Microsoft's lack of innovation... pot, kettle.
Re: The cesspool that is windows
The "cesspool" as you call it has been around for around 30 years, give or take, and a lot of businesses have invested a lot of time and money in developing systems based on it. Moreover, the staff of said businesses, especially the older ones who tend to be in positions of management, are used to Windows - "the devil you know" and all that.
Now, if you have a magic wand that you can wave that can make an entire board of directors suddenly decide "Hey! Let's dump years worth of time, money and training and re-develop everything we use to run on something other than Windows because it's more secure" - please, do let me know. I can think of more than a couple of places where I would use it...
But in the real world, we have to accept that Windows - for all it's flaws - is very much a part of what we are likely to face in the working environment. Cope.
Re: and not based on their individual merits?
Woah, someone tell Bob his account has been hacked - not a single SHOUTY, a dead give-away!