The personal data that is handed over is email address of the account. It's probably a privacy violation if it's really that hard to find out someone's email address once you know his social network account, but it's not spying on people.

That makes it even less sensible to call Google "spying" on people when one signup for Google's social network.

A. If it can, then it can send my personal info to outside world. I don't care if it can't gain root access to my phone. My phone's root account is not important, my personal information inside that phone is.

B. If it cannot. Then most of my application is useless because it can't access any information at all. Why don't I add it to "trusted" zone? Because I don't trust it. And I shouldn't have to.

So what do I want? I want it to see my personal data but not being able to send it to anyone.

We're back to permission based system again.

The toolbar says nothing about taking his data to improve Bing, only for Site-Suggestion which, to average user, is clearly a browser feature.

> Google doesn't lose a customer because the second searcher was already on Bing to begin with.

What about one who could have converted to Google if he search on Bing and didn't find a result?

Google couldn't lose a customer but there's no way Google would gain a conversion from Bing in this situation.

> Bing does nothing but analyze their own users' behavior

Assuming that this is a search result that Bing wouldn't have found by itself, then this "user behavior" wouldn't have occurred for Bing to capture had Google not exist.

Without Google each user can then probably only have behavior of clicking same old web site they have collected from long ago, there's no search engine for them to learn new relevant site easily.

Yes, Bing toolbar just rely on people clicking links. But without Google doing all the hardwork here, users will never know about such link, that's why they went to Google. And there will not be any of such link to feed to Bing's system.

Merging location bar and search bar doesn't mean you can't give URL higher priority or that you must query search suggestion every key stroke.

Nobody knows how bigger the web browser is going to be, MS sure doesn't want to lose the power in influencing and ensuring that their other product stay relevant.

You can also use Javascript and jQuery directly.

Or you can write CoffeeScript without using jQuery at all.

If you want to make business out of something, price it. I'm not going to "donate" if you are not some non-profit charity organization. But I'll gladly "pay" the same amount.

Business accepting donation feels like a convenient way for them to deny responsibility because, they didn't sell me anything, even if socially people will tell me to "donate".

Running gives you better health, so if you value your health then running, even on treadmill, already gives you something of values.

You declared a variable once and use it n times. If you accidentally shadow a variable, via typo, then you only have one place to check for the typo. The compiler/interpreter will complain if you don't happen to also consistently made that typo everywhere you use the variable.

In language with implicit declaration, everywhere you use the variable is as likely to have typo that the compiler/interpreter cannot check for you.

1 place to check vs. n places, is a no-brainer which one is more error prone.

> By accidentally shadowing an external variable ...

In language with explicit declaration you have to accidentally declare same name AND use it with that accidental name. If both doesn't happen, the interpreter will complain.

In language with implicit declaration, one accidental typo is all it takes to accidentally shadow a variable.

You have just made a case against implicit declaration.

> There are no situations where shadowing a variable is desirable. [...] if you accept that shadowing is undesirable, and choosing a more descriptive name for the inner variable is preferable

So, to name a local variable "list", you have to look up on every outer variables involved to make sure nowhere else also use the name "list".

And let's give up on naming an outer variable name "list" because, who knows where some inner function might decide to use such name for local variable.

> choosing a "more descriptive name" for the inner variable

More like "more redundant name". Implementing "date_diff" function? Forget naming different of it "delta", let's name it "date_diff_delta", or else it might conflict with some outer variable name.

Congratulation, you have successfully remove concept of namespace from your language.

> if you accept that shadowing is undesirable

Then you should consider other job than programming.

To be a statically type language you would need to throw the error at compile time.

How do you raise (or not raise) error of this code at compile time and still make it feel like dynamic type language?

    x = (rand() > 0.5) ? 42 : "42"
    y = x + 1;

Do you think it is within your right to write "[company you work for now]'s guide to X" without asking for permission from your employer?

Just because a person is part of an organization doesn't mean he has the right to represent the organization in anyway he wants.

What about differences between languages in their ability to convey ideas.

What is this "hefty price"? Is it price without contract? Because we don't sell mobile phone with contract in my country and people still get iPhone.

Only it is worse in Python because, lacking `var` keyword, you will shadow the variable in Python

Also, "less skilled programmers" are not always "incompetent programmers" so more of the former who already understands the system may be able to complete the project faster than fewer "more skilled programmers"

Have you really read the mythical man month?

What's more important than whether he pays for it is whether everybody else will still pay for it.

If everyone around you use Windows, you probably have to still use Windows in order to be able to collaborate with them. And you don't even have to think about open standard.

The more people around you use other OS, the more you are likely to think about using platform-independent technology. Then the more likely you are to be able to move to other platform since there are less and less fraction of people holding you on Windows.

The author using Windows gives everyone around him the inertia of moving to other platform. He is part of the reason why most people knows how to use only Windows.

And then when big company wants to buy a platform they will chose Windows because most people use it. And big company will pay. And big company will buy more expensive software and extra support.

Everything in the world is essentially just a bunch of atom, too. By this logic you can probably do anything you want and never be wrong, right?

If you can answer this question then you have already answered your own question.

But if your answer is "I don't have to because I use Lisp and I don't use other languages" then you miss the point of JSON.

What's the different?

To be more precise, the rise of WebM-enabled browser market share ignores its WebM altogether.

People use Chrome or Firefox because it's faster than IE, it has automatic update, it supports more CSS3 features (i.e. it renders more beautiful web site). I never once heard people choosing Chrome/FF over IE/Safari because of WebM.

Don't forget that all this browser still support flash with H.264 codec and most website still have flash video fallback. Hell, most website only use Flash video player.

It might just well be the article about rising maket share of Browser with green icon or some other silly factor, and statement like "Yes, the rise of green-icon browsers market share ignore this fact" would have been equally correct.

Not that it has anything to do with your parent comment missing the point of the article.

They both do "pass reference by value". Which is a big difference.

Your seed value from 0-100 is only varies in the last 6 bits out of 64 bits. Which I assume probably caused this whatever psuedo-random function Java is using to generate very similar value for seeds with that low level of entropy. You can look up the formula in Java SDK and do the math.

There's no need to pass in seed value to Random constructor unless you really want to reproduce the same random sequence.

Different language has different limitation. Just because you can not have SQLAlchemy in C, does not mean C encourage bad code.

Also, if you know where the button is but you don't know what exactly it is going to do, do you really know where the button is?

Good if it is the only apps you are using. But what if you switch to use others app for a while and switch back to this app. Can you remember the activity stack as of all the apps good as the OS does? Can you predict where back button is going to take you after not using the phone for half an hours?

So if a company follow the law and they gets tax deduction, it means that that's the tax the society agree that the company should be paying, right?

> loopholes are involuntarily, while tax deductions are intended.

So can the company exercise tax deduction without being called using a loophole? Is it ever intended for tax deduction to be okay for a company?

But since TFA also list Dropbox and Kicksend, both are not builtin in iOS, it seems the author would accept non-builtin Flickr solution as well.

So the whole article would come down to "I don't know Flickr exists and can share video".

Step 1: Define "unimportant" as "actually important"

Step 2: Write catchy title based on new definition, making it sounds controversial.

Step 3: Profit?

What does that have to do with whether the unmodified one must means user has no security?

All you said can mean you can be more sure that open source code is secure. But it does in no way proof that "proprietary security software mean no security at all (EDIT: better be 'proprietary security software mean user has no security')".

Someone are just the best programmer in Windows/Visual Studio environment. And being "top-notch" should not be reserved to only those who use command line.