Google and Watermarks

In article ,
nospam wrote:

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

Well a friend of mine shared a flat with a google employee 3 years ago.
But I doubt she knows everything that google was doing even then.
It's how I first got my googlemail when it was still in beta .
Apparently they were difficult to get then.
My first googlemail was sent 4th oct 2004 not sure when it went public .

april 1 2004 and thought to be an april fool's joke, except it wasn't.

The joke was that it was supposed to be free...
--
teleportation kills

In article , android
wrote:

My first googlemail was sent 4th oct 2004 not sure when it went public .

april 1 2004 and thought to be an april fool's joke, except it wasn't.

The joke was that it was supposed to be free...

it is free.

In article ,
nospam wrote:

In article , android
wrote:

My first googlemail was sent 4th oct 2004 not sure when it went public
.

april 1 2004 and thought to be an april fool's joke, except it wasn't.

The joke was that it was supposed to be free...

it is free.

Free as commercial telly. You pay by giving access to your attention and
in this case the content of your communications.
--
teleportation kills

"nospam" wrote

| My first googlemail was sent 4th oct 2004 not sure when it went public
..
|
| april 1 2004 and thought to be an april fool's joke, except it wasn't.

Most people haven't got the joke yet. GMail was
one of the first to be presented as limited edition,
invitation only, limited beta, etc. And that was
before most people realized how sleazy Google was
becoming. I was amazed to see hardcore geeks
proud as punch to be sporting a spyware email
address. They thought they were showing that they
had an insider connection. In a way they did. The
general public didn't know enough to get suckered.
These were the same people who can easily set up
their own ISP email or run their own domain, with
domain email. Yet by making it appear hard to get,
Google suckered them all into switching to their
spyware.

It reminds me of the famous quote from Zuck.
I don't remember exactly how it went, but a
friend asked him how he was getting so much info
about other students on his sharing new college
social site and Zuck responded something to the
effect that the idiots wanted to give it to him.
(Though I think he used a more crass term.)

On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 18:47:18 -0400, "Mayayana"
wrote:

"nospam" wrote

| My first googlemail was sent 4th oct 2004 not sure when it went public
.
|
| april 1 2004 and thought to be an april fool's joke, except it wasn't.

Most people haven't got the joke yet. GMail was
one of the first to be presented as limited edition,
invitation only, limited beta, etc. And that was
before most people realized how sleazy Google was
becoming. I was amazed to see hardcore geeks
proud as punch to be sporting a spyware email
address. They thought they were showing that they
had an insider connection. In a way they did. The
general public didn't know enough to get suckered.
These were the same people who can easily set up
their own ISP email or run their own domain, with
domain email. Yet by making it appear hard to get,
Google suckered them all into switching to their
spyware.

It reminds me of the famous quote from Zuck.
I don't remember exactly how it went, but a
friend asked him how he was getting so much info
about other students on his sharing new college
social site and Zuck responded something to the
effect that the idiots wanted to give it to him.
(Though I think he used a more crass term.)

Every time I read one of your posts, I can't help thinking of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6Sxv-sUYtM

In article , Mayayana
wrote:


| My first googlemail was sent 4th oct 2004 not sure when it went public
.
|
| april 1 2004 and thought to be an april fool's joke, except it wasn't.

Most people haven't got the joke yet.

there is no joke.

GMail was
one of the first to be presented as limited edition,
invitation only, limited beta, etc.

google wanted a metered launch versus bazillions of people signing up
all at once. it was also easy to get invites. same for google voice.

And that was
before most people realized how sleazy Google was
becoming. I was amazed to see hardcore geeks
proud as punch to be sporting a spyware email
address. They thought they were showing that they
had an insider connection. In a way they did. The
general public didn't know enough to get suckered.
These were the same people who can easily set up
their own ISP email or run their own domain, with
domain email. Yet by making it appear hard to get,
Google suckered them all into switching to their
spyware.

setting up one's own domain & mail server is well beyond what most
people care to do, even for those who have the technical ability to do
it.

It reminds me of the famous quote from Zuck.
I don't remember exactly how it went, but a
friend asked him how he was getting so much info
about other students on his sharing new college
social site and Zuck responded something to the
effect that the idiots wanted to give it to him.
(Though I think he used a more crass term.)

and those who you call idiots get a benefit from doing so.

Eric Stevens
Tue, 22 Aug 2017
04:57:29 GMT in rec.photo.digital, wrote:

On Mon, 21 Aug 2017 19:42:13 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Aug 21, 2017, nospam wrote
(in ) :

In , Eric
Stevens wrote:

Regarding the sub-thread the two of you are wallowing in; Sheesh!!
Enough already!!

Unfortunately this thread is typical of any where it is necessary
to extract information from nospam as though he were a hostile
witness.

We have more or less got to the point where nospam has admitted
that he deliberately and secretly sabotaged the URL in order to
show up the alleged deficiencies of the news readers of others.
Had you not come in at this point it is possible that he would
have admitted doing this with other URLs in the past. In fact, I
believe he has.

nospam should read http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1738.html where he
will find the actual state of affairs with URLs and that what he
has consistently argued is the case is in fact not the case. I
hope he doesn't have to have this explained to him in great
detail.

Interactions with nospam can be rewarding if the following two rules
are followed:

Rule #1 nospam is right even when they aren't.
Rule #2 See rule #1

Following the aforementioned rules has the following benefits:
#1 Significant reduction in wasted bytes and time.
#2 Possibly Significant reduction in large threads that go nowhere.
#3 No filtering need be performed on nospam and/or the posts/replies
they write. Allowing you to obtain new and possibly interesting
(educational?) information on the rare occasion it's presented.

Urls of interest in no particular order:
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php
http://picpaste.com/B4rjEFK0.jpg - David and Trisha
http://picpaste.com/U5np7XvN.jpg - RIAA love David style


--
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php
http://picpaste.com/B4rjEFK0.jpg - David and Trisha
http://picpaste.com/U5np7XvN.jpg - RIAA love David style



Reality is something you rise above.

"David B."
Tue, 22 Aug 2017 16:33:46 GMT
in rec.photo.digital, wrote:

On 22/08/2017 10:14, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Sunday, 20 August 2017 22:00:29 UTC+1, rickman wrote:
Savageduck wrote on 8/20/2017 1:27 AM:
It looks like Google is headed to the darkside.

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/08/g...-way-to-automa
tically-and- perfectly-erase-watermarks-on-stock-photos/
http://tinyurl.com/y88mrfvx

Funny that Google is doing this. Seems like they would have a
big interest in *preventing* the removal of watermarks.


I'd have thought it's rather like employing a safe cracker in
order to build a crack proof safe. Or the 21st century version of
employing a hacker to find ways of preventing hacking.

That is EXACTLY what Malwarebytes did - they employed a Blackhat
hacker called Dustin J. Cook of Kingsport, Tennessee!

Former Blackhat, thanks. Became a grayhat many years ago, David. I
also *don't* actually live in Kingsport. [g]

That's never stopped you from lying your arse off previously though,
so don't worry yourself about doing it now.

He wasn't quite up to the job though and he was invited to leave.

Completely untrue. Infact, I earned nice raises sharing technologies
they didn't use at the time as well as teaching them how to use those
technologies to better the programs detection and removal
capabilities. One more than one occasion during my employment with
them the announcement of a faster scan engine was the direct! result
of something *I* shared with them. The job was hardly challenging
from the technical aspect side, David. I'd already been doing it for
three years on my own as I developed and supported my own friendly
antimalware utility known as BugHunter. And no such invite (rofl)
took place, either. I've elected not to discuss how I parted ways
with the company or why I chose to do so, and, I see no reason to
change my mind concerning that now. Chalk it upto being none of your
business.

You may now resume your lies and besmirching efforts.



--
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php
http://picpaste.com/B4rjEFK0.jpg - David and Trisha
http://picpaste.com/U5np7XvN.jpg - RIAA love David style



186,000 miles/sec: Not just a good idea, it's the LAW.