I am extremely sorry .. for using the word freaking !!!!!!!!!! .. I really didn't mean it, I was on the pretext of its meaning to be something on the lines of 'scary' rather than what you pointed out [somehow I used that word to represent horror movies for years .. and never actually checked the meaning .. so somehow didn't even guess it would have a meaning like that].. and I repeat .. I am very sorry !!! ..
2009/7/12 Sebin Jacob <sebinaja...@gmail.com> > Reply Inline: > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Jikku Jose <jikkuj...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I never understood this *usual freaking statement* "Google is soon >> turning another monopolistic mega corporate". > > > Jikku, please mind your words. This is a public forum. If you use such > words, I can react in the same fashion. That would make things complex. > (Check the meaning of the word > freaking<http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=freaking> > .) > > > >> And unlike anything ever in the business it is giving us choice, also no >> body is forcing anyone to choose their service. > > > I agree that they are giving a choice. Together with it, they are also > narrowing down the choices by their business model. Rest, you guess. > > >> And it is perfectly possible to live without their services too. > > > That is the same argument, I made. Men can live without any technology. > > >> Then why are there so many worries and how can they be monopolistic. > > > When a company is big enough to effectively control the web, can't it be > called monopolist? I have a disclaimer to make here. I am not a google hater > and I use many of their services. But the business method they follow is to > swallow great ideas. Blogger (blogspot), Youtube and Feedburner are the most > evident examples of this style. > > >> About your email conversations being analyzed, it is no "*belief*" they >> have openly mentioned it at the time of launch of the service about their >> technology in 2004. > > Hmm. true. > > >> >> >> Coincidentally I read a comment in >> PCWorld.com<http://forums.pcworld.com/message/43016#43015>about such fears >> like "Google is too big": >> >>> ** >> >> > >> *(...continued) so far they are not forcing u to use anything that they >>> offer.. they are the best in market but u can as well go with all the other >>> search engines... yahoo also has my yahoo page.. You guys want the best and >>> will cry even when you get the best!!!!* >> >> > This is not always true.Google Reader may be a widely used RSS reader. But > certainly, that is not the best. Orkut may be popular in India and Brazil. > But can it be matched to FB and Myspace? Wordpress is far more superior than > Blogger in beta. Google talk is inferior to Yahoo IM client. > > >> >> About looting using AdSense: >>> >> How can advertising be classified as looting???? They are giving >> information about products for interested people to buy, and they are >> getting a share in the profit. How can this ever be looting ???? >> > > In terms of what we study, it is ethical business. But in the terms of > macro economics, something in the scale of looting is taking place. As an > example, consider the Advani for PM campaign during the loksabha polls. It > made a major part of BJP's election spending. And whom do you think, reaped > the profit? On a side note, we must also consider the fact that, it was the > election > spending, which was beyond Rs 40,000 crore, that cushioned the Indian > economy from the global financial crisis together with some pro-people > measures like the NREGA scheme. And this amount does not include BJP's web > advt as the money was not circulated in India. > > > >> >> >> >> Restriction on filming helped Iran to make the most political films !! >>> >> Shouldn't films be made depending on user choice/demand or what director >> wants to make?? Rather than someone dictating that this good and something >> else is okay ? And what good can these "political movies" have to a person >> who dislikes it >> > > I didn't dictate. I just made an analogy here. Restrictions helped Iranian > film makers to come out with anti establishment films that could convey > messages in between the frames. The effective way of conveying a message is > through deceptions. The art of deception was well mastered by Iranian film > makers. If you don't like it, its okay. > > >> >> >> And I think communication shouldn't be have to be made possible using >> 'circumventing tools'. It should be openly usable, so that a lay man can use >> it. > > > I agree to it. But you must also have the eye to see the amended cyber law > of India. We are the so called democratic republic and still our government > wants to be the Orwellian big brother. > > Thanks and regards, > Sebin > > -- > Understanding is a three-edged sword: your side, their side, and the truth > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ "Freedom is the only law". "Freedom Unplugged" http://www.ilug-tvm.org You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ilug-tvm" group. To post to this group, send email to ilug-tvm@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to ilug-tvm-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For details visit the website: www.ilug-tvm.org or the google group page: http://groups.google.com/group/ilug-tvm?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
