This week, a global ransomware hack will make you WannaCry, Google’s I/O Conference, babies made from skin cells, Apple builds a new spaceship, and a pizza box, plus much, much more.
You can find the episode here.
Jillian D'Onfro, writing for Business Insider:
"The feature has long been available on the desktop version, which made its absence on the app even more annoying for those of us (like me) who like to plan roadtrips on a computer but rely on a phone for navigation. Not being able to add multiple stops on the app was incredibly frustrating."
What's similarlly interesting, is that Waze, a mobile navigation app which Google has owned since 2013, has had this same functionality for at least a couple of years now-- even allowing passengers of moving cars to insert a stop into an established route. I really wonder what took so long.
It's not a BIG deal....
but it's a big deal, considering the pseudo-marketing line "it just works" that my fellow iPhone users tend to bellow every time Apple's mobile devices are contrasted with Google's
An important example of when it's important to maintain the status quo. still, while this is definitely a desired outcome in the view of the public interest, this won't be settled until it's been looked at by the Supreme Court.
Cecilia Kang of The New York Times wrote a great article about this and their video (below) is exceptionally informative.
This week, while I was in China, Andrew and Tosin were on their own to discuss why the Jawbone UP is down and out, how and why Intel is busting out 10-core chips, and whether the Hulk Hogan/Gawker suit threaten journalistic free speech? They also get into whether the Google vs Oracle matter is a victory for fair use, and how European hate speech laws may affect US social media.
This week, Andrew, Tosin and I focus on all of the best from Google’s developer conference, Twitter lets you tweet longer, an artificially intelligent lawyer (make up your own jokes there), 50 times faster storage from IBM.
Caitlin McGarry, writing for PCWorld:
"Apple has admonished Google for violating user privacy with practices like mining emails for keywords to generate ad revenue. Now we know that Apple financially benefits from Google’s ad-targeting practices."
This quote (and the article's headline) strikes me as bothersome. First-- Google has a revenue sharing agreement with Apple on search ad revenue. They didn't cut Apple a check for $1 billion up front to exclude other search engines. The arrangement is performance-based. It doesn't seem as if there's any sort of barrier to MS's Bing outbidding Google for the same arrangement.
As for the quote-- this statement simply doesn't ring true. In fact, Apple's making money on search ads-- ads that have context based not on scanned emails but on terms that users input to a search engine for the purpose of receiving a contextually relevant response as output. The ads they receive are based on the search terms, not on scans of email or browser tracking.
Disappointing.