- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Judge in US v. Google trial didn’t know if Firefox is a browser or search engine::Google accused DOJ of aiming to force people to use “inferior” search products.
You must log in or register to comment.
The judge in question is 51 years old. He’s not old enough to be this clueless about basics like the difference between a search engine and a web browser and popular examples of each.
I teach a programming class to young adults (18-25, usually) and was flabbergasted last semester when I realized that a couple of them didn’t know what a directory hierarchy/file system was.
My suspicion is that the ease of use angle of “just tell me what you want and I’ll find it” led to this. Not saying ease of use is bad, but I expected more from people wanting to learn programming.
And I’m over here meticulously organizing my music library into folders by band, album, year, etc…o the humanity.
There’s a subgroup of the millennial and gen X that grew up with a sweet spot of computers such that you actually need to know how it works in order to use one effectively. Ease enough to do a lot of fun stuff, hard enough that it encourages learning the technical minutiae. The rise of smart phones and net/chrome books means there is a huge chunk of population that has a superficial and passing relationship with tech. It’s big buttons or else it doesn’t register with them. It’s not their fault, the pursue of usability and fool proofing without actually giving tools to dig deep when necessary means they have less exposure to the underlying tech. Thus are less familiar with how things work. It’s an universal phenomenon, I would bet most people have no clue how to raise, grow and process food, but still we don’t starve, we go to the grocery and buy what’s there already cleaned, processed and packaged. There are huge advantages to understanding the chain of production of food, but I’d guess most people would struggle in an agronomy class about what’s a compost bin.
100% agree. Great description that dives into particulars of what I hand waved at.
deleted by creator
No. It’s phones. Phones hide their file directories.
iPhones do, I can get to them on android
It’s a bigger pain than it needs to be though, im an Android user too
What phone? I have a feeling your vendor is obfuscating it as stock android has a very straightforward files app.
The fact that android can be that different between different vendors isn’t help either.
You can get to them, but how many people actually do, or even realize the directory tree exists?
How do people usually clean up their storage space? I guess if they never run out, they could avoid using it. Another thing I use it for is looking though downloads. Maybe some people just download a new version every time?
Most people’s main use of storage is music, photos, and videos. All those can be managed from within their respective apps.
iOS has had a files app that looks very similar to the one on android for at least 5 years. Android had it first, but iPhones do not hide this app. It is installed by default just like on android.
iOS has had a files app that looks very similar to the one on android for at least 5 years. Android had it first, but iPhones do not hide this app. It is installed by default just like on android.
deleted by creator
As one of those people who didn’t understand what file systems and directories were at 18, it isn’t taught in early school so you don’t notice it is a thing that exists until you stumble upon it yourself. I distinctly remember the day it clicked and it felt like I had had an epiphany.
Once you break that basic barrier then you rely on your interests to take you further. I went from not understanding that to being a Linux guru in years time, so I fully believe if the desire to learn is there, it will happen. It is just not mandatory to learn anymore. So most people don’t.
School computer classes are often just job training for working in an office doing word processing shit.
Still, it goes a long way when you explain how these things work. It isn’t something super hard to grasp either, you just need to know that it exists in the first place. To know that it isn’t just technomagic and has a proper rhyme and reason for the way things work. I have seen far too many people use their documents folder as their everything folder scattered without a care.
At least their documents folder isn’t their desktop folder.
This is a fan-fucking-tastic article! Thanks bud.
And I’m over here meticulously organizing my music library into folders by band, album, year, etc…o the humanity.
beets, it’s a life changer
A music folder is like a zen garden. Where’s the zen in automating it all?
Kids often don’t know the difference between “wifi” and the Internet. It’s not an age thing these days.
Since smartphone became a thing it has always been my theory that millenials, and up to a point GenX, would be the only two generations to be forced into being tech-savy. Boomers and GenZ have been overwhelmingly tablet and phone users. Whoever still logging on a PC nowadays will have a vastly different experience than what it used to be.
It is a different world really. I am a huge geek and I have been in tech for a long time now, but I still get confused look at family gathering when I tell them I have no idea how to fix someone’s Ipad or what app/settings/touch gesture to do whatever.
Kids often aren’t explained the difference and if they have been they just don’t understand, wifi IS the internet to them.
A 51 year old Judge has a vastly different brain and should be able to retain the difference when explained.
You’d think they’d notice they can use the internet from their phones when there’s no wifi.
If it’s not connected to a cord, it’s wifi. Now try and explaining those nuances to them that there’s more than one-type of wireless signal.
Wifi is easier and simpler. Sometime I find myself making the mistake…
In construction there’s a similar issue (with grown men even). A circular saw is the tool, but everyone calls it a skilsaw, which is a brand name. You can correct them, they just don’t care, that’s what the tool is called, a skilsaw.
I hold out hope they’ll figure out the difference when they have to pay for separate subscriptions for cellular data and home internet service.
Some places have mobile (cellular and internet) and home internet, so that’s not likely to help some people.
But is this like Kleenex?
TIL skilsaw was a brand name. I thought it just just the guy making Doom maps.
Pretty sure they call cellular data “wifi”.
Or you’d think it would also be very easy to demonstrate you can be on wifi and not on the internet.
deleted by creator
Lawmakers and judges should not be allowed to make decisions on something they know nothing about. This is a huge problem with people not even wanting to educate themselves, and then deciding how the rest of us get to interact with the internet.
That being said, Firefox is only popular with tech folk. They have just over a 3% market share. I’m a developer and I don’t know anyone but myself that uses it. My mother would think I was talking about a cartoon if I brought it up. A lot of lemmings use it, but o would not call it a popular example.
Experts are supposed to break it down to them. But yeah, this is a flawed system but I fear the honnest take is that most humans know nothing about most things (even if we’re tempted to believe otherwise), so you’d be running out of avalaible judges real quick.
That’s a fair point. This case is even more complicated, as either the author of the article doesn’t know what they’re talking about, or a word was missing. The article says the judge wasn’t sure if mozilla was a browser or search engine, and Mozilla is neither.
I still hate the confidently incorrect assertions people in charge are making to negatively impact the way the largest and most complete telecommunications and information system works. Just look at facebooks trial where zuck had to explain how the internet works to the people who were deciding if his company was doing something wrong.
That just…seems so wrong. My mentally declining grandmother used firefox back in the 00s era (though now that I think about it, my uncle is a developer, so maybe he set up the computer). How have we backslid since then to where so few people know/use firefox?
Actually yes. Around 2010 Firefox still had like 60% market share. Now, chrome dominates the market and Firefox is in single digits. Chrome gives you so many conveniences, and only a small amount of people care about what you give up for those conveniences. “My data isn’t important. Who cares about what I do?” Is a common response to data mining and sharing.
Most people don’t want to put the time and effort into researching these things. Most people just don’t have the energy.
But again if you don’t know anything about a topic you are asked to make a decision on, you should recuse yourself. It’s unfortunate that most people making decisions about tech know very little about it.
Another thing not being considered by all the “judge doesn’t know anything” crowd is that they’re failing to consider that this case isn’t really about search engines or Alphabet as a company.
It’s about monopoly laws. In this case, pertaining to Google and Mozilla, but monopolies nonetheless.
Only a few years older than me. Absolutely not yet old enough to be a boomer.
Yet? How would one turn into a boomer?
Use your favorite search engine (mine is called firefox) to browse the google and connect with your friends on a facebook
We don’t have Facebook is AltaVista okay?
I was thinking of cancelling my Internet service, I only use the facebooks and sometimes emails I don’t use the Internet anymore.
-my mom.
I have heard of this social media called MSN Messenger but it doesn’t seem available on the AOL? I don’t see it, anyway. Maybe I should just email Bill Gate?
No, you should be using Fark.
When you start posting searches in your Facebook status.
“Mysterious purple spot on butt cheek”
OK boomer (someone had to say it)
Lots of people of my gen were utterly clueless about computers growing up-- it was arcane nerd shit.
You didn’t have to know how to use a computer until much later in life in a number of careers.
Hell, my university still had rentable typewriters in the library, which still had a physical card catalog (alongside the new computerized one), and we still wrote tests by hand (essay or otherwise). Laptops weren’t a thing. And not everyone had a PC/Mac. The Internet was something most students were oblivious to. The web was only just in its infancy and only the nerds knew about it as a curious novelty. Hell, there wasn’t even DNS back then. Everyone downloaded a “hosts” file.
Even so, I’m still struggling to imagine how a person still doesn’t know the difference between a search engine and a browser, though.
Then again, I suppose some people are just really awful at analytical thinking – understanding how to decompose complex things. Understanding how the parts and pieces work. The people who were really bad at that kind of thing probably would have steered clear of computers as much as possible.
So, ok, maybe if a person avoids computers in undergrad and law school in the 90s then becomes a lawyer, they can just actively avoid computers in their job. That’s one career where maybe that’s possible because, by the time computers become truly ubiquitous, your assistants that can do the computer stuff for you.
So we have two options:
-
A 52 year old federal judge is somehow tech illiterate in a way that would imply they have absolutely no idea about the fundamentals of modern technology.
-
A federal judge is asking a large number of extremely basic questions to get their answers on official records so that the cases parameters are clearly defined. He is taking extra care because there’s not a lot of direct precedent on these issues.
I’m heavily leaning towards number 2 here. The internet likes to pretend everyone over the age of 40 has no idea how a computer works. The year is 2023. A middle-aged person today was fairly young when computers started to be incorporated into all aspects of society and is well versed in computer literacy. In some ways they are actually much more tech literate than the younger generations. It’s almost certain that he knows the difference between Firefox and Google.
I’m a 53 year old IT person, and I’m leaning towards 1. The level of technology incompetence in the general public is astounding. My wife only knows “Have you tried turning it off and back on again?” And that pretty much makes her a member of the help desk at her job.
My mom uses a computer at her job but confuses the terms computer, internet, browser and email on a regular basis. I wonder what would happen if I restarted the internet as she tells me to sometimes. I could install Linux and she wouldn’t tell.
Still better than her father, who had her operate a casette player for him when she was 2.
I always cringe in horror as both my parents still double click links on the internet.
Mine are not that old but they absolutely need access to assistance every day. Mom cannot turn the computer off if anything other than “Shutdown” was previously chosen in that awful Windows dialog. Dad fell for a basic “unclaimed delivery” phishing email even though he found it in the Spam folder that has an explicit warning. Fortunately, his gut told him something was fishy and he told me right away, and we suspended his card before it was abused.
What’s wrong with double click?
On a link? Everything.
I still don’t understand. IIRC, it’s click once to select, click twice to open. Why should hyperlinks be different?
Or maybe you mean machine gun clicking until the page loads, that’s, eh, wrong, yes.
Links only need single clicks. Always have.
Icons on the desktop, or files in a listview need a double click to open, because single clicking just selects them.
I think it is the idea of clicking some random link on the internet and not the act of double clicking itself. It caught me for a second too.
Boy, do I understand the cringe.
I always described these users as “unable to distinguish between an icon an a button”. Modern Windows UIs don’t make it easier, though.
I could install Linux and she wouldn’t tell.
Works with grandparents. They don’t even suspect they have Gentoo on their computer.
The law is nuanced out the ass. I sit through depositions every day, and terms of art are a plague, and you can say something, but it can be interpreted differently because in such and such a field it’s a term of art, etc. That’s my hope.
I am fully on board with we need more judges, we need younger judges. But I don’t think that’s because they’re incapable of learning. In fact, I think there’s be value to someone going in blind, being given all the facts, and making their determination that way. It just sucks that something we value so highly can be determined based on the presentation of counsel.
It’s always amazed me of the learning gap… we learned how to get stuff working by hacking config.sys and our peers can it seems barely spell computer.
It’s even worse as people get younger, even though it shouldn’t be. How computers work should be in peoples DNA by now, but they still think you’ve deleted IE if you hide the icon…
Agreed. If it has a positive effect as in 2, I’m all for it, but trusting that a non-technical user really know what’s going on with his computer is a serious gamble.
My wife only knows “Have you tried turning it off and back on again?” And that pretty much makes her a member of the help desk at her job.
Next step: “Is it even powered?”
To be Dennis Ritchie was born in 40-ies. He would be 80 y.o. if he didn’t die in 2013. And he is most literate person on this planet.
Honestly same. The passage of time is weird
People think 52 is like super old… but really that’s just Gen X
Hell you really wanna know how warped our perception of time is?
Most people think 20 years ago Mario was an 8bit platformer that revitalized interest in video games after Atari killed the medium with oversaturation and nonexistent quality control.
What was Mario 20 years ago? An aging mascot with a divisive summer themed pollution game that I loved but others seemed to hate, on a console that only did well with diehard fans… 20 years ago Nintendo wasn’t the big man on campus, that was Sony with the PS2 despite it being weaker than GCN and Xbox.
Currently playing through Super Mario Sunshine. Looks pretty decent with HD textures.
Dude SMS was such a great game, big part of my childhood. I loved Luigi’s Mansion, too.
I was very disappointed with Luigi’s Mansion sequels. I like that the original Luigi’s Mansion was able to have a genuinely haunting atmosphere, that still managed to feel in place with the Mario universe. I was disappointed that portrait ghosts never really made a return, and that our ghosts were downgraded from actually scary premises like a baby that can warp dimensions to generic cartoon antics. Like this really was baby’s first horror game. A Fatal Frame for the kiddos, or is it more accurate to say that Fatal Frame is Luigi’s Mansion for the non kiddos? I think Fatal Frame came after Luigi’s Mansion
Luigi’s Mansion 3 is especially bad with this because although I do like the main villain a lot, most of the ghosts you see are just the standard blue one again and again, you don’t have the rich variety that even Dark Moon pulled off. And oh boy did I love the ghosts of shy guys in the first game.
Kinda lost me with Mario
I agree, none of that comparison made sense. It relies too much on prior knowledge/association.
Lemme break it down then…
Most people, if asked what a Mario game, one of the most iconic and best selling franchises in gaming history… beaten out only by Pokemon (owned by the same company) was like 20 years ago, they’d describe this - https://youtu.be/7qirrV8w5SQ
When in reality, Mario 20 years ago, was this - https://youtu.be/WIHFSgPv3Ak
This is due to how bad of a perception of time we as humans seem to have… It works for other things
20 years ago “Ah yeah that’s when we were using floppy disks right?”
Heck my brother’s a pretty sharp guy, but at one point he seemed to think my dad’s generation grew up with black and white silent films, and not… Friday the 13th or Ghostbusters
Well, in the 1970/1980 there actually were still a lot of black and white movies on TV. “The Streets of San Francisco” “Kojak” “Dragnet” not to mention the endless reruns of Stan and Laurel.
For reruns in Argentina, nothing beats Disney’s Zorro. It’s a full-on revered classic here.
For reruns in Argentina, nothing beats Disney’s Zorro. It’s a full-on revered classic here.
Wow, I remember that one too from my child hood. The German TV played it once, the Austrian TV played it like over and over again. Don’t ask me why but the Austrian TV was always miles better than the German TV. Living close to the border allowed us to watch both, sometimes even the Swiss TV which was usually attrocious.
Well you got me there, plus when my dad does like to watch Mash, it says go to when he I just want some noise. Which I can understand, I usually have a let’s play of some game going. My grandmother has a recording of rain, I have a recording of the Blair Witch volume 1 Ruston Park going. And know that he’s not what the character is called, speech to text is being a bastard and I can’t use my hands right now
Wow, I’d never come across super Mario sunshine before - cheers!
In the 1990s if you wanted to play a PC game you had install it manually with a CD, typically configure ini files in a text editor and fix irq requests for your peripherals just to play. In the contemporary world a zoomer only needs to tap the install icon on the screen, Gen Z may have more experience usually technology than any previous generation, but the days of asking grandma to fix your computer seem a certainty on the horizon.
Yep, the digital illiteracy of the z gen is terrifying. Apparently contemporary teens have no understanding of the folder structure. Like, at all. Of the concept of files having their location. It’s all because they were brought up with iPhones for everything just is, and iCloud where everything just is.
Maybe they imagine tag-based filesystem or content-addressed?
Like porn sites.apparently they imagine a huge dump of stuffs which just exists
Apparently contemporary teens have no understanding of the folder structure. Like, at all.
I met numerous 20- and 30- somethings in the 90s who had no idea either. When asked why they didn’t know where did they save the documents they “lost”, they usually answered that they hadn’t studied Computer Sciences and therefore they didn’t have any reason to know (!).
Appelations to learn to use better their tools usually got nowhere.
It’s a bit like how cars used to be really unreliable but easy to work on so a lot of people learned to fix some basic things, but now it’s more complicated and difficult to fix anything so even a lot of handy people don’t bother.
To be fair a lot of things are as easy or easier, but vendor will never let you use diagnostic software
It’s easier to build a PC in 2023 than it was in 1993. Modern motherboard’s typically don’t require separate cards for sound, network and video (unless you’re gaming). It’s mostly integrated now and you don’t need hours manually manipulating jumpers and trying to affix terribly designed IDE cables now replaced with SATA. I’d much rather work on repairing my modern PC vs trying to troubleshoot a Compaq 486 20+ years ago.
Ide? Sata? M.2 baybeeee
I work as a website developer and I think number one is so, so much more likely. The average person barely knows how to use a computer at all, let alone how it works and different terminology.
An older, non-IT person - an actual judge, yeah I’m not giving them the benefit of the doubt here - they likely don’t know lol
Not sure why “old+judge” automatically equals “tech illiterate.” The judge in another high-profile Google case taught himself to code
The article you link says the judge already knew how to code beforehand.
He’s been coding in BASIC for decades, actually, writing programs for the fun of it: a program to play Bridge, written as a gift for his wife; an automatic solution for the board game Mastermind, which he is immensely fond of; and most ambitiously, a sprawling multifunctional program with a graphical interface that helps him with yet another of his many hobbies, ham radio.
Yes, because he taught himself.
“At some point, I looked at the BASIC book and decided I would learn that.” He taught himself straight from the book, which he recalls was “pretty straightforward.”
It’s because these things work by probabilities. Generally when you think of older people who aren’t working as IT professionals, you wouldn’t expect them to be great with computers - and you’d probably be right.
Do you really think that a judge that taught himself to code would be common-place and would be the norm? That judge is awesome, but he is very clearly an outlier lol
I think the probability of somebody who had to pass a Barr and likely worked as a lawyer in 2005 knowing the difference between Google and firefox is pretty damn high tbh
I really don’t mean to be rude however I don’t think there’s any polite sounding way of asking this, have you worked in IT? You would be surprised how many lawyers, doctors, etc all kinds of genius professionals absolutely do not know how computers work, and even who don’t care to learn them.
You’re good, but no I haven’t worked in IT, I’ve job hopped in manufacturing most of my life I just went to high school in the early 2000s and in my experience those particular things were ubiquitous enough to be common knowledge. I fully understand that there’s people out there who have no idea how to operate a computer, it also makes sense to me why an IT person would see the most numerous and most extreme examples of this, but I think precisely because of that you have a bias in the other direction because everybody who has to come to you is likely an idiot, that doesn’t mean everybody who isn’t an IT professional is also an idiot.
I agree, that’s a decent point, but I have a counterpoint. I think with sheer numbers alone, especially when it comes to the context of computers would give more accurate results even if they could be somewhat biased. A larger sample size is more likely to give a more accurate idea of a picture of what’s going on. I also think if you compare an IT person, versus a non-IT person, the IT person is going to be able to identify Firefox being a search engine or a browser 10 times out of 10 lol, whereas with a non-IT person, those numbers could be anywhere except for 10/10, most likely anyway. lol
Knowledge of one field doesn’t imply knowledge or even common sense in another.
If you’re ever back on reddit, check out ‘tales from tech support’.
Knowing how to code doesn’t mean you know the difference between a search engine and a web browser.
I have soon a PhD in computer tech related subject, program for living, and am a lot younger than the judge, and if you ask me if Mozilla makes a search engine I would say I have no idea, they’ve made a lot of stuff. And if you asked me how Google’s SEM tools work I would ask wtf is SEM.
-
I’m disappointed in arstechnica for only supporting their provocative headline (Judge in US v. Google trial didn’t know if Firefox is a browser or search engine) with this vagueness in the article:
While Cavanaugh delivered his opening statement, Mehta even appeared briefly confused by some of the references to today’s tech, unable to keep straight if Mozilla was a browser or a search engine. He also appeared unclear about how SEM works and struggled to understand the options for Microsoft to promote Bing ads outside of Google’s SEM tools.
What did he actually say?!
Plus it’s an opening statement. It’s an intro that tells the finder of fact (traditionally a jury, but for cases like this it’s the judge) what evidence you’re going to present during the trial. You want that person to be able to place that argument in context, but the very nature of explaining that “I’m going to show you a bunch of stuff” is going to have a bunch of “well I haven’t seen it yet, so can you tell me what to expect” responses.
Especially if there’s a discussion of the different contractual relationships and the different companies and products. I’ve seen plenty of judges insist on clarity when communicating about things that might have more than one meaning: a company that has the same name as a product that company produces (Toyota makes Toyotas), a legal entity that has the same name as a place (Madison Square Garden banned someone from Madison Square Garden), etc.
For all we know, the confusion might be one of the lawyer’s fault, for using the words Mozilla or Firefox interchangeably, the way this article seems to.
I think its also important to note, he was not explicitly unclear about what Firefox was, he was unclear about what Mozilla was. It’s admittedly still not great, but I think it’s a little more understandable a thing to be unfamiliar with than the browser itself. I’d really rather the title referred to Mozilla because of this, as really there’s little to definitively back up its claim that the judge is unfamiliar with Firefox, just that he is to some degree unfamiliar with the company that makes it. Again, still far from ideal, but not nearly as egregious as they’re trying to make it sound.
|unable to keep straight if Mozilla was a browser or a search engine
It is neither. It is a foundation that maintains a browser. It is like asking if Microsoft is a browser or a search engine.
if Microsoft is a browser or a search engine.
yes
No
Yes! Stop fighting the status quo
Allow me to introduce ‘I have problem with The Google’.
E: wording.
You mean the Google Bing?
Let me quickly Google that in Bing Bing Go
So true
It would be naive to expect Google to be broken by anti-trust laws, just look how microsoft dodged that in the 2000 and went back to the same practices today . this is a circus show
<s>Welcome to American politics. </s>
Welcome to politics.
For strike through, use ~~content~~
exampleYou forgot the /s frienderino
Tips fedora
How can anyone make a judgement about something they know nothing about? We are so doomed.
They do so all the time - do you think judges are experts in every thing? The judge needs to understand the law. It’s up to the counsel to ensure they have experts to explain the details.
Judges should specialize in certain areas for this exact reason. They should absolutely understand the material as well as the law.
They don’t need to be an expert. They need to be people that have basic knowledge of how the world around them works, and the ability to learn new things as that world changes. I mean that’s the basic requirement at any job I have ever had, why are they exempt?
I’m assuming they asked what it was? Or for clarification? If so, then they learned.
Wasnt there that judge who went and learned programming in order tp preside over a software patents case?
As if this has doomed humanity before.
Judging without knowing has been practically sport for most of humanity’s history.
Just because it’s done that way doesn’t mean we can’t fix the issue.
Oh for sure. I was just pinpointing the fatalistic reaction.
It’s not “fatalistic”, it’s “fine” this way.
A judge doesn’t have to know what mozilla is before a trial starts. Council can tell them what it is, how/whether it matters to the case, etc.
It’s the lawyers that have the duty to inform the judge. You can’t rely on every judge knowing everything about all topics. And they don’t really need to…
I know what you’re saying, and I understand it. But again, I’m not talking about how I perceive it, but how the other commenter described it (“we’re doomed!”) And like you, I thought it was an overreaction.
Ahh, gotcha.
I mean… gestures wildly at, like, everything
Right? It’s a good thing this judge is asking questions.
Imagine how fucked we would be with zoomers for judges and then count your blessings ;)
Completely brain dead take
I think you mean complete shit post
Where’s the punch line? Please explain the joke to me
There is no punch line. And no joke. It’s a shitpost so there is little to explain.
You already won bro put away your confusion and pat yourself on the back 👍
Holy shit you mean the generation that’s actually going to be effected by their own decisions? What would make that worse? Please expand
nah
Because you’re a dipshit
alright
Google trial didn’t know if Firefox is a browser or search engine::Google accused DOJ of aiming to force people to use “inferior” search products.
Google search is an inferior search product.
Google, Twitter, and Reddit are proof that your business cannot relay on a middle man without that middle man creating a monopoly that shits itself
God the nightmare we will get when Gaben passes…
Valve is directly owned by him with no stockholder nonsense, as I understand it, so perhaps he has willed it to someone who will handle it well. Hopefully. I don’t like everything about Steam, but I do like that, assuming I’m not misinformed.
I remember hearing that his son would take the reigns after his death and that his son shares the same values as Gabe. So hopefully we’re fine for the foreseeable future on that front. Assuming I’m remembering that right at least.
What I’m paranoid is that it seems companies have started giving out arbitrary bans as part of a power trip.
My friend’s an Overwatch Streamer and they shot him with a one-month ban for “Being Toxic”
His toxic behavior was… “Asking people to stop using racial slurs in voice chat”
I’m not gonna lie, and I hate to admit it, but I actually really like Bing’s ChatGPT integration. For basic searches, it does all the legwork and gets you a summarized answer with sources for more info. It even works great on really obscure topics…
It is now but it wasn’t always.
When asked about a perceived ignorance in computers, the judge proclaimed, “I’m not ignorant about computers! In fact, just last week I finished Space Quest, and I’m now getting through Leisure Suit Larry!” The judge’s report, written using WordPerfect 5.1, is expected to be released soon.
I’ll have you know that I just recently had a user incredibly upset because their word perfect files did not automatically identify as word documents.
I’m not surprised at all. Only people who work in IT are aware or care about anything other then the default apps and operating systems.
I really think it’s a matter of context; how one was raised, what kind of people one interacts with, interest, etc.
I’m older and i know so much more than most of my age group. I learned a long, long time ago to not be afraid to try things out, my pc is not going to explode; to investigate when i’m stuck with some computer stuff; and i have adult kids who teach me things that i don’t know enough about or share their views. Some of the communities i subscribed to are about tech, FOSS, android etc. I’m always really open to boost my knowledge.
Yeah, that’s great and all. But this judge shouldn’t be ruling over this case if he doesn’t know the basics of today’s technology.
So I got to wonder, when that judge goes home at night, does his family, and especially his kids, let him know what everyone is saying about him in relation to this article?
And then I wonder how that affects him going into court the next day, when he has to ask more ‘dumb’ questions, does he actually ask or not.
Tech just isn’t his expertise.
Mehta has been described as an avid fan of hip hop music. In a 2015 copyright case regarding the similarity of two songs, Mehta noted in a footnote that he was "not a ‘lay person’ when it comes to hip-hop music and lyrics,” and noted he has “listened to hip hop for decades”. American rappers Jay-Z, Eminem, Kanye West and Canadian rapper Drake are among his favorite artists.
Amazing underrated comment right here.
His job is to ask those questions. If he doesn’t do it, his reasoning will be flawed and then the case will restart with a new judge when appealed, wasting everyone’s time and money. I gotta imagine that’s more embarrassing to a judge than asking these questions.
His family and friends are likely a bubble and thus never see the article to begin with.
Kids are never in the bubble, you know that. Even when they’re supposed to be in a bubble, they’re not in a bubble.
Don Jr would like to have a word with you after he finishes these few ounces of blow.
I guess it depends how rich or how mafia/Russian your connections are.
The people making decisions often don’t know shit about what they’re deciding. I used to wonder why huge companies with a shitload of cash make horrible decisions for their products. Hint: It’s not because they hire bad engineers.
I feel like most average people (regardless of age) don’t even know alternatives to internet browsers exist, so why would I expect a judge to know? They’re obviously not experts in every field, it’s up to the attorneys to inform them and persuade them one way or another.
Are people here unable to see that the layman might not know what Firefox is off-hand?
Are people here unable to see that the layman might not know what Firefox is off-hand?
I don’t think it’s that. I think most people want a judge who’s knowledgeable enough on the subject that he/she’s actually judging.
Bringing in experts to educate him during the court case is not right, he’s supposed to be able to judge if the experts are actually experts and know what they’re talking about, by the time the actual case is happening.
I don’t care, i use Duck.
This guy ducks
But does he go?
So, you’re saying people should go get Ducked?
I mean, i use Duckduckgo dude lmao
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Today, US District Judge Amit Mehta heard opening statements in the Department of Justice’s antitrust case challenging Google’s search dominance.
To prove this, the DOJ plans to bring in Hal Varian, who served as Google’s chief economist at that time.
William Cavanaugh, a lawyer representing the state of Colorado, also appeared to raise one unique claim still being weighed in this case regarding Google’s search engine marketing (SEM) tool SA 360.
During the more than 10-year time period that the case covers, browsers, phones, and search engines all evolved rapidly.
So, on top of weighing complicated antitrust questions, Mehta might also struggle to keep track of basic facts like how search was conducted at any given point in the case’s timeline.
While Cavanaugh delivered his opening statement, Mehta even appeared briefly confused by some of the references to today’s tech, unable to keep straight if Mozilla was a browser or a search engine.
The original article contains 496 words, the summary contains 153 words. Saved 69%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
