The Department of Justice (DOJ) rested its case in Google's search remedy trial earlier this week, giving Google a chance to push back on the government's attempt to break up the search giant. Today is arguably Google's best chance to make the case that it should not be harshly penalized in the ongoing search antitrust case, with CEO Sundar Pichai taking the stand.

Pichai attempted to explain why Google isn't abusing its market position and why the DOJ's proposed remedies are too extreme. The issue of Chrome divestment came up, but Google's team also focused intensely on the potential effects of the DOJ's data remedies , which could force Google to share its search index and technology with other firms.

A de facto spin-off

Pichai, who chose to stand while giving testimony, took issue with the government's proposal to force Google to license search technology to other companies. The DOJ claims that Google's status as a monopolist has resulted in it accumulating a huge volume of user data on search behavior. Plus, its significant technological lead means its index of the web is much more robust than competing services.

Read full article

Comments

The Department of Justice (DOJ) rested its case in Google's search remedy trial earlier this week, giving Google a chance to push back on the government's attempt to break up the search giant. Today is arguably Google's best chance to make the case that it should not be harshly penalized in the ongoing search antitrust case, with CEO Sundar Pichai taking the stand.

Pichai attempted to explain why Google isn't abusing its market position and why the DOJ's proposed remedies are too extreme. The issue of Chrome divestment came up, but Google's team also focused intensely on the potential effects of the DOJ's data remedies , which could force Google to share its search index and technology with other firms.

A de facto spin-off

Pichai, who chose to stand while giving testimony, took issue with the government's proposal to force Google to license search technology to other companies. The DOJ claims that Google's status as a monopolist has resulted in it accumulating a huge volume of user data on search behavior. Plus, its significant technological lead means its index of the web is much more robust than competing services.

Read full article

Comments

The Department of Justice (DOJ) rested its case in Google's search remedy trial earlier this week, giving Google a chance to push back on the government's attempt to break up the search giant. Today is arguably Google's best chance to make the case that it should not be harshly penalized in the ongoing search antitrust case, with CEO Sundar Pichai taking the stand.

Pichai attempted to explain why Google isn't abusing its market position and why the DOJ's proposed remedies are too extreme. The issue of Chrome divestment came up, but Google's team also focused intensely on the potential effects of the DOJ's data remedies , which could force Google to share its search index and technology with other firms.

A de facto spin-off

Pichai, who chose to stand while giving testimony, took issue with the government's proposal to force Google to license search technology to other companies. The DOJ claims that Google's status as a monopolist has resulted in it accumulating a huge volume of user data on search behavior. Plus, its significant technological lead means its index of the web is much more robust than competing services.

Read full article

Comments

From the department of head scratches comes this counterintuitive news: Microsoft says it has no plans to change a remote login protocol in Windows that allows people to log in to machines using passwords that have been revoked.

Password changes are among the first steps people should take in the event a password has been leaked or an account has been compromised. People expect that once they've taken this step, none of the devices that relied on the password can be accessed.

Not just a bug

The Remote Desktop Protocol —the proprietary mechanism built into Windows for allowing a remote user to log in to and control a machine as if they were directly in front of it—however, will in many cases continue trusting a password even after a user has changed it. Microsoft says the behavior is a design decision to ensure users never get locked out.

Read full article

Comments

From the department of head scratches comes this counterintuitive news: Microsoft says it has no plans to change a remote login protocol in Windows that allows people to log in to machines using passwords that have been revoked.

Password changes are among the first steps people should take in the event a password has been leaked or an account has been compromised. People expect that once they've taken this step, none of the devices that relied on the password can be accessed.

Not just a bug

The Remote Desktop Protocol —the proprietary mechanism built into Windows for allowing a remote user to log in to and control a machine as if they were directly in front of it—however, will in many cases continue trusting a password even after a user has changed it. Microsoft says the behavior is a design decision to ensure users never get locked out.

Read full article

Comments

From the department of head scratches comes this counterintuitive news: Microsoft says it has no plans to change a remote login protocol in Windows that allows people to log in to machines using passwords that have been revoked.

Password changes are among the first steps people should take in the event a password has been leaked or an account has been compromised. People expect that once they've taken this step, none of the devices that relied on the password can be accessed.

Not just a bug

The Remote Desktop Protocol —the proprietary mechanism built into Windows for allowing a remote user to log in to and control a machine as if they were directly in front of it—however, will in many cases continue trusting a password even after a user has changed it. Microsoft says the behavior is a design decision to ensure users never get locked out.

Read full article

Comments

With the rise of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., brain worms have gotten a bad rap.

A year ago, the long-time anti-vaccine advocate and current US health secretary famously told The New York Times that a parasitic worm " got into my brain and ate a portion of it and then died ." The startling revelation is now frequently referenced whenever Kennedy says something outlandish, false, or offensive—which is often. For those who have followed his anti-vaccine advocacy, it's frightfully clear that, worm-infested or not, Kennedy's brain is marinated in wild conspiracy theories and dangerous misinformation.

While it's certainly possible that worm remnants could impair brain function, it remains unknown if the worm is to blame for Kennedy's cognitive oddities. For one thing, he was also diagnosed with mercury poisoning, which can cause brain damage, too. As prominent infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci said last June in a conversation with political analyst David Axelrod: "I don't know what's going on in [Kennedy's] head, but it's not good."

Read full article

Comments

With the rise of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., brain worms have gotten a bad rap.

A year ago, the long-time anti-vaccine advocate and current US health secretary famously told The New York Times that a parasitic worm " got into my brain and ate a portion of it and then died ." The startling revelation is now frequently referenced whenever Kennedy says something outlandish, false, or offensive—which is often. For those who have followed his anti-vaccine advocacy, it's frightfully clear that, worm-infested or not, Kennedy's brain is marinated in wild conspiracy theories and dangerous misinformation.

While it's certainly possible that worm remnants could impair brain function, it remains unknown if the worm is to blame for Kennedy's cognitive oddities. For one thing, he was also diagnosed with mercury poisoning, which can cause brain damage, too. As prominent infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci said last June in a conversation with political analyst David Axelrod: "I don't know what's going on in [Kennedy's] head, but it's not good."

Read full article

Comments

With the rise of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., brain worms have gotten a bad rap.

A year ago, the long-time anti-vaccine advocate and current US health secretary famously told The New York Times that a parasitic worm " got into my brain and ate a portion of it and then died ." The startling revelation is now frequently referenced whenever Kennedy says something outlandish, false, or offensive—which is often. For those who have followed his anti-vaccine advocacy, it's frightfully clear that, worm-infested or not, Kennedy's brain is marinated in wild conspiracy theories and dangerous misinformation.

While it's certainly possible that worm remnants could impair brain function, it remains unknown if the worm is to blame for Kennedy's cognitive oddities. For one thing, he was also diagnosed with mercury poisoning, which can cause brain damage, too. As prominent infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci said last June in a conversation with political analyst David Axelrod: "I don't know what's going on in [Kennedy's] head, but it's not good."

Read full article

Comments