×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

47 comments

Change! (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35453414)

I, for one, welcome our new boss overlord, the same as our old boss overlord.

Re:Change! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35453822)

While, currently, your post sits at a -1, I think that it is very accurate and prescient of the times. No matter who we elect into public office, the politics will stay the same for the foreseeable future. The only thing that will garner true change is a revolution.

Re:Change! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35456448)

prescient of the times

This is what is known as an oxymoron.

You, on the other hand, are just a regular moron.

Re:Change! (1)

extraordinaire (2010224) | more than 3 years ago | (#35456780)

My personal apologies for the ridiculous partisan groupthink on slashdot, which moderated your post down to -1. It's becoming so prevalent, it's almost unbearable to read comments any more.

So the US Commerce will now be in Beta forever? (5, Funny)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 3 years ago | (#35453436)

Well, that seems to be the way that Google works. I guess if Eric Schmidt gets chosen, that will be his first move: Declare all Commerce to be Beta. So if there are any problems with the US Commerce, he can just say, "Hey, this is all still Beta . . . problems are to be expected."

Schmidt cashes in (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35453630)

Google was a big supporter of the Obama campaign, now its time to cash in some chips.

If Ice Cream Man Wins We Loose (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35453714)

The Commerce Dept. will become an extension of Homeland Security, Homeland Commerce Security. Any monetary transaction by anyone in the US will be posted on Google Maps for verification with the FBI. This will lead to the formation of the new Department, Homeland Commerce Federal Bureau of Investigation Security. The GoP will champion the idea saying it will save a Butt-Zillion load of dollars and give the Federal government the leverage and tools needed to confront their sworn enemy, the citizens of the U.S.A.

-308

Revolving Door (2)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#35453716)

There sure has been a lot of revolving door action in this administration, for a President who vowed there would be none. It's business as usual, as conflicts of interest abound with the appointment of big private industry leaders to significant posts and the vacating of significant posts leads to those persons capitalizing on their position (and, often, the actions they took while holding that position which just so happen to be in the same field of interest as the company's they're now leaving for) to private industry.

Re:Revolving Door (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35454252)

There is a revolving door in every administration. Cabinet-level appointees and agency heads are usually chosen because they have a substantial track record and lots of valuable contacts. They're uprooted from their hometowns and may be taking a substantial pay cut. The media scrutiny is intense and often unfair. And yes, the high-level Federal government experience usually makes them even more in demand in private industry and academia.

Re:Revolving Door (1)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#35454440)

Oh, if only that were true. Unfortunately, we have people like Vivek Kundra and his whole wealth of "experience" and "knowledge" that undermines that whole idea. I think everyone recognizes titles as the rewards they are and the whole "okay, I did your bidding, now employ me" model.

Re:Revolving Door (1)

extraordinaire (2010224) | more than 3 years ago | (#35456824)

There is a revolving door in every administration.

Not every administration runs and is elected purely on the notion that it will "be different from all of those other administrations that you've hated for so long."

Obama: We are the ones that we've been waiting for.

Really???

I'm kind of sick of the spin here. (4, Interesting)

HeckRuler (1369601) | more than 3 years ago | (#35453738)

ok, I had to double-check this:
blithe/blTH/Adjective
1. Showing a casual and cheerful indifference considered to be callous or improper.
2. Happy or joyous.

But when Eric Schmidt reminded everyone that he is bound by law to hand over your search history and that googling "how to murder my wife" was a really stupid thing to do before you go and murder your wife, I'd hardly consider his comments to be joyous or cheerfully indifferent.

I know that there is an unreasonable hatred of Google around here, but seriously, stop trying to spin this quote into some sort of distopian doomsaying.

And while I'm at it, I'm going to pre-emptivly rant about how it's not "Do no evil", it's "don't be evil". Just wait, someone will drag that minor grammar mistake out. Well you sir can consider yourself ranted against.

Re:I'm kind of sick of the spin here. (1)

Qwertie (797303) | more than 3 years ago | (#35454550)

itwbennett/soulskill/Chris Nerney are criticizing the choice of Eric Schmidt without proposing an alternative. I'm inclined to think that a pharmaceutical industry bigwig from Pfizer is chosen instead, he probably will not in any way improve life for US citizens. What's the big deal about Schmidt? Do you think, as Commerce Secretary, that he will somehow water down privacy legislation to help Google?

Understands the 'Net (3, Insightful)

sconeu (64226) | more than 3 years ago | (#35453784)

At least if Schmidt gets appointed, there will be *SOMEONE* in DC who understands the Internet.

Re:Understands the 'Net (1)

xMrFishx (1956084) | more than 3 years ago | (#35454468)

He'll also raise the average IQ by a phenomenal amount.

4 in a row (3, Insightful)

digitalsushi (137809) | more than 3 years ago | (#35453786)

"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people."
    -- Eleanor Roosevelt

Look at the last 4 story posts by soulskill. Looks like the cover of a gossip magazine. Here I am being ironic pointing this out. Guess I need to be angry at myself first, then. I'm just getting older and cranky. I think a lot of us are around here. I stopped putting energy into this system. I'm sorry everyone. I bring this place down too.

Re:4 in a row (1)

Chapter80 (926879) | more than 3 years ago | (#35453872)

"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people."

    -- Eleanor Roosevelt

I'd like to discuss the idea that you mentioned, including the quotation. I don't really care who said it, or under what circumstances she said it. But the idea itself certainly has merit. I wonder if there's a way we could prove or disprove it.

Re:4 in a row (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35454140)

A person would be awful boring if they only discussed ideas. What if all their ideas are crap? Are they then a great mind? Just asking...

Re:4 in a row (1)

jdgeorge (18767) | more than 3 years ago | (#35455332)

A person would be awful boring if they only discussed ideas. What if all their ideas are crap? Are they then a great mind? Just asking...

1. "Great minds discuss ideas" does not mean "all people who discuss ideas have great minds."
2. Many people find discussion of ideas boring.
3. The fact that most "great minds" do not have television shows where people can watch them discuss ideas is probably related to 2.
4. The proliferation of television shows where crap ideas are discussed highlights the truth of 1.

Re:4 in a row (1)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 3 years ago | (#35457072)

Well we can surely prove that if it bears some truth, the average voter has a small mind.

Therefore, if you want an idea to gain some merit, you have to push forward the people more likely to advance them.

I would post as anonymous for augmented irony, but karma is good for my skin problem.

Re:4 in a row (1)

Chapter80 (926879) | more than 3 years ago | (#35463486)

As author of the GP, I was really going for "+5 Funny".

I used the quote, and refused to talk about the people or event, but only wanted to discuss the idea - to show I have a great mind.
But it apparently went over everyone's head. I guess my mind is either too great, or just not very funny.

Re:4 in a row (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 3 years ago | (#35454258)

"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people."
        -- Eleanor Roosevelt

"America is all about speed. Hot, nasty, bad-ass speed."
        -- Eleanor Roosevelt

Re:4 in a row (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35454328)

What a dumb quote. Great minds discuss all of these equally, knowing the distinction between each.

Re:4 in a row (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35454376)

The greatest minds of all discuss ideas but know that only people matter.

People on your side.

Filling your trough.

Oink oink, Schmidt.

The way tech corps usually go, it'll be about a decade before people end the worship and see Google for what they've already become.

Now I just have to sit back and wait for people to change their minds and act like they'd never thought any differently.

Unqualified Weasels All Around (1)

RobinEggs (1453925) | more than 3 years ago | (#35453798)

Wow...so we've got three choices: a guy who openly declares his current employer to be an advertising company masquerading as a benevolent information broker; a former boss of the most corrupt, cynical corporation in an industry that's famous all around for bribes, price fixing, and bad science for profit; and a bureaucrat.
Is this Russian roulette or what?

Wise choice. (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 3 years ago | (#35453804)

Someone as naive as Eric Schmidt would be perfect, because hes naive but also commercially connected.

Donald Trump for president! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35453954)

Sarah Palin for vice president! Paris Hilton as speaker of the house. Gonna be a blast!!

A least something different (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35454036)

He is not from Goldman Sachs or any other Wall Street company. I also prefer him over an ex-CEO of Pfizer.

Good choice! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35454152)

Good choice! He did such a wonderful job with Novel.

Wow great work (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 3 years ago | (#35454320)

Two megacorp CEOs are not only eligible for, but are candidates for the position of commerce secretary. Real smart guys. Real smart.

Re:Wow great work (1)

xMrFishx (1956084) | more than 3 years ago | (#35454522)

Maybe, but he at least understands what a working business model of today is that doesn't involve making half your income by sueing everyone around you.

Jeffrey Kindler (1)

Boghog (910236) | more than 3 years ago | (#35455868)

A burned out CEO from a company that is in a death spiral (Pfizer) seems like a very unlikely choice. Let's hope that US is not following the same trajectory as Pfizer.

Just what we don't want (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35456092)

A "know-it-all" in D.C., helping to enact his personal favorite legislation over us all.

Maybe if Schmidt changes his name first, nobody will notice it's him.

God help us.

Just what you need (1)

drsquare (530038) | more than 3 years ago | (#35457778)

With a crushing budget deficit, what better than to appoint someone whose specialisation seems to be international tax dodging. Maybe he can advise all of Americas corporations how to use these 'double dutch' schemes so the US can collapse altogether.

How about...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35458254)

Get Jeff Bezos in there. If anybody understands commerce AND the internet, it's him.

Perfect for Government (1)

Mr Bubble (14652) | more than 3 years ago | (#35460004)

Schmidt will fit right into the new post 9/11 government view of citizen privacy:

If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place.

http://gawker.com/#!5419271/google-ceo-secrets-are-for-filthy-people [gawker.com]

Re:Perfect for Government (1)

dataminator (1447053) | more than 3 years ago | (#35464868)

Yet another fucking idiot using this misquote to manipulate people into believing the exact opposite of what was actually said.

What Schmidt actually said was (paraphrased): "If you do stupid shit you don't want people to know about, don't post it on the internet. Google can't save your ass, neither technically (there are other search engines) nor legally (Google is not immune to legal subpoena)."

Instead of recognizing Schmidt for being one of the few (influential) people out there who actually recognize and warn people about the dangers of Internet privacy issues, his quote gets turned around as if he was saying the exact opposite. Sorry, I'm getting really fed up with the manipulative assholes who consciously misquote him, and the huge amount of stupid idiots who believe and repeat that shit.

Re:Perfect for Government (1)

Mr Bubble (14652) | more than 3 years ago | (#35465424)

Well, sorry, but I am tired of people calling people assholes and fucking idiots because they disagree with the idea or sentiment being proposed. Grow up.

I did not misquote the man, I put his words down verbatim and took the trouble to find the video so that people could judge the content for themselves.

The whole point of the debate is, what if you are not doing stupid shit? What if you are doing research on terrorists because you want to know what makes them tick? What if you looking up something that is not stupid or illegal but that you don't want people to know about?

The entire Google business model is predicated on people trusting you with their information. The fact that he knows that and would make such a remark, leads me to distrust him even more. If I were a shareholder, I would have been cringing. The hope is that the information is private and if it is needed for law enforcement reasons, there better damn well be reasonable suspicion and a warrant signed by a judge. His comments don't reflect that sentiment and smack more of the government's 'if you don't have something to hide you shouldn't fear the invasion of your privacy' line. Have you not been paying attention? We are losing rights.

BTW - it is really tempting to call you names back, but I think we all need to be a little more respectful in our public discourse.

Re:Perfect for Government (1)

dataminator (1447053) | more than 3 years ago | (#35465634)

Ok, since you bother to reply I'll take back calling you names, and apologize for that.

However, while your quote is not falsified by changing the words, I still see it as voluntarily misleading by only quoting the first part, which is really only hedging for what he actually has to say, which is: "If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines -- including Google -- do retain this information for some time and it's important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act and it is possible that all that information could be made available to the authorities."

In other words, he's warning people that Google cannot protect them against the privacy invasion that is the Patriot Act. The oft-quoted first sentence is nothing more than a politically correct disclaimer: "but of course doing bad things is bad and Google doesn't condone it".

Basically, the message is the exact opposite of what is so often claimed, including by you. Schmidt says: "be careful to protect your privacy" and you claim he said "only evil people need privacy". I consider this to be either voluntarily misleading or a pretty strange interpretation of what he said.

Just shows there is no end. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35463906)

This just shows there is no end to the corporate revolving door of CEOs and politicos playing the chair game. We as Citizens are totally fucked.

Businessmen in politics. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35465870)

Businessmen in politics. It's America's problem.

They aren't trained to be educated, to know science, to understand education, or even to understand how the government works.
They are trained to make money and use the people to do so.

If Scientists and Engineers ran the government, we might need some businessmen as assistants to help us understand business, but we wouldn't give a rats ass about what number is in the deficit or how much money can be made through a government office.

If some corporate "exotic lobbyist" runs up to a Businessman's office and offers them three hundred thousand dollars to pass a bill that will get people killed for the sake of money, the businessmen will be coerced by the number.
If some corporate "exotic lobbyist" runs up to a good physicist's office and offers them three hundred thousand dollars, the physicist will spit on his food and tell him to get out and never come back.

However, politics might get seriously screwed up in the whole war thing.
Army brat: We need to buy more M4's for the upcoming troops.
Physicist (AKA Speaker of the House): What? No. The sand will get caught in the gun barrel and increase the chances of a backfire, killing the soldier.
Chemist (AKA Vice President): No. The powder will react with the metals and potentially send some gas down through the gun, exploding the powder.
Astrophysicist (AKA Governor of New York): Chaos theory. Why are we even there?
Neurologist (AKA US Commerce Secretary): They say it's about the terrorism, but, psychologically and neurologically, our presence makes no significant difference.
Businessmen (AKA 2012-elected President): Naah. That doesn't sound right, you guys don't know what you're talking about. We have to be there. We need to separate God from Islam and keep those terrorists in check like we always have.
All Scientists: Mutiny.
People: Mutiny.
1 election later...
Astrophysicist (AKA 2012-emergency-elected President): Off with the war, on with the education.

Kindler (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35495010)

Lordy. Kindler made that short list? Really might want to check out how well Pfizer's done since he took the helm.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...