Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump administration backs Oracle in Google fight

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 232 posts

Re: Trump administration backs Oracle in Google fight

#171

Post by duckMuppet »

okaram wrote: post #114
skrowl wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Partisanship bias confirmed! Obama had plenty of evidence of corruption, and that's just ONE past president. - Benghazi - Ordering IRS to target conservative groups - AP Phone Records Scandal - Obamacare / You can keep your doctor - NSA PRISM Surveillance System - ATF Fast and Furious - Rosengate - Holder committing perjury multiple times - VP Biden forcing Ukraine to fire that prosecutor... If you haven't heard of s…

Except that ... Benghazi was an error, no corruption ; the IRS did not target conservative groups, Obamacare did not mandate you change doctors in any way .. Normally I assume it is stupidity rather than malice, but now ...

Well if we're playing loose with language and all:

- the IRS didn't target conservative groups specifically, they just chose to stand down the audits on billionaires and add extra auditing of groups with particular keywords in their name, keywords such as; tea, party, people, patriot, country, or 9/12 to name a few. These tax exempt or applied for exempt status groups were likely funneling money and investigation was needed. Results inconclusive.

- Affordable care act mandated that you could keep your doctor. And you could. You just might not have been able to keep or afford to keep your health care plan. So it's really the fault of the people who didn't keep or couldn't afford to keep their plan, giving the ACA a bad rep.

And my personal favorite, - Hillary may Have ordered action taken on contractors and other actors when she released sensitive documents about certain employees from her private server.

I normally attribute such things to malice, but I've learned to never underestimate the gullibility of people who listen to MSNBC, CNN and occasionally FOX.

Re: Trump administration backs Oracle in Google fight

#172

Post by amanaplanacanal »

chrisco255 wrote: post #118
jorblumesea wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you honestly believe that Trump is in any way on the same "corruption level" as any previous sitting President you're delusional. I'm sorry that reality is getting in the way of the narrative, but it's fairly obvious that he's far worse than any side has elected within living memory. Maybe Nixon is a distant second?

You understand that the Obama administration oversaw an illicit investigation of a political rival on the basis of the Steele dossier, which was bought and paid for by the DNC. The FBI and CIA knew the Russia narrative was false and pushed it anyways. Look if you need a Progressive source for this info because you can't appreciate alternative points of view, then Jimmy Dore did a very good job of breaking it down: ht…

I believe that investigation started before the Steele dossier. Steele was fuel on an already raging fire.

Re: Trump administration backs Oracle in Google fight

#173

Post by tetha »

kickopotomus wrote: post #116
ViViDboarder wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was part of it. This article is light on details, but there was one part of the codebase that was copied verbatim. It was the RangeCheck function. Google argued that the function in question was not copywritable, and judge Alsup agreed (after learning how to write code). [1] It’s unclear to me if the administration only sides with Oracle on this count, or also on reimplementation of APIs, which would have sweepi…

Honestly, I feel that it would almost be worse if the Court ruled in Oracle's favor on the ability to copyright intuitively obvious functions. There are only so may ways to write `return x >= a && x <= b;` that aren't unnecessarily obtuse and contrived. It's honestly tantamount to being able to copyright math itself.

I know this is inappropriate..

but to me, it sounds like a fascinating and hilarious dystopian visions... there'd be entire legal teams dedicated to find, and claim and defend the corporate specific ways to implement.. a range check (NO! Don't put a space there! Oh dear!). Or, if a number is even. And an eternal cultural feud between the "is-even"-clan and the "is-odd"-triad.

Once we include mercenaries hired to steal certificates about a specific is-odd implementation, we're in a really weird kind of cyberpunk or shadow run.

Also, don't count the number of paragraphs in this comment and think about them. Don't! Or else!

Re: Trump administration backs Oracle in Google fight

#174

Post by saghm »

blackflame7000 wrote: post #167
paulmd wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because there was absolutely nothing to be gained from testifying. Conservatives were going to go after her regardless of what she said, so why talk at all? It's the ultimate "don't talk to cops", nothing you can say can ever help you and everything you say can hurt you, except Congressional Republicans don't even have to adhere to the very low standards that cops do. They can literally just say whatever, so there is…

Pretty Ironic that this is the excuse you’re going with after all the times your party lambasted Trump for doing similar things. Your belief in the ends justifying the means is the root of all your hypocrisy. People are sick of hearing why it’s ok for you but not for them. You will lose badly this year as a result. For god sakes you have Bloomberg running after half your party was just outside occupying wall street n…

> For god sakes you have Bloomberg running after half your party was just outside occupying wall street no less than 3 years ago.

Independent of all the other points under discussion, I'm not sure how this is a fair a critique? It's not like there's a vote to decide who gets to run in a primary; the whole point of a primary is to vote to see who gets to run, and that isn't anywhere near being decided yet. If five months from now he gets nominated, that's another story, but there's not much evidence to suggest that will be the case.

Re: Trump administration backs Oracle in Google fight

#175

Post by AlexCoventry »

jorblumesea wrote: post #99
chrisco255 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Partisanship cuts both ways and if you're too ignorant to see your own bias and through the narrative spin on your own side of the aisle, then you're like a fish that doesn't know its wet.

If you honestly believe that Trump is in any way on the same "corruption level" as any previous sitting President you're delusional. I'm sorry that reality is getting in the way of the narrative, but it's fairly obvious that he's far worse than any side has elected within living memory. Maybe Nixon is a distant second?

Warren Harding

Re: Trump administration backs Oracle in Google fight

#176

Post by foobar_ »

ticmasta wrote: post #71
0xff00ffee wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both. 50 years of people cynically saying "all politicians are crooks". And now we have legitimate sleazeballs running the country and nobody believes it. On the one hand, Google is huge and needs competition. On the other hand: not this way. Antitrust and monopoly laws exist for a reason, but if you look at telephones in the 80's and microsoft & intel in the 90's, better lawyers get you around that. We need trustbus…

how many hands do you have :) The story could largely be reduced to: Giant Multinational sues Giant Multinational; both gain support of other Giant Multinationals while World's Most Powerful Government sides with plaintiff Giant Multinational. The EFF needs to 100,000x larger to influence this level of game.

Throw shoes at Ellison. 10000s of shoes with flyers in them about FSF ;)

This is just another iteration of BSD vs UNIX.

This is so silly. It's like every toy compiler has to pay a license because it looks like "C", even if you make money and other software with it.

As long as they did not "literally" steal the code, I don't see any reason to bother with Oracle's defense.

The same thing happens with MPAA and others, where the actual creators hardly get much but "abstract" corporates get a lot. How long should the copyright law hold? No more than the lifetime of the author. They have made a corporation an abstract person, giving it all sorts of inalienable rights. Lulz ... if that's how you want to go, every time someone in a company commits suicide, the entire corporation needs to be charged with murder and the entire team needs to be thrown in jail and be charged for murder. Every privacy violation would be espionage charges .....

Re: Trump administration backs Oracle in Google fight

#177

Post by scarface74 »

homonculus1 wrote: post #134
pstuart wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the same government The same branch of the same country, but with changes in who occupies it they can be vastly different. I greatly dislike the "both sides are the same" narrative, but there were some strong elements of consistency regardless of occupant. The current administration is an entirely new beast that reflects the whims of a single individual. We are in uncharted waters now.

It is the same government. Every power the current administration has at its disposal was granted or expanded at some point in the past into what it is now. The Trump administration is not a paradigm shift toward obscene federal executive power, it has been this way for a long time. The small-government counterargument has always been "You are not going to like this new power when it's inevitably in the hands of the…

While the last thing I want is a “War on Guns” because it will end up just like the “War on Drugs”. It will give another excuse for the government to enforce laws much more harshly on poor and minorities.

But at the same time, it’s just silly to think that a reason to own guns is in case the government wants to impose martial law. We are talking about the government with the largest military in the world - with tanks, jet fighters, bombs etc. The 2nd amendment is not going to protect you from a hypothetical fascist government.

Re: Trump administration backs Oracle in Google fight

#178

Post by blackflame7000 »

saghm wrote: post #174
blackflame7000 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty Ironic that this is the excuse you’re going with after all the times your party lambasted Trump for doing similar things. Your belief in the ends justifying the means is the root of all your hypocrisy. People are sick of hearing why it’s ok for you but not for them. You will lose badly this year as a result. For god sakes you have Bloomberg running after half your party was just outside occupying wall street n…

> For god sakes you have Bloomberg running after half your party was just outside occupying wall street no less than 3 years ago. Independent of all the other points under discussion, I'm not sure how this is a fair a critique? It's not like there's a vote to decide who gets to run in a primary; the whole point of a primary is to vote to see who gets to run, and that isn't anywhere near being decided yet. If five mon…

It's a fair critique when he went from 4% to 19% in two weeks after spending 400 million on TV ads. I mean we all know the DNC will choose whomever they want because of their superdelegates, but don't act like democrats aren't starting to view him as their best option.

You aren't the victim of division, you are the creator of it.

Re: Trump administration backs Oracle in Google fight

#180

Post by zepto »

scarface74 wrote: post #177
homonculus1 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is the same government. Every power the current administration has at its disposal was granted or expanded at some point in the past into what it is now. The Trump administration is not a paradigm shift toward obscene federal executive power, it has been this way for a long time. The small-government counterargument has always been "You are not going to like this new power when it's inevitably in the hands of the…

While the last thing I want is a “War on Guns” because it will end up just like the “War on Drugs”. It will give another excuse for the government to enforce laws much more harshly on poor and minorities. But at the same time, it’s just silly to think that a reason to own guns is in case the government wants to impose martial law. We are talking about the government with the largest military in the world - with tanks…

This assumes they throw a ‘martial law’ knife switch and instantly the armed forces turn into fascist enforcers willing to slaughter their own families rather than protect them.

Clearly not realistic.

Post reply on HN