Google has posted today a rambling history approximately concerning its algorithm for parsing what we type on our keyboards, but the narrative has the tone of a deliberately fragmentated, popularized, and vaguely overprotective presentation of its way of conceptualizing how to grow the Google platforms’ profiling capabilities. I still think the chafing over the 700MHz spectrum auction is a salient place to observe incumbent Telco anxiety over competitiveness and altered revenue streams with the new comms hub paradigm Google is incubating, and that the retroactive tort-relief sought in the wiretap scandal is an issue onto which to piggyback the telcos’ next gen marketing plans. One of the linchpins has to be fiscal liquidity in this clash, which is why Google and Microsoft are at the front of the pack nipping at usta members’ heels. Yahoo may enjoy rejuvenation, and some trimming, after the m+a hassle with Microsoft resolves. Y is in no position to compete as a standalone company with Google now, if measured solely by current stock value of the respective companies. There is some interesting writing in business and tech literature stipulating the barriers Google and Microsoft face are similar processes of endemic senescence.

GOOGLE OFFERS BETA OF FREE UNIFIED MESSAGING SERVICE

Google has opened up a free unified messaging and phone management
service to users of its Blogger platform.

News of limited beta of its GrandCentral service is creating some
buzz. GrandCentral has been mostly silent since the startup was
bought by Google last June. Until now, it had been available only by
private invitation.

GrandCentral offers users a free local phone number. Users can set
their account so that incoming calls to their one phone number are
directed to any of their phones – office, home or mobile – based on a
set of rules, such as time of day and identity of the caller.
GrandCentral also provides its users a centralized voicemail system
that can be accessed by phone or online. The service can also …

Read full story.
http://go.techtarget.com/r/3187899/1733941

Notice that this is tied to a Blogger account, not a Gmail account.

Most interesting.

WilliamOckham (5) — I disagree about MSFT getting pressured; they’ve already caved in so many different ways and allowed themselves to be co-opted, in exchange for getting a built-in preference for their products. You’ll see states like MA that are rejecting standardization around MSFT’s OOXML as not open enough — but you don’t see the USGOVT doing that, do you? Yahoo’s likely caved, even though they’re in a no-win situation. They caved to China’s demands on blocking access, for example, had Lantos calling them “ethical pygmies”; bet you they rolled over in order to stem the bleeding.

What an effing joke, that; why wasn’t he worried about other search engines, or competitors like Amazon, or the damned ISP’s and telecom companies…

I would like to ask Google: how’d you piss off Hastert, and please, could you do it again?

Dear Mr. Tuttle
Thank you for your communication regarding S.2248, the FISA Amendments Act of 2007.

S.2248 was passed by the Senate, as amended, on Feb. 12, 2008, by a vote of 68-29. I supported S. 2248, which included the Title II limited immunity provision for telecommunications companies, because I believe this legislation is a first step in addressing the civil liberties and privacy concerns raised by the President’s Terroist Surveillance Program. In addition, this legislation will provide our intelligence agencies with the tools and capabilities they require to defend all of us.

Protecting our civil liberties and the privacy of all Americans is fundamental to our founding principles, and violations of those principles should not be taken lightly. In the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, our nation’s security became a top priority, and Americans came together willing to offer any assistance in our common defence. It is in this spirit of rallying to protect American lives that I believe the telecommunications companies now facing civil suits acted when they agreed to assist the President. In my opinion these companies acted in good faith that the cooperation the President sought was within the boundaries of our legal system.

We cherish our freedoms and liberties. They are the cornerstones of our American democracy that must be defended and protected, and it is elusive and delicate balance that we constantly strive to acheive. We must not allow the actions of this Administration to jeopardize our nation’s security in the future. It is equally imprudent to ignore the impact those actions have on our freedoms and liberties, or we will concede the basic principles this nation was founded upon.

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me on this important matter.

Aloha

If they had acted in good faith and legally, why would they need Immunity? WTF???

CCIA’s mission is to further our members’ business interests by being the leading industry advocate in promoting open, barrier-free competition in the offering of computer and communications products and services worldwide.

CCIA Members

CCIA’s advocacy of “open, barrier-free competition” should get the attention of the House.

So…is that really laying it out there that they were told to do it and if it ever came up the government sort of promised it would paper over any constitutional violations? Is that what that says? Hellloooo