Google denies evildoing, kills Wave app
Original post made by GoogleWatch, News on Mountain View's largest employer, on Aug 5, 2010
[Web Link The New York Times reports] that a deal is in the offing for Android equipped phones that would "allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content's creators are willing to pay for the privilege."
Such a deal was widely cast among tech bloggers as a violation of Google's "don't be evil" policy. The Huffington Post's headline was "Don't be evil (unless it's profitable)"
Numerous reports said that such a deal would set a precedent and lead to large companies paying to allow trouble-free online access to some sorts of content, such as Google's Youtube, while blocking or slowing down access to other content and online applications.
The deal is said to take advantage of a federal appeals court decision in April that hampers the FCC's ability to regulate broadband service.
Google denied the report in a Twitter post from its [Web Link public policy blog]: "@NYTimes is wrong. We've not had any convos with VZN about paying for carriage of our traffic. We remain committed to an open internet."
[Web Link CNET confirms] that Google is in talks for a deal that would allow traffic priority for certain types of data, such Voice Over Internet Protocol phone data over video data, according to Google CEO Eric Schmidt.
"We're trying to find solutions that bridge between sort of the 'hard-core Net neutrality or else' view and the historic telecom view of no such agreement," Schmidt reportedly told reporters yesterday at a Lake Tahoe technology conference.
In other Google news, the company is [Web Link reportedly going to kill of its Google Wave application soon.] The communications platform, still in beta form, was supposed to replace email and change the way people collaborate in creating documents.
Employees-turned-owners revamp Cafe Alto, open new restaurant
By Elena Kadvany | 3 comments | 4,027 views
Judgments - Mental Shortcuts, or Distortions in Reality?
By Caroline Fleck | 2 comments | 349 views