|The Colbert Report||Mon – Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c|
|Colbert Super PAC SHH! – Secret Second 501c4 – Trevor Potter|
By Louis Goddard (The Verge) The Court of Appeal of England and Wales has ordered Apple to pay the legal fees of competitor Samsung on an ‘indemnity basis’ after the company published a “false and misleading” notice in the wake of a patent lawsuit over the iPad. The judgement, intended to humiliate Apple, will require the company to pay a majority of the expenses associated with Samsung’s legal defense, with any disputes over the exact amount likely to be resolved in the latter firm’s favor.
By Brian Stelter (NY Times) MSNBC, a unit of NBCUniversal, has a long way to go to overtake the Fox News Channel, a unit of News Corporation: on most nights this year, Fox had two million more viewers than MSNBC.
But the two channels, which skew toward an audience that is 55 or older, are on average separated by fewer than 300,000 viewers in the 25- to 54-year-old demographic that advertisers desire. On three nights in a row after the election last week, MSNBC — whose hosts reveled in Mr. Obama’s victory — had more viewers than Fox in that demographic.
By Stefan Constantinescu (Android Authority) Every iPhone or iPad or iPod touch that you see in the wild, they all have processors inside that were manufactured by Samsung. Samsung, knowing that Apple simply can’t call another company and ask them to make their chips, raised the prices of said chips by 20% according to MarketWatch. There’s not much Apple can do, and the report confirms that, saying Apple accepted the price bump.
Why did Samsung bump up the prices of their chips? To screw Apple, obviously, but more importantly to make sure that Samsung can keep a greater share of what their factories spit out. The fewer processors Samsung makes for Apple, the more they can make for themselves.
Never mind spies, Gmail reads everything you write so it can feed you the right ads. –Jules Siegel
By Max Fisher (Washington Post) The beginning of the end came for CIA Director David Petraeus when Paula Broadwell, a younger married woman with whom he was having an affair, “or someone close to her had sought access to his email,” according to the Wall Street Journal’s description of an FBI probe. Associates of Petraeus had received “anonymous harassing emails” that were then traced to Broadwell, ABC’s Martha Raddatz reported, suggesting she may have found their names or addresses in his e-mail.
The e-mail account was apparently Petraeus’s personal Gmail, not his official CIA e-mail, according to the Wall Street Journal. That’s still a big deal: Some of the most powerful foreign spy agencies in the world would love to have an opening, however small, into the personal e-mail account of the man who runs the United States’ spy service. The information could have proved of enormous value to foreign hackers, who already maintain a near-constant effort to access sensitive U.S. data.
If Petraeus allowed his Gmail security to be compromised even slightly, by widening access, sharing passwords or logging in from multiple addresses, it would have brought foreign spy agencies that much closer to a treasure trove of information.