Guy L. "Bud" Tribble, MD, PhD, is Vice President of Software Technology at Apple Inc. Tribble served as the manager of the original Macintosh software development team where he helped to design the Mac OS and user interface.[1] He was among the founders of NeXT, Inc., serving as NeXT's vice president of software development.[2] Bud is one of the industry’s top experts in software design and object-oriented programming.[3]
Tribble's career includes time at Sun Microsystems and Eazel. At Eazel, he was vice president of Engineering leading development of next generation user interface software and Internet services for Linux computers.[4] Tribble was also chief technology officer for the Sun-Netscape Alliance, responsible for guiding Internet and e-commerce software R&D. Tribble earned a BA degree in Physics at the University of California, San Diego and an MD and PhD in Biophysics and Physiology at the University of Washington, Seattle.
Originally Posted by Congressional Internet Caucus Advisory Committee
Alan Davidson is the head of U.S. public policy for Google. Alan opened Google's Washington DC office in 2005. He has written and spoken widely on Internet policy issues including privacy, free speech, encryption, network neutrality, and copyright online.
Prior to joining Google, Alan was Associate Director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a public interest group promoting Internet civil liberties. Starting in 2000 he has also served as an Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University's program in Communications, Culture, and Technology.
Like many Googlers, Alan started professional life as a computer scientist. He worked as a Senior Consultant at Booz-Allen & Hamilton, where he helped design information systems for NASA's Space Station Freedom. Alan has an S.B. in Mathematics and Computer Science and an S.M. in Technology and Policy from MIT, and a J.D. from Yale Law School.
Also note that Google is a member of the Congressional Internet Caucus Advisory Committee, whereas Apple is not. http://www.netcaucus.org/advisory/
Here's the list from the same source for Obama's opponent, John McCain. Notice where your culprits are on his list. These companies hedge their bets by playing both sides.
Top Contributors to John McCain 2008
Merrill Lynch\t$373,595
Citigroup Inc\t$322,051
Morgan Stanley\t$273,452
Goldman Sachs\t$230,095
JPMorgan Chase & Co\t$228,107
US Government\t$208,379
AT&T Inc\t$201,438
Wachovia Corp\t$195,063
UBS AG\t$192,493
Credit Suisse Group\t$183,353
PricewaterhouseCoopers\t$167,900
US Army\t$167,820
Bank of America\t$166,026
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher\t$159,596
Blank Rome LLP\t$154,226
Greenberg Traurig LLP\t$146,437
US Dept of Defense\t$144,105
FedEx Corp\t$131,974
Bear Stearns\t$117,498
Lehman Brothers\t$114,357
Wow, that is quite a big disparity between the parties. Goldman Sachs gives Obama nearly $1 million, but gives McCain only $230,000? I don't think that's called playing both sides, that's called throwing a bone to McCain just to make him think he hasn't been forgotten.
I had high hopes upon Franken's election to the Senate. He's a smart guy and I generally share his political philosophy. But I'm wondering what he was thinking in calling this hearing. I'm not saying there aren't real issues in general that need addressing. But the particular issue that spawned this hearing--"tracking gate"-- has been blown out of proportion. By going nuclear on it he comes off looking like just another congressional witch hunter. Either he is not aware that level heads have judged this matter overblown, or his politics are more libertarian than progressive. Either way I am a little disappointed.
Or, he sees the publicity the issue this generated as the perfect time to focus attention on, and raise the level of public awareness of, the problem of private companies engaged in mass cyber-stalking of citizens. Sounds pretty progressive to me. I'd wait to see how the hearings go before getting disappointed.
Wow, that is quite a big disparity between the parties. Goldman Sachs gives Obama nearly $1 million, but gives McCain only $230,000? I don't think that's called playing both sides, that's called throwing a bone to McCain just to make him think he hasn't been forgotten.
That's called hedging your bets. The probably apportioned their donations based on the total amount budgeted and the perceived odds of each candidate winning. So, Goldman obviously rated Obama as a 4:1 favorite to win the election.
Back on topic, it is worth noting Apple already fixed the issue in iOS. So I am happy, even if my god dammed horse didn't win.
Yeah. If this congressional hearing focuses on technology, Apple will do fine. However, if it becomes a political game, Google is much better positioned than Apple to play that game, it seems to me.
Regardless of the intent or outcome of the hearings, Google and Apple have different views on privacy issues. Google is investing in the political space to promote its views. Apple doesn't seem to be doing that.
Comments
Same pay as Warren Buffett I believe. Couldn't have anything to do with taxes on capital gains of course.
No.
Not even sure what (remote) connection is.
this trimble guy, whats he do?
Sounds like a techie. Here's his wiki entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bud_Tribble ):
Guy L. "Bud" Tribble, MD, PhD, is Vice President of Software Technology at Apple Inc. Tribble served as the manager of the original Macintosh software development team where he helped to design the Mac OS and user interface.[1] He was among the founders of NeXT, Inc., serving as NeXT's vice president of software development.[2] Bud is one of the industry’s top experts in software design and object-oriented programming.[3]
Tribble's career includes time at Sun Microsystems and Eazel. At Eazel, he was vice president of Engineering leading development of next generation user interface software and Internet services for Linux computers.[4] Tribble was also chief technology officer for the Sun-Netscape Alliance, responsible for guiding Internet and e-commerce software R&D. Tribble earned a BA degree in Physics at the University of California, San Diego and an MD and PhD in Biophysics and Physiology at the University of Washington, Seattle.
Whereas the Google guy sounds like a dyed in the wool lobbyist (http://www.netcaucus.org/biography/alan-davidson.shtml ):
Alan Davidson is the head of U.S. public policy for Google. Alan opened Google's Washington DC office in 2005. He has written and spoken widely on Internet policy issues including privacy, free speech, encryption, network neutrality, and copyright online.
Prior to joining Google, Alan was Associate Director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a public interest group promoting Internet civil liberties. Starting in 2000 he has also served as an Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University's program in Communications, Culture, and Technology.
Like many Googlers, Alan started professional life as a computer scientist. He worked as a Senior Consultant at Booz-Allen & Hamilton, where he helped design information systems for NASA's Space Station Freedom. Alan has an S.B. in Mathematics and Computer Science and an S.M. in Technology and Policy from MIT, and a J.D. from Yale Law School.
Also note that Google is a member of the Congressional Internet Caucus Advisory Committee, whereas Apple is not. http://www.netcaucus.org/advisory/
Here's the list from the same source for Obama's opponent, John McCain. Notice where your culprits are on his list. These companies hedge their bets by playing both sides.
Top Contributors to John McCain 2008
Merrill Lynch\t$373,595
Citigroup Inc\t$322,051
Morgan Stanley\t$273,452
Goldman Sachs\t$230,095
JPMorgan Chase & Co\t$228,107
US Government\t$208,379
AT&T Inc\t$201,438
Wachovia Corp\t$195,063
UBS AG\t$192,493
Credit Suisse Group\t$183,353
PricewaterhouseCoopers\t$167,900
US Army\t$167,820
Bank of America\t$166,026
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher\t$159,596
Blank Rome LLP\t$154,226
Greenberg Traurig LLP\t$146,437
US Dept of Defense\t$144,105
FedEx Corp\t$131,974
Bear Stearns\t$117,498
Lehman Brothers\t$114,357
Wow, that is quite a big disparity between the parties. Goldman Sachs gives Obama nearly $1 million, but gives McCain only $230,000? I don't think that's called playing both sides, that's called throwing a bone to McCain just to make him think he hasn't been forgotten.
I had high hopes upon Franken's election to the Senate. He's a smart guy and I generally share his political philosophy. But I'm wondering what he was thinking in calling this hearing. I'm not saying there aren't real issues in general that need addressing. But the particular issue that spawned this hearing--"tracking gate"-- has been blown out of proportion. By going nuclear on it he comes off looking like just another congressional witch hunter. Either he is not aware that level heads have judged this matter overblown, or his politics are more libertarian than progressive. Either way I am a little disappointed.
Or, he sees the publicity the issue this generated as the perfect time to focus attention on, and raise the level of public awareness of, the problem of private companies engaged in mass cyber-stalking of citizens. Sounds pretty progressive to me. I'd wait to see how the hearings go before getting disappointed.
Wow, that is quite a big disparity between the parties. Goldman Sachs gives Obama nearly $1 million, but gives McCain only $230,000? I don't think that's called playing both sides, that's called throwing a bone to McCain just to make him think he hasn't been forgotten.
That's called hedging your bets. The probably apportioned their donations based on the total amount budgeted and the perceived odds of each candidate winning. So, Goldman obviously rated Obama as a 4:1 favorite to win the election.
Back on topic, it is worth noting Apple already fixed the issue in iOS. So I am happy, even if my god dammed horse didn't win.
Yeah. If this congressional hearing focuses on technology, Apple will do fine. However, if it becomes a political game, Google is much better positioned than Apple to play that game, it seems to me.
Regardless of the intent or outcome of the hearings, Google and Apple have different views on privacy issues. Google is investing in the political space to promote its views. Apple doesn't seem to be doing that.