herostratus101

Yes, also Elon.

LOL, $99/month for a gimmick service worth $0.

I think you mean that the committee comprises humans.

That's simple, we only burn the bad books!

How does this apply to the parent post, but not the grandparent?

Very low quality article, does not give any reasons at all why TSMC believes this (and they have an ulterior motive). Just a naked assertion.

"In Chess, you win when you take the King, which in effect has infinite point value, and it is relatively uncommon to come to a draw."

Great article, but this guy clearly does not follow competitive chess. The vast majority of games end in a draw.

Extremely unhealthy binge-eating of unhealthy foods in the obese girls paired with bouts of bulimia that never worked.

Mostly plant-based/vegan diets and yoga/other forms of exercise in the thin ones.

Another uncomfortable truth for overwhelmingly overweight Americans: fat-shaming seems to work.

Anecdotally, the girls I know whose parents/family criticized them when they started to get fat never became truly fat and the ones whose parents were completely laissez-faire about it are now whales.

Sure, they can. Should they? And should they be allowed to looking forward, or are they now an active threat to democracy? By the way, I say this speaking as a conservative who opposes basically everything the Socialist Workers Party stands for, but who is more threatened by autocratic tech censorship than by opposing ideas.

The pricing for this is ridiculous. Far easier to just unsubscribe + report to spam + set a filter if that doesn't work. This takes almost no time for me currently because I unsubscribe diligently.

I think you're confusing YouTube's "free speech" with YouTube's ability to censor anything they want. I have no issue with Google uploading YouTube videos or blog posts spreading essentially whatever message the company wants to spread.

This seems more complicated and significantly more expensive than hosting a static site from S3 and using a Cloudfront distribution to enforce SSL.

Does Google Drive not charge users based on data transfer? With S3 this would not be an issue, but either the uploader or the downloader (with "requester pays" buckets) would end up covering the cost.

Yeah, relax guys, we only burn the bad books!

You're completely missing the point. I'm making an argument about how companies should behave, not how they are legally obligated to.

Incidentally, YouTube, Twitter, etc. should be subject to far stricter regulation when they enforce speech codes and don't behave as neutral platforms.

You presumably also would be in favor of domain brokers restricting speech (correct me if I'm wrong). Does every controversial political speaker also need to host his or her own ICANN domain? Or should they just promote their speech entirely offline?

You can have a fairly minimal degree of censorship limited to actual criminal speech. There's no reason why platforms can't adopt that as their standard.

This is a fairly cheap argument. Presumably the reasons why it's bad for the government to ban speech are also largely applicable to platforms that are almost universally used to discover new viewpoints.

We only burn the bad books!

Real World Tech (David Kanter)

Good for Amazon for not caving to activist pressure. Google's past fecklessness in this domain has come to haunt it.

Not enough people make it into their 80s to have a large vulnerable population. Mystery solved.

I happened to start reading it a few weeks ago. The book is even better than the movie, and the movie is one of my favorite horror films of all time.

Whatever the advantages of GCP, they don't amount to "technical superiority" imo.

The fact that Oracle's main relational database offerings are still the most technologically sophisticated does not mean that Oracle Cloud is technologically superior to AWS (or GCP for that matter). It just means that they beat the other cloud providers at one thing.

AWS offers hundreds of very mature, extremely reliable services, many of which have either no competition or half-assed clones with few of the same features.

Serverless is a great example of this. GCP and Azure both have serverless offerings, but neither of them has the equivalent of Lambda Layers, which has been groundbreaking.

Even if we grant that Google's network is better, how can you point to that single dimension and claim that GCP is a better cloud platform? For most business's use cases it would be professional malpractice to recommend GCP over AWS or Azure.

> While what they offer is technically superior to all their competitors

No it's not...

> The tougher part is perhaps not technical, but human. Facebook will have to build out an enterprise sales and support team that is culturally and operationally very different from running an ad-supported social network. Google, also a primarily ad-supported company, suffered from this “identity crisis” and is still trying to catch up to AWS and Azure, despite offering what many believe is a superior technical product.

Who on earth believes that GCP is in the same universe as even Azure, let alone AWS?

Oh, there have been lots of great indie films, to be sure. Most of them made outside of America. The majority of Hollywood is garbage though.

No, they're mostly plotless, capeshit, superhero garbage flicks that pander to international audiences. To be clear though, 1930s movies are also bad. But the golden era was not the last decade.