zajd

Ahh yes, multinational corporations worth hundreds of billions, also known as the left. Insightful.

> Every two party accident has at least two parties that could have done something different that would have prevented the accident.

Be sure to tell this to the family of someone who died when a drunk driver crossed the lanes and hits them head on

> do you think mozilla should continue including un-used features in their browser just because you like the technology that underpins them?

It's not unused, but sure, keep repeating that to yourself. And yes, they should continue including it. What exactly do they gain by removing it?

There's a reason Feedly has millions of users and it's not because RSS is dead and nobody cares.

He doesn't really address the most difficult Google service to give up, YouTube. There's literally no replacement, especially from a content perspective. There are alternative search/email/map providers, there just isn't one for YouTube.

It's because they use systems that identify the client via js to deliver the most "expensive" ad possible. It's complete garbage of course, Google/Facebook should be held liable for what they advertise, not run massive automated systems full of fraud. If Google delivers malware they shouldn't be able to throw their hands up and go "well, section 230!".

Sure, this is by profession group/sector, do they have statistics that are by income? ie what share of the increase went to each quintile, for example.

You can do all of those analytics server side, there's no reason to deliver it via JS and have the client do the computation. You're already sending all the required info to track that sort of thing via the request itself.

I'm guessing a vast majority of that 2.9% wage growth is in the upper brackets anyways.

https://fortunedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2017/09/income_cha... for reference from a few years ago, it would be shocking if things have changed

> They need data to produce the product

[citation needed]

There's no reason they need to use Javascript to track user behavior down to "how long have they read this article".

> Somehow I doubt anyone is going to agree to pay more in taxes to cover pensions in their state or city. After all, why should the government keep its promises (especially if it means we have to pay for it)?

I agree with it but then again I'm not opposed to paying taxes. Why shouldn't we provide for the retirement of our workforce?

A few home users?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwQpPqPKbAw

Man, some really questionable use of animations and things in here. Hopefully the website isn't the message, because lord knows any sort of advanced lifeform isn't going to put up with that crap.

Or they would be forced to charge for their services and actually compete in the market. Fastmail/protonmail exist, there's no reason Gmail couldn't charge $10/mo and provide the same services

It's a symptom of a greater problem, which is that Google (the search engine) owns Chrome, Youtube, Android, Maps, Gmail, and a whole host of other services that are tenuously linked at best (outside of the fact that all the data gets fed into advertising algorithms)

Quite frankly, the company should be broken up forcibly by the government. All of these services should be profitable on their own, not used as loss leaders to grab as much ad data as possible and stamp out any sort of competition.

> someone sworn to protect Americans now cowers behind semantics and loopholes to exploit their trust

This is pretty American if you ask me

What makes you think Somalia doesn't suffer from rampant inequality?

Distributed =/= decentralized.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_root_zone

> Notably, lots of people who make median-ish income save every penny for retirement and accumulate a lot of wealth

Not even in the same ballpark. You're not getting to $100mm in wealth on a $50k salary. But you can be born in to it overnight. Or make that in one day in the market if you're Bezos.

> We tried not to make it sound too lawyerly

Who's we? Did you have a part in writing this? What does "not make it sound too lawyerly" even mean? This press release screams "we made a mistake but we're going to use paragraph after paragraph to ensure we don't actually say that". I have a hard time believing that the people who make up the Google Cloud team don't recognize this.

It's not unrelated. If people want to wax poetic about how much social good an organization who's on record as breaking the law to fund neonazi groups they should probably provide a reason for the justification.

Running the fundraising infrastructure for neonazis isn't really "social good" if you ask me.

> I think the case could be made that sales tactics like this are common at nearly all major retailers

That's why these sorts of tactics need to be made illegal. The US desperately needs better consumer protections, the amount of scams and misinformation flying around is dizzying.

What about the things that China has that we don't? Like high speed rail networks? Or things we both don't have, like university that doesn't cost an arm and a leg to attend?

> China is still a developing nation.

> That means that China can invest in infrastructure (roads, trains, airports, education) which have high real return making the increase in debt much less of a problem.

What does that have to do with being a developing nation? The US could do the same.

My safety and freedom aren't guaranteed, they are rewarded by me working in a lucrative job. If I wasn't fortunate to have the career I do there would be no safety or freedom. I'll agree it's easier to be critical of the US in the US as opposed to being critical of China in China but that's not the only thing that matters if you're talking about authoritarianism and human rights abuses.

I mean, you could make an argument that the UK or Germany might not participate as much as China, but the US is certainly one of the world leaders in stomping on human rights. Forget the homeless population and separating families, just look at our mass incarceration programs. We have something like five times the percentage of our population in prison as opposed to China.

My point isn't to say China is good, only that participating in human rights abuses and authoritarianism are endemic to all the major powers and there's no point in singling China out here. If you're working for the government chances are you're working for an organization that is authoritarian and abuses human rights.

So is working with the US, or Britain, or like 90% of the governments in the world (hell, probably closer to 100%)

It's a dark pattern and what led me to unsubscribe. See also: getting rid of the five star rating system (I realize this wasn't ideal in terms of figuring out what people want but it was invaluable for cataloging your own preferences)

>Log into Facebook

>You must log in to continue.

Seriously?