281–290 of 428 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone reading this on Chrome should switch their browser today. Get off of Gmail while you're at it. There is no perfect alternative, but all those reasons why you think you can't switch don't add up to anything a fraction as bad as what Google is doing.
What's a good alternative to gmail? Fastmail? Protonmail? Other? I don't mind paying a small subscription.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am very much interested in furthering this discussion. Every so often there is something big like this in the news, we talk about it for a few days and then forget about it. Nothing substantially changes. No big consequences for the guilty. How do we fix this?
Stop using their junk. Delete your facebook, switch to fastmail or protonmail. Join patreaon and support content creators directly. There are plenty of things you can do you just have to start doing them.
What can we as people in top 1% with 1) information about big tech abuses 2) skills to fix this do? Individually we can use browsers like firefox or brave and probably donate time or money to them, but I think it's not enough. I think we would need something like a movement against those abuses, but probably the biggest win would be a business model that could win with them in the free market. Is this possible? Has a…
Incentivize the economy to not overproduce bullshit ad nauseam. Vote with your wallet, and push for it culturally, or spiritually - offer alternative experiences and goals to consumerism. Stop working for companies producing products nobody asked for, which are made for “economic growth” as a goal in it self. (If your factual constraints allow for it.) As long as there is this enormous pressure to sell you ever more…
I don't think it's possible for something to have less sex appeal than an online advertising scam named after a star wars character
I think they were riffing off 'Have Blue'.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless you've enabled DoH, it shouldn't.
This whole thread is about Google doing things they shouldn't.
> Re: forced Chrome logins. Don't need cookies if you own the browser! ( https://twitter.com/fasterthanlime/status/145209451374118912... ) The swindle with FLOC was pretty obviously tied in this, but people still went in circles discussing whether it's private or not, and downvoting those who said FLOC is a trap. Let's consult the plan, nothing is even secret about this: - Google disables third-party cookies, crippli…
Everyone reading this on Chrome should switch their browser today. Get off of Gmail while you're at it. There is no perfect alternative, but all those reasons why you think you can't switch don't add up to anything a fraction as bad as what Google is doing.
The most "surprising" thing for me as a mathematician is that Google publishes a lot of top notch research on bidding and pricing theory. But it's all rigged in the end. So Google pushed the perverseness as far as basically creating a fake research lab to cover it all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the thing though. They don't need more money. So why not try to make the world a better place for once? I know they donate to charity but they're uniquely well positioned to influence one of the biggest, and most dangerous, tech company on the planet. I wonder. Do they care? Do they have personal problems that makes the rest seem insignificant? Or do they believe they're truly making the world better?
No, they don’t care. If they did, their relatively paltry donations to charity would be closer to 95% of their net worth at any given moment. They are wholly incapable of spending their current ~$100b, growing at insane rates YoY, in their lifetimes.
This argument I don't understand https://twitter.com/fasterthanlime/status/145206648791366451... Using the median page load time is one of the best tools for analyzing effective load speedups. Sounds legit to me, and they're just trying to speak to the jury.
A non-AMP site could be just as fast as an AMP site (minus the initial prefetching) or even faster by not requiring all the AMP-specific stuff, but in practice, the AMP sites were a minimal rewrite of the full site, leaving behind the popups, autoplaying videos, 40 different trackers, ads from 5 different companies, etc.
AMP overcame the inertia of just leaving all the crap in and incrementally adding more by forcing the rewrite. Over time, as the publishers had more time to crappify the AMP versions too, they became worse.
Cost of doing business. If the penalty costs less than the profit they make they will keep doing it.
Or if it allows them to build a hard-to-break market position (see e.g. how Intel destroyed AMD, the fines couldn't undo that).