3 ms·

Wait a guy who works for a company that uses the world's most popular website (the google search homepage) to aggressively proselytize it's own browser is compl

by jgon 8y ago

Wait a guy who works for a company that uses the world's most popular website (the google search homepage) to aggressively proselytize it's own browser is complaining about Windows prompting you to use Edge? For real dude? Edit: I'll expand. You work for a company the bundled Chrome as a default install with many other toolbars and utility programs. You sell a line of computing products where Chrome is not only the default, it is literally the only browser than can be installed. Chrome is the default browser on the world's most popular OS (Android). Multiple Google properties have refused to work on other browsers and displayed a popup asking people to switch the Chrome (Inbox is the one I remember most vividly). Here's a link to people trying to figure out how to get Chrome to stop asking to be default every time it opens: https://www.tenforums.com/browsers-email/59843-how-stop-google-chrome-not-your-default-browser-message.html https://www.tenforums.com/browsers-email/59843-how-stop-goog... As you can see it's not exactly an easy task. All of this, and probably more, and you're here talking about what Windows does? C'mon man.

dontblink 8y ago
What does that have to do with his point? Could you address his comment instead? "C'mon man."
- jgon 8y ago
  He doesn't have a point. He has whataboutism. So I decided to address his whataboutism by pointing out that Google is honestly even worse at what he is talking about, and thus his whataboutism is in fact invalid. So in a roundabout way I did address his "point".
  - DannyBee 8y ago
    You certainly have an interesting perspective on what you did there. That comment would be equally as worthwhile and useful if you had started it with some other form of bias to justify it like "Wait, a woman who is black ...." If your comment starts with some form of "well you are an x so ...", it's probably not actually addressing anything other than your own interesting biases against people. Or you know, just dismiss whatever you want with bias and claims of whataboutism. I guess that works too! Despite your claim of whataboutism, i'm instead showing the author is incredibly conveniently eliding large parts of actual history in trying to make their point. You may want to argue those shouldn't matter (or make it worse). That's at least a more valid argument than you made. I would argue if you asked most people they do in fact matter because the world is not an abstract idealist paradise. The internet definitely never has been in the past, so saying it isn't in the future is not particular interesting.
DannyBee 8y ago
I am so unbelievably tired of the hacker news "you work for company x and therefore your opinion is tainted and you aren't allowed to have personal opinions" crap I don't even know where to begin. It's just another form of worthless bias being used to dismiss arguments. It's no different than any other form of bias, even if it seems more socially acceptable here. If you want to argue with what I actually wrote, happy to have that discussion. Otherwise, not interested, sorry.
- belltaco 8y ago
  It's just weird when those so called personal opinions almost always support the company very strongly and are extremely negative about the competition since a very long time.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    Hey. This is a pattern of argument that is explicitly forbidden by the site guidelines. Please stop asserting, overtly or implicitly, that people are making arguments because they're shills for this company or that. Beyond that: I've read every 'DannyBee comment on HN for the past several years and I assure you he has far stronger opinions about register allocators and the LLVM development process and open source licensing than he does about people criticizing Google. I think you owe him an apology.

by jgon 8y ago

dontblink 8y ago

What does that have to do with his point? Could you address his comment instead? "C'mon man."

jgon 8y ago
He doesn't have a point. He has whataboutism. So I decided to address his whataboutism by pointing out that Google is honestly even worse at what he is talking about, and thus his whataboutism is in fact invalid. So in a roundabout way I did address his "point".
- DannyBee 8y ago
  You certainly have an interesting perspective on what you did there. That comment would be equally as worthwhile and useful if you had started it with some other form of bias to justify it like "Wait, a woman who is black ...." If your comment starts with some form of "well you are an x so ...", it's probably not actually addressing anything other than your own interesting biases against people. Or you know, just dismiss whatever you want with bias and claims of whataboutism. I guess that works too! Despite your claim of whataboutism, i'm instead showing the author is incredibly conveniently eliding large parts of actual history in trying to make their point. You may want to argue those shouldn't matter (or make it worse). That's at least a more valid argument than you made. I would argue if you asked most people they do in fact matter because the world is not an abstract idealist paradise. The internet definitely never has been in the past, so saying it isn't in the future is not particular interesting.

DannyBee 8y ago

I am so unbelievably tired of the hacker news "you work for company x and therefore your opinion is tainted and you aren't allowed to have personal opinions" crap I don't even know where to begin. It's just another form of worthless bias being used to dismiss arguments. It's no different than any other form of bias, even if it seems more socially acceptable here. If you want to argue with what I actually wrote, happy to have that discussion. Otherwise, not interested, sorry.

belltaco 8y ago
It's just weird when those so called personal opinions almost always support the company very strongly and are extremely negative about the competition since a very long time.
- tptacek 8y ago
  Hey. This is a pattern of argument that is explicitly forbidden by the site guidelines. Please stop asserting, overtly or implicitly, that people are making arguments because they're shills for this company or that. Beyond that: I've read every 'DannyBee comment on HN for the past several years and I assure you he has far stronger opinions about register allocators and the LLVM development process and open source licensing than he does about people criticizing Google. I think you owe him an apology.