3 ms·

On the main topic: do you see the the ability to leave does not not an asset make? The other things are also simple: Saying things repeatedly doesn't make the

by eviks 2y ago

On the main topic: do you see the the ability to leave does not not an asset make? The other things are also simple: Saying things repeatedly doesn't make them universally true. You don't need to buy anything, it can continue to be free, why did you make it up??? Google would pay because they can't make another leader overnight. Also they might be banned from doing so.

aurareturn 2y ago
So basically, you think: 1. Google must sell Chrome 2. Google must continue to pay the new buyer tens of billions for the right to be default engine 3. Google is disallowed from making a browser ever again 4. Google must abandon Chromium, and their engineers should stop contributing to Chromium because of #3 I feel sorry for Google. The Biden administration is absolutely clueless on how tech works and the Trump administration will hate Google regardless.
- eviks 2y ago
  Basically, I think you're making more stuff up to substitute for the lack of argument in the previous stuff you've made up, which isn't related to the main point. So, no, of course you guessed wrong again in your 1-4
  - aurareturn 2y ago
    On the main topic: do you see the the ability to leave does not not an asset make? This was your question right? I'd provide an argument if the question was more coherent.
    - eviks 2y ago
      How would you provide an argument with such a level of comprehension? There are 3 identical questions you ignored, if you can't comprehend the third one you could fall back to the first two, which are phrased a bit simpler. But that's enough of your trolling for me, goodbye
      - aurareturn 2y ago
        On the main topic: do you see the the ability to leave does not not an asset make? What does "not not" mean? Yikes.
- concinds 2y ago
  It's actually dumber. Google can't "pay the new buyer tens of billions for the right to be default engine" either.
  - aurareturn 2y ago
    Which comes back to my original point, who the heck is going to buy Chrome?

by eviks 2y ago

aurareturn 2y ago

So basically, you think: 1. Google must sell Chrome 2. Google must continue to pay the new buyer tens of billions for the right to be default engine 3. Google is disallowed from making a browser ever again 4. Google must abandon Chromium, and their engineers should stop contributing to Chromium because of #3 I feel sorry for Google. The Biden administration is absolutely clueless on how tech works and the Trump administration will hate Google regardless.

eviks 2y ago
Basically, I think you're making more stuff up to substitute for the lack of argument in the previous stuff you've made up, which isn't related to the main point. So, no, of course you guessed wrong again in your 1-4
- aurareturn 2y ago
  On the main topic: do you see the the ability to leave does not not an asset make? This was your question right? I'd provide an argument if the question was more coherent.
  - eviks 2y ago
    How would you provide an argument with such a level of comprehension? There are 3 identical questions you ignored, if you can't comprehend the third one you could fall back to the first two, which are phrased a bit simpler. But that's enough of your trolling for me, goodbye
    - aurareturn 2y ago
      On the main topic: do you see the the ability to leave does not not an asset make? What does "not not" mean? Yikes.
concinds 2y ago
It's actually dumber. Google can't "pay the new buyer tens of billions for the right to be default engine" either.
- aurareturn 2y ago
  Which comes back to my original point, who the heck is going to buy Chrome?