3 ms·
The argument is that the scrutiny is in practice not sufficient, as usual in these cases.
by girvo 1mo ago
The argument is that the scrutiny is in practice not sufficient, as usual in these cases.
- vkou 1mo agoThe argument generally doesn't demonstrate that. The argument generally goes: 1. Google could do it. 2. <This space is intentionally left blank> 3. Therefore, Google is doing it! (Step 2 needs to be filled in a bit for it to be a good argument. Generally, analogies don't quite make the cut.)
- mring33621 1mo agoYou are ignoring the value of previous experience: Please replace 'Google' with 'Profit-driven legal entity in the USA' and reread your argument. The parent is making an assumption, based on past experience, but is also Most Likely correct.
- andybak 1mo agoAt the risk of posting without adding anything substantive, I find this an exceedingly convincing argument.