3 ms·

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:b-3ZibpM6IIJ:qnrq.se/why-i-wont-work-for-google/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:b-3ZibpM6IIJ:qnrq.se/why-i-wont-work-for-google/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:b-3Zibp...

clips 13y ago
How ironic that one would be using Google's cached version to read this
- porpoisemonkey 13y ago
  Not at all. Google's caches are pretty commonly used to view pages with high levels of traffic.
  - etfb 13y ago
    https://google.com/search?q=define:irony https://google.com/search?q=define:irony
    - porpoisemonkey 13y ago
      I'm not sure why you posted this link. The comment I was responding to does not meet any of the definitions you posted. As others have pointed out using Google cache to view a high traffic anti-Google article would be coincidental and not ironic.
- Aldo_MX 13y ago
  More ironic that Google has a cached copy and CloudFlare not.
  - Donzo 13y ago
    Not really ironic because nobody expects that CloudFlare Always On cached copies will actually work.
- axanoeychron 13y ago
  It is not ironic, it's just a coincidence.