22289d

7 ms·

31.
by 22289d 3y ago
> I’m curious what makes you think that? 15+ years of living on Reddit. Is it perfect at those things? Of course not. Can you and I and others provide a bunch of examples of those things not happening? Of course. It's still damned g
32.
by 22289d 3y ago
I can see that Reddit really hurt you. On behalf of the community, I'm sorry. > It just means they need a different type of marketing. That's correct. And Step #1 is to have a product which will make it past the collective bul
33.
by 22289d 3y ago
one day i will figure out how to respond to a minor detail, without making people think i'm addressing the main point.
34.
by 22289d 3y ago
One could say you're doing the exact same thing to Redditors that you say they do. Being negative for the sake of being negative. Just love to hate when there is no human face - or even someone to reply. But oops, here one is ;) Reddit
35.
by 22289d 3y ago
You don't have to give the url, you can just say 'found it online' 'saw it an article'. anything like that will be much more helpful than giving them false information. Reddit is where I often see this stuff and for
36.
by 22289d 3y ago
The movie Malice is one of my all-time favorites. 1993, average reviews. Total random movie. Recently I paid attention to the credits: written by Aaron Sorkin. It all makes sense now. It's been ignored for whatever reason but it's
37.
by 22289d 3y ago
There are Chrome Extensions that do this. Search this site and I'm sure people have recommended good ones. A common use case is blocking w3schools.
38.
by 22289d 3y ago
Something won, this place is a lot different than I remember it.
39.
by 22289d 3y ago
I shouldn't need to apologize for making an example. How about you quit being such a pedant. An example is not supposed to be exactly the same in every way. It doesn't even need to be mostly the same. It can be only kinda sorta ma
40.
by 22289d 3y ago
It's created AT&T all over again. Many got gobbled up by one baby bell who bought the name. Quite interesting.
41.
by 22289d 3y ago
So apologizing wasn't enough. What would you like for me to show my genuine remorse for providing an example you don't approve of?
42.
by 22289d 3y ago
Ask the regulators, that's one tool they use against monopolies. Like when they shattered AT&T into over a dozen pieces.
43.
by 22289d 3y ago
Yes I forgot, you can't make analogies or even provide examples on the interest, because no two things are ever exactly alike. My apologies. My point stands, however.
44.
by 22289d 3y ago
"they're not doing anything nefarious" and "what they are doing should be prohibited" are not mutually exclusive. You aren't disagreeing with me. They're in anti-trust proceedings. That is the proper way t
45.
by 22289d 3y ago
I'm not familiar with EU law but as a US consumer, I don't think that's fair. They're far from perfect but they try. We have entire agencies that exist to protect consumers in specific areas. The SEC being a famous one.
46.
by 22289d 3y ago
Remove the word monopoly from this and there is nothing wrong with it. It's standard and smart business practice to create synergies among your business units in this way. It's one of the key reasons companies acquire other compan
47.
by 22289d 3y ago
> It's not a standalone product that has its own revenue sources. Chrome makes a ton of money. Google pays Apple and others billions of dollars to be the default search engine in their browser. Google gets that free now from Chrome
48.
by 22289d 3y ago
> But do not program in COBOL if you can avoid it. lol I don't know anything about COBOL but I can feel all of the people that must have triggered. Which is surely why the author included it. Probably like if today that said PHP or
49.
by 22289d 3y ago
Assuming every grad of a university will be the same is going to lead to a lot of false positives. If you're hiring for a huge company then maybe generalizing will be useful but if you're looking for one person - you should probab
50.
by 22289d 3y ago
I would encourage you to read the first three words of my comment again. You're attacking a strawman.
51.
by 22289d 3y ago
You're not wrong but it's worth considering that life wouldn't exist otherwise. The choices are not kill or let live, the choices are kill or do not breed at all. They breed these animals specifically to kill them.
52.
by 22289d 3y ago
If we funded you to build it and it worked, do you know what you'd do? The exact same thing you're complaining about :)
53.
by 22289d 3y ago
> Until I do it incorrectly, and then I'm deliberately misconstruing your point into something you didn't say. That's what you're doing now, aside from pretending it isn't deliberate. I strongly suspect all of yo
54.
by 22289d 3y ago
> Amazon does 100s of billions of 1st party sales. And the remainder is not scalable. All of that done by their sellers. As evidenced by the fact that they are not doing it themselves. I'm beginning to think this thread is being ast
55.
by 22289d 3y ago
> Unscalable is not synonymous with hard for the vast majority of people. > It's not easy or hard. It's lucky. Great, thank you for teaching me about the English language. None of this addresses a single thing about my point
56.
by 22289d 3y ago
I rephrased it to accommodate the nitpicking and you completely ignored it, going right back to hard/easy rather than scalable/unscalable. FBA is scalable. These people are doing the unscalable part. "But I was nitpicking whe
57.
by 22289d 3y ago
They did the unscalable part. That better? Are you happy now? Can you go find something else to nitpick? > finding some cheap garbage on AliExpress that you can sell with instagram ads isn't actually all that hard It's very har
58.
by 22289d 3y ago
It's always a signal that you're on to something when you get a bunch of pedantic rebuttals like this. Attacking the central argument isn't possible, so they nitpick.
59.
by 22289d 3y ago
That part they can't do themselves at the same scale as all of the sellers can. That is what I meant.
60.
by 22289d 3y ago
> They were pissed Huge corporations do not get pissed. It's not personal. They were not angry or acting spiteful. Note: I'm only addressing those three words, not any other points you made.

More ›