394549

18 ms·

121.
by 394549 8y ago
> People seem mad that it was a configuration change and not a change in the image that is installed on the device, but I don't see the difference. Think of it this way: you need a backdoor to push remote config changes the way Go
122.
by 394549 8y ago
> If Senator Sanders et al want to target all companies who pay below a certain wage or offer/don't offer a certain benefit or whatever broad category of social/economic ill that the legislature wants to end, have at it. J
123.
by 394549 8y ago
> Surely if its terrible and no one will work there they will have to improve or pay more? Or am i misunderstanding basic economics? Your mistake was assuming that this is something that could be understood solely with "basic econom
124.
by 394549 8y ago
> Lowering profits means reduced shareholder value and a lower market capitalization. Every company is interested in providing as much value to shareholders as possible. Ultimately, it's pro-business elite politics that have created
125.
by 394549 8y ago
> As a society we've decided that we do, because we are. The shoddy treatment of Amazon's employees has been publicized repeatedly for years. The operations of the market, with its vast information asymmetries , does not amoun
126.
by 394549 8y ago
> Frankly, I don't buy it. If we have a problem with detaching from technology, then, stopping all usage of it only one day a week is maybe 90% as unhealthy. I think you're letting the perfect become the enemy of the good. Also
127.
by 394549 8y ago
Couldn't the control L. humile by increase the "super-colonies'" genetic diversity by in introducing drones from its native range to them? That could fragment the super-colonies into regular colonies and give the nati
128.
by 394549 8y ago
>> Having Google censor results could create the false impression that search results are censored similarly in the US as well. > ...false... > Maybe we can trust Google not to hide stuff from us, but how come the following bull
129.
by 394549 8y ago
>> Because they're obviously qualitatively different to a significant degree. Only one is viewpoint-based political censorship. > I'd argue that both are political in nature. They're both cultural ideas (copyright an
130.
by 394549 8y ago
> This is China. Search results are censored and people are fully aware of that. Having Google censor results could create the false impression that search results are censored similarly in the US as well.
131.
by 394549 8y ago
> If I were to take a contrarian view of this, I would ask: "What is the difference between Google censoring search results based on the public security laws of China, versus Google censoring search results based on the copyright la
132.
by 394549 8y ago
> You won't help human rights in China by refusing to work there. Maybe so, but you definitely can hurt human rights by working there. I would say providing censored search results (and putting an American stamp of approval on th
133.
by 394549 8y ago
Why are you dropping Ayn Rand quotes all over this thread? I count three quote-heavy comments already. It's bizarre and pretty spammy.
134.
by 394549 8y ago
> As I see it the choice is to either do what Google is doing, which means being involved, staying relevant, and making a few bucks along the way, or to stay away. In the latter case the only result will be diminished influence for Googl
135.
by 394549 8y ago
> They are looking for information, they should question the person who can answer those the best. I disagree. Calling the CEO to testify puts the chief decision-maker on notice that these are issues he needs to focus on. Settling for
136.
by 394549 8y ago
> I'm not sure we scramble fighter jets every time they do. I thought they did, since scrambling the jets demonstrates to the Russians that the US's air defense network is tight. It also helps keep the pilots from getting lax.
137.
by 394549 8y ago
> It is interesting they had "GOOGLE" printed on the reserved seat. Where in reality Sundar Pichai is the ceo of Google and Larry Page is the ceo of Alphabet. So the Senate committee was actually expecting Mr. Pichai and Bloomb
138.
by 394549 8y ago
>I like him giving the the middle finger. Why does he have to satisfy a bunch of egomaniac corrupt politician who has been net negative for the society. Why we have to watch in awe of their complete disconnect from current affairs of the
139.
by 394549 8y ago
> This just goes to show how much of a charade these hearings are. Literally no one in the public is going to pay attention or give a shit about hearings where Congress questions lower level executives with little to no decision-making a
140.
by 394549 8y ago
> They offered their legal guy who is also one of the main leaders at Google and is probably the right person to talk about this but Congress refused. They want figureheads. Why is this a problem? The CEO is the public face of the compa
141.
by 394549 8y ago
> It's likely not google get bored, but users didn't adapt product on large enough scale. What exactly is a "large enough scale"? The mentality that a project is a failure unless it achieves exponential growth and mas
142.
by 394549 8y ago
> By exiting China, except pleasing the those moral puritans, I fail to see what exactly Google achieves. You don't even have to have much imagination to realize that by exiting China, Google removed the leverage the Chinese governm
143.
by 394549 8y ago
> but this is just tiresome. Especially the exaggerated adjectives. Everything's "gorgeous," "beautiful," or "stunning," even if it's just a featureless black slab like every other phone for the l
144.
by 394549 8y ago
Paywall bypass: http://archive.is/Visq4
145.
by 394549 8y ago
> Are you contesting that ads work better for good products, or that such would imply more good products across advertised products? The latter. Basically, it boils down to the intuition that a company with an inferior product is likely
146.
by 394549 8y ago
It feels like this story was suppressed from HN. Here's a story that's older but has a similar number of points that's still on the front page ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17964942; 64 pts, 13 hours
147.
by 394549 8y ago
> But ads work better for companies with a real product, and therefore you expect the % of good products among advertised products to be higher than among non-advertised ones. [citation needed]
148.
by 394549 8y ago
> But this is exactly why sponsored results are good for the searcher. Products that people are willing to spend money advertising will usually be better for you, especially in a context where repeated custom is likely. No, that's f
149.
by 394549 8y ago
> Don't forget another thing the government did: previous bailouts. When large banks were told they were "too big to fail", they heard "your risks will be subsidized by taxpayers", so of course they took on more
150.
by 394549 8y ago
> Why would anyone want something outlawing automation in their TOS? Is their 'service' maximizing human effort and minimizing throughput? It could be that they want to make usage painful to keep control of the data. Automated

More ›