Oletros

92 ms·

871.
by Oletros 11y ago
> Rate is change is actually pretty slow in this case. Really? All the articles and papers say the contrary. Do you have anything to back your claim?
872.
by Oletros 11y ago
Well, as far as I know,. all the articles I have read say exactly the contrary, that the rate now is a lot faster than the one coming out from the ice age. Is because of that I ask your sources. From [0]: > As the Earth moved out of ice
873.
by Oletros 11y ago
> the rate of change is not unprecedented. The climate changed faster coming out of the last ice age, for example Do you have a source for that?
874.
by Oletros 11y ago
I have read what is written but sorry, WUWT and Robert Brown are not exactly examples of honest reporting. And, to be sincere, the site the link pertains to is just another denier site and not even a very smart one
875.
by Oletros 11y ago
> In twenty years we'll look back on global warming like we do on D&D suicides, satanic ritual abuse and militias: just another instance of mass hysteria. Then, are you saying that there is no climate change and temperatures are
876.
by Oletros 11y ago
For sure, a really unbiased site
877.
by Oletros 11y ago
> When we would occasionally get an extra cold day or cold winter, climate change deniers would say "where's the global warming if it's so cold?" and the response would be "you have to average it over decades, no
878.
by Oletros 11y ago
Why is almost irrelevant?
879.
by Oletros 11y ago
> studentrob 1 day ago | parent > No, agency model gave LESS revenue to publishers Why would publishers ask for an agency model if it earned them less money? This is the the difference between you and me, I have read a lot about the
880.
by Oletros 11y ago
> . In this case, Apple was trying to bring in a competitor model that would earn publishers more money, No, agency model gave LESS revenue to publishers > Some of the publishers did not support windowing, that is, withholding new rel
881.
by Oletros 11y ago
> I think they're great questions, really interesting and forward thinking, and it's too bad you're being downvoted for promoting interesting discussion. He is downvoted because those questions have nothing to do with the
882.
by Oletros 11y ago
> But how was Apple supposed to negotiate their store deals with the publishers? Wasn't it an optimal goal offering all the publishers the deal they'd accept? Such a deal can't be made without discussing the prices. How wo
883.
by Oletros 11y ago
> Before Amazon started selling eBooks, publishers were able to sell hardcover books, i.e. new releases, for a higher price point. Then Amazon, being the only ebook retailer, was able to very quickly undercut the publishers' in-stor
884.
by Oletros 11y ago
> Anti-competitive to whom? To the costumers as the DOJ said. Please, if you don't want to read what the case is about, stop posting. You're your repeating the same things again and again. And they are wrong.
885.
by Oletros 11y ago
> The ads that they present to you are based on the data they collect about your behavior. They generate revenue on those ads. Thing that has nothing to do with your claim > This is a Pedantic distinction that exists only if you think
886.
by Oletros 11y ago
No, this is not what is claimed
887.
by Oletros 11y ago
> I was claiming you didn't read the bloody article mate. I am not trying to be rude Then you should read what people post. Perhaps then you won't sound like a rude person. I diddn't said anything about the 90% market sahr
888.
by Oletros 11y ago
> All my quotes here and in other posts here are from the court decision. All of your quotes here and in other posts are cherry picking form the court decision to much your beliefs. Read the 160 pages of the ruling and then post. But it
889.
by Oletros 11y ago
> The publishers were able to make new deals with Amazon. Mmm, no, the publishers forced ALL the stores, not only Amazon, the agency model and the forced the SAME price for all the stores
890.
by Oletros 11y ago
Here it is the DOJ ruling [0]. The link comes from this blog [1] > The iBook store didn't exist before, so Jobs had to win the publishers somehow, that means that all had to agree to some model that would be favorable to them and ce
891.
by Oletros 11y ago
Are you saying that your proof that Amazon was doing predatory pricing is an Amicus Brief supporting Apple where the publishers that were accused with apple make the claim? It is a joke, isn't?
892.
by Oletros 11y ago
> Apple didn't work with competitors to fix prices for consumers No, they worked with publishers to fix the prices for consumers
893.
by Oletros 11y ago
> Apple gets sued for charging more than a retailer that owned 90% of the market in an Anti-Trust case and is fined $450 million. No, Apple and the publishers were sued for colluding to fix the prices in all the stores, including the one
894.
by Oletros 11y ago
> 90% of control of the market of a highly elastic good was controlled by a single entity engaged in dumping Do you have a source for that accusation of dumping? To my knowledge, the ebook division was profitable. > If I could buy a c
895.
by Oletros 11y ago
Yes, I know about how Google uses the data. But in your quote there is nothing about selling it.
896.
by Oletros 11y ago
> EU and EEC are different things. I don't think anybody would object to the UK opting for staying in EEC but out of EU proper. After all that's what they want: a trade zone. Yes, this is what I wanted to say.
897.
by Oletros 11y ago
> & selling your data. Do you have any source for that?
898.
by Oletros 11y ago
How it is saying to UK leave being uncivil?
899.
by Oletros 11y ago
> The choice is really for British people not Euro mainlanders Perhaps then should be a referendum to ask the "Euro mainlanders" if they want a UK with the privileges they have > There's a lot to be gained from being in
900.
by Oletros 11y ago
I can't express it better. Please, leave

More ›