ihatethem

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by ihatethem 8y ago

   I don't know what you're talking about.
2. 2.▲
   by ihatethem 8y ago

   I don't see how private citizens discussing their political views is "substantive", there is nothing remotely controversial in that footage, this is just fodder for partisans.
3. 3.▲
   by ihatethem 8y ago

   While you're not being "facetious" you're being "glib". Inbox was obviously a place the gmail team used for experimentation and now they are folding it back in. Besides you're making it sound like there wa
4. 4.▲
   by ihatethem 8y ago

   I don't understand why any of this was necessary in the first place, the only reason I can think of is this being on the wishlist of a powerful lobbying bloc. There is something suspect about the EU's cavalier attitude in churning
5. 5.▲
   Press protections safeguard Google’s algorithms(cjr.org)

   1 points by ihatethem 8y ago|0 comments
6. 6.▲
   Don’t Force Google to Export Other Countries’ Laws(nytimes.com)

   1 points by ihatethem 8y ago|0 comments
7. 7.▲
   'Right to be forgotten' could threaten global free speech, say NGOs(theguardian.com)

   85 points by ihatethem 8y ago|77 comments
8. 8.▲
   by ihatethem 8y ago

   Of course the NYT would publish a 1k word profile of a virtual nobody as long as they're criticizing big bad tech companies. Tech companies are only an issue for the newspaper business, they are a boon for the economy as a whole.