schubidubiduba

6 ms·

1. 91.▲
   by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

   Of course, they dared to impede the US social media propaganda machine. How could they.
2. 92.▲
   by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

   By enforcing antitrust laws, like it has been done many times in history?
3. 93.▲
   by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

   They have a duopoly, so all app developers are extorted to use this if they want to make a living. (Or they use the duopoly-sanctioned payment methods and pay the extortion money there)
4. 94.▲
   by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

   Since Google is making sure to use all its monopolistic power for keeping Google Play the "default" app store for 99% of users, I fail to see this distinction as particularly relevant. From an anticompetitiveness perspective, that
5. 95.▲
   by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

   I think the numbers you are arguing with here are for all employees, not just fresh graduates. Blame the article for using suboptimal numbers, but the "wiping out" part is definitely justified when talking about jobs for graduates
6. 96.▲
   by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

   You got it the wrong way around: Apple feels entitled to use all the hard work developers put into their apps to bolster their own pockets.
7. 97.▲
   by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

   Google has already backpedaled on that, luckily. But you are right, insofar that it likely is only a matter of time until Google's walled garden is as walled in as the one of Apple.
8. 98.▲
   by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

   I believe that one point of the author precisely is that there seems to be no room for middle ground left in the tech space: Resisting the status quo of hostile technology is an endless uphill battle. It requires continous effort, mostly mo
9. 99.▲
   by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

   The issue is when companies try to hide their evil, manipulate public opinion, lobby (bribe) lawmakers to disable the democratic process, ... All of which happens regularly, and especially in this case, as the person you responded to showed
10. 100.▲
    by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

    I tried using Brave. It weirded me out with the crypto stuff and random popups. Now back to Firefox, on all my devices, without any crashes ever. And it's just as fast as chromium, which I very very rarely use for bad websites that do
11. 101.▲
    by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

    I don't see the issue tbh. Why should the UK (or the EU) care about US laws likenthe first amendment? Nobody is forcing them to offer their website to Europeans, a simple IP block of UK users would likely be enough to avoid any legal r
12. 102.▲
    by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

    You mean how it happened with Charlie Kirk and all the posts about him, that led to people being tarred and feathered and losing their jobs?
13. 103.▲
    by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

    X does have a presence in the EU though, because it wants to make money by selling EU citizens data.
14. 104.▲
    by schubidubiduba 10mo ago

    You've got it the wrong way around. No one is forcing X to operate in the EU. If they want to do that, they need to follow EU laws.
15. 105.▲
    by schubidubiduba 11mo ago

    Been a while since I applied, but when I did the "reasonable case" was mostly just your repo being FOSS and having a license file (+ a very vague description of what you plan to do and how much resources you'll use)
16. 106.▲
    by schubidubiduba 11mo ago

    If European citizens would rather use Google's services anyway, why does Google permanently abuse it's market power to push these services, and disadvantage competitors? One would think that if their services are preferred anyway,
17. 107.▲
    by schubidubiduba 1y ago

    You mean the US government _ran_ the biggest such fund, and is currently in the process of defunding it.