The Netherlands also had a massive anti-EU sentiment at around the time of the 2015 refugee crisis. As did several other countries. Shit, the UK was only the 3rd most anti-EU country in the EU at the time.
I imagine you wouldn’t be having this uncaring sentiment if it was your own government who called for a referendum that went the same way as the UK’s did.
Jesus Christ. The amount of absolute bellends in the world never ceases to confound me.
Indeed.
I just doubt his ability to actually bring it to market in any reasonable capacity anytime soon.
It’s not abusing your market position to not open source your own software. If I make a game, I don’t have to let people have the source code. How don’t you understand this?
I’ve explained many times why Google’s options are abusive of their market position and Apple’s aren’t. You’re just unable to understand, it’s like talking to a brick wall.
So the complaint here is that Apple’s AI summary… Accurately and succinctly summarised his messages, as he requested?
They are, and I’ve already explained how they are, several times.
And you were wrong.
They have no choice because Apple does not make iOS/Apple Store available to anyone else…
People and companies are not compelled to open source their software. Apple doesn’t have to open source iOS or offer it on other devices if they don’t want to. Same goes for Sony/Xbox/Nintendo.
If I code a game, it’s not illegal for me to keep the source code to myself.
If Google did what Apple did (or did not in this case), those other OEMs would have zero choices and wouldn’t even exist…
No, if Google had done what Apple did, nobody would’ve flocked to Android in the first place, and we’d have more competition. Do you think there were no phone makers before Android or something?
It’s incredible how you still don’t get it despite me very clearly explaining it multiple times.
Apple. Is. Not. Imposing. Terms. On. Phonemakers.
Google is. Because their dominant market position allows them to.
If Google did this only for their own Pixel line, it would be fine.
I really don’t know how you aren’t grasping this.
Apple isn’t forcing anybody to do anything, because they make their own device. (iPhones are made by Apple).
Google is forcing OEMs to do all sorts of things, because they have no choice but to use Android/the play store. (Other phones, e.g. Samsung’s Galaxy S series, aren’t made by Google).
Do you understand? I’m not sure I can make this any more simple. What’s going on in your head that’s not letting you understand this?
Repeating my own comment back to me in a way that doesn’t even make sense doesn’t make you witty, it makes you look like someone who doesn’t know how to interract with people like an adult.
You never addressed my comment at all. Apple isn’t abusing their dominant market position by putting what they want on their own phones.
Google is abusing their market position by forcing other OEMs to do what Google wants, knowing they have no other choice.
Do you understand now?
If you want Apple to be punished, write some new laws, because they aren’t breaking the one Google is.
Come on, man, my comment isn’t that long. Just read it.
Perhaps they mean allowing android OEMs to ship with the play store without having to agree to all the other Google requirements.
It’s because Google is using their market dominance to essentially force OEMs to do what Google wants them to do.
You can’t have a successful Android device without the Play store, or access to any Google apps. Shit, for lots of apps, they will be straight up broken without Play Services installed, or notifications won’t work.
The market reality is that you have to have the play store. Google knows this, so they attach all kinds of extra requirements on OEMs to push Google services and tracking.
Apple doesn’t do this. Yes, Apple’s system is more locked down than Google’s (by far), but Apple is not using their market position to force anything on anybody or any OEM. Google is. Apple has not forced Samsung, OnePlus, Motorola, Sony, etc to do anything. They are only doing things of their own accord, on their own devices.
What Apple is doing is the same as what the games consoles do. You buy a Sony console, it has Sony software, Sony’s storefront, Sony-sanctioned games. It’s an ecosystem they’re putting on their own product, as opposed to Google strong-arming other companies into pushing Google’s ecosystem, because Google knows they have no realistic alternative. That’s why one is abuse of market dominance and the other isn’t.
And it can’t replace what we have today if it doesn’t exist. Therefore it existing is a good thing and a positive move for privacy.
That’s the kind of data companies like Meta and Google (I’m sure among others I don’t know) track and use to sell ads today . That is their entire business model. And they will not stop it of their own free will for an alternative that gives them less useful data than they had before.
No shit.
Mozilla’s model does nothing for privacy unless legislation forces companies to quit the current more invasive kind of tracking. But if it did that, we would have won and wouldn’t need Mozilla’s model either.
Yes, as I have already stated, Mozilla should be pushing governments to enforce privacy respecting and models.
They have made a privacy respecting option, and you are angry with them because others are still hoovering up your data. It’s a dumb take.
It is an alternative, and if it became more common in the industry it would be one of the best things to happen for user privacy in decades.
You don’t need to take their word for it, it’s open source and has a lot of eyes on it.
That isn’t doing nothing for privacy. That’s absurd. It’s a private alternative. Therefore it’s a good move for privacy.
They want to know who you are and what you do so they can sort you in categories and show you specific ads based on those. That’s the service ad networks sell to advertisers. So, tracking as usual will continue.
That’s not what this is. Neither Mozilla, nor anybody else, has any data tied to you. You cannot be tracked with this.
No they weren’t. Clearly you don’t know how this system works.
It is impossible to track anybody using this.
You are getting angry at Mozilla for making something that enables privacy, then getting angry at them again because they aren’t dictators of the web who can control everybody’s and networks.
Unfortunately a lot of people, particularly on Reddit/Lemmy, are completely unwilling to even talk about any impacts mass immigration could be having.
Twitch doesn’t want to get rid of it, it’s a huge moneymaker.
They just want plausible deniability to keep advertisers, sponsors, and regulatory bodies happy enough. That’s why the rules are so weird.
It’s just an excuse to kick the can down the road further and continue making short term cash.
And they are doing better. Making ads private is a very good thing. They’re currently a privacy nightmare.
You know no details about their relationship at all.
Perhaps she was being truly awful to him, and that prompted him to leave. We don’t know.
But fuck off with that implication that women are weak and pathetic, needing a man around to protect them. If someone is being awful, you can leave. Doesn’t matter what they’ve got between their legs.
If a woman I was with was being awful to me in a bar, of course I’d leave. She’s an adult. She can deal with the consequences of her own actions, and she can look after herself. I’m not above her, needing to be her guardian figure, just because I have a cock and she doesn’t. What a 1950s attitude.