It’s as if Toyota and Samsung are adjectives just as the word “dangerous” and “mortal” can be used as an adjective.

The image of asian women in their traditional clothing hints of them gossiping. They are probably talking about some event and one of them comment “Toyota, Samsung, even” to remark the positive/negative significance of the event.

What if it’s yellow? That’s what I want to find out.

Ideal reality: Google doesn’t buy advantage from browsers to make their search engine the default. This way, other search engines can compete at the same level, right?

Reality: browser developers will have their income cut down because now their main source of income is dead (see recent news on Mozilla).

Usually these kinds of policies that may or may not come up out of goodwill results in unintended consequences that negatively affect others.

The winner here are the politicians.

I’m with you on this.

In this thread are people who screams monopoly, thinking they know what it means. One comment said Google is a monopoly, followed by “along with <other giant companies>”

They’re giants because they’re successful and good at what they do. They’re successful because people are benefiting and find values from the products they use. The moment these giants stops “exploiting” people will be when they stop bringing values to society.

They’ve confused economic reality with their own ideal reality.

Source?

So, uh, how do you live in modern society?

Shameful is very much an understatement…

Thanks for the explanation.

Trump’s grazed in the ear, inches away from death. That’s sick, man.

I don’t use screw drivers enough to know what these are for. But from a programmer’s standpoint, punishing people to deviate away from standard may cause more harm than good, no?

Suppose it’s easier/cheaper/more effective to deviate a bit from standard, why should I be punished to do things a bit differently?