neclimdul

This article is pretty terrible and I'm not a fan of Apple but honestly he's taken a pretty measured approach and the fact that their product is garbage isn't his fault so much as the hype train being off course.

If anything people should be thankful he didn't waste more money, but right now the measurement isn't how successful your business is or how good your product is but how much money you flushed down the toilet chasing the dream of "AI". Because this is a bubble not a revolution.

Firefox main problem with profitability relevance. They need more people to get people to use their tools

So I just have two questions.

1. How does this get new users?
2. How does this help retention?

The only answer is it doesn't and we don't care because we're going to cash out.

I'm not running away, I'll still open Firefox tomorrow like yesterday because the browser landscape is terrible and the shadow of what Firefox was is still good.

But I'm looking for the disruptor because as questionable as a lot of the new smaller browsers are, there are people out there trying and it's going to happen.

Cool.

And the best part is, if I set it to never I get the websites I was actually looking for.

Right? That's pretty obviously the entire point of the first amendment right? Anyone?

It's so semantic it almost reads like a sentence!

And who needs simplicity when you can teach people about advanced shell techniques like command substitution?

Perfection.

Between the fact I've been using a date picker for ages in Firefox, the fact dates and times are hard, and the title of the issue that's clearly a zombie issue. I'm surprised they were able to close it at all.

I mean yes but also credited as the inspiration to start YouTube so also the same as it ever was?

Protected from government censorship. Companies have strong protections allowing for controlling the speech on their platforms.

And if you asked Roberts he'd probably say since companies are people, as long as it's used to protect conservatives they have protection for controlling their platforms speech as a 1st amendment right.

I agree. I've thought about it a lot and I still don't have any sympathy for them after the harm they've caused. I see why it's news worthy enough they might reverse it, and why it would be political speech.

But also I think they made the right choice to take it down. If blsky wants to be the better platform, it needs to be better. And not having an exception for this is the right thing.

"Man we really got trounced in that election "

"Yeah we should really work on our image"

"Yeah. Oh I know! You know how everyone hated that tik tok ban?"

"Yeah?"

"Well what if that, but more!"

"But people hated the ban...."

"Oh right, no, the movie industry is paying us to do this."

"Oh why didn't you just say so."

This keeps getting better! Tell me more!

Nuclear though, never had a problem with excess heat at one of those. /s