throwaway46829

5 ms·

1.
by throwaway46829 4y ago
Also, even if they weren't making money from such users, if this is a common experience, the opportunity to make money from them with advanced warning to switch to the official client existed but has now been lost.
2.
by throwaway46829 4y ago
It's not hypocrisy, the other side isn't now saying "we need freedom of choice" they're still fine with the principle of banning things, they just want the other thing banned, simple disagreement. Another example, p
3.
by throwaway46829 4y ago
I thought "yum"
4.
by throwaway46829 4y ago
I don't think resolution is everything, I can definitely notice that the image is "better" in other ways when people are using proper cameras (whereas for a phone camera the resolution is a bigger part of what makes it better
5.
by throwaway46829 4y ago
I'd act differently if the worst that could happen from failing to deliver/someone thinking I had was being kicked out of the country rather than just unemployment, it's about sticks not carrots
6.
by throwaway46829 4y ago
A more interesting/valid scenario might be something like "Spotify is using their dominance in music streaming to get too much of an advantage in the podcast market". How much is too much is for the public and politicians to
7.
by throwaway46829 4y ago
It can be perfectly legal but still wrong, in which case it makes sense to raise awareness with the public in the hope of new laws.
8.
by throwaway46829 4y ago
All of business is a sort of charade, Amazon might be "sorry that your product was disappointing and want to offer you a refund" by which they mean "if we give you a refund we think you'll feel confident enough to buy mo
9.
by throwaway46829 4y ago
Spotify also adds value to the iPhone, before the App Store it was pretty but kind of useless. Make them give both options, people can decide whether easy cancellation etc. is worth 30%, Apple can make up any losses it needs to continue the