vermillion

5 ms·

1.
by vermillion 13y ago
I use DDG, StarPage, and others because I consider privacy a right. Yet I don't necessarily endorse any of them, you're misrepresenting my opinion to come out on top. Your argument is strikingly close to those against net neutrali
2.
by vermillion 13y ago
90% market share implies a position similar to IE6 some years ago, a de facto standard. With respect to RSS, Google launched a free product, poured millions into it. If you're not Google you can't compete with that. It was dev
3.
by vermillion 13y ago
Your analogy with DDG doesn't hold. First, DDG includes (mostly) other companies' services like HN, WolframAlpha, etc. It doesn't compete with them, it's closer to prerendering in Chrome. Second, I argued in other comme
4.
by vermillion 13y ago
You're totally right. But I would argue that its search engine is considered a standard by many. And now with a 90% market share it's reversing its policies. Also, lest never forget Google Reader: "Embrace, extend, extinguish
5.
by vermillion 13y ago
> money is often valued more than time I argue that time is always worth more than money. You can transform time into money, but not the other way around. > which is why the majority of us spend most of our days working for someone e
6.
by vermillion 13y ago
I never mentioned the word "propietary" in my comment. I said that Google's decision to display its own products prominently and bury the rest is downright evil. Now that you say standards.. that reminds me of Google's (
7.
by vermillion 13y ago
A very quick search turns up this: "Google faces antitrust probes in India, Europe, 3 other jurisdictions" "Google Inc faces anti-trust probes in India, Europe" [...]
8.
by vermillion 13y ago
You're attacking a straw man. I don't object to Google fighting its competitors, but it must play by the rules. Google is not a country, but part of society and this imposes certain obligations.
9.
by vermillion 13y ago
> his time is much more valuable than his money That is the case for everybody, for time is limited and money can be created arbitrarily. Don't take my comment as an attack to the OP, I'm just stating that the situation is the
10.
by vermillion 13y ago
This argument is faulty, implying that Gates' time is more valuable than others'. We need both time and money to survive, when you need not worry about the later, logically you can approach other pursuits with more dedication.
11.
by vermillion 13y ago
I actually have DuckDuckGo as my default search engine, but as Google extends its reach, we have to find alternatives for other services too. Google's decision to display its own products prominently and bury the rest is downright evi
12.
by vermillion 13y ago
It seems more and more clear with every new announcement, that Google has adopted the "embrace, extend and extinguish" strategy and it's taking it farther than what we thought possible in the past. These are worrisome news fo
13.
by vermillion 13y ago
What's the problem with picking the low hanging fruit first?
14.
by vermillion 13y ago
This article reads like an advertisement, reminds me of this essay: http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
15.
by vermillion 13y ago
This comment should be on top, it confirmed my suspicions.
16.
by vermillion 13y ago
I loved this comment, why is it being downvoted?