Moltz
Google claimed to be open but ran backroom deals to ensure low competition. In doing so it proved its weight in the industry could squash competition, proving its monopoly, which is illegal.
Apple never made claims it was open.
As simple as. Toss in one case was decided by a jury, and the other a judge, and you'll quickly see neither are related.
Basically your question was nonsense from the jump, and pushed by blogs and the like to get idiots to click. Had you read the news, you'd get it. By why read when others will explain it for ya.
Sadly the rest of us have to live in reality. Have fun railing against one of the few sites left that makes an effort. Soon there won't be any and your fantasy world will magically come true. You've definitely thought this through. ;)
The fun of using AdSense or any other ad network. Surprise, Google doesn't actually vet its ads.
This is why blocking adblockers isn't safe, Google still can't guarantee its ads are safe. At the same time, the site doesn't earn without doing this. Tough spot to be in. This is why so few private sites are left, Google and the rest ran em out of town by controlling the money flow, or buying em up. Valnet didn't go on a buying spree of the remaining private tech sites for shits and giggles.
If there is a single APK site that can be trusted, it's APKM. Owned and operated by the dude that started Android Police. Owned and operated privately in the US, following all laws that entails.
APKM is nothing like the Russian and Chinese APK sites out there. It's ran by a legit dude that personally checks every hash of the APKs he lists. It literally exists to catalog and store APKs for posterity, a huge help to the community at large. Why it was created, why it sill exists. It's also why you won't find paid APKs on there, the entire operation is run well above board, because that's the kind of guy the owner is.
I highly doubt Artem is happy to have to block adblockers. This is simply the reality of trying to own and operate a legit site that relys on ad money. You can thank Google for the amount of ads necessary to keep the site going. You can also thank Google for the demise of privately owned sites as the ad money keeps getting lower. There's a reason he sold AP, and that's because private sites can't earn enough to keep going. Now a conglomerate owns it, and you see the clickbait results and what it actually takes to earn money with a tech site in 2023.
Well, nobody would have clicked on Ron's title or linked it to social media if he had put Wear in the hed. Isn't clickbait fun?
Double biggest. Fail. Shoulda been tighter, that's just lazy. Everything after the emdash is pointless anyways, Google cut the title much earlier. Another fail.
It's clickbait, you got that right, but it's super sloppy.
Because they both pull the same censorship so there's no discernable difference where it matters?
Gimme a call when any website can exist purely on DDG traffic or Bing's ad platform.
And why do you think they are written in this manner? Does it have something to do with ads? Praytell, who owns the ad platform as well as search?
Pretty balsy to blame the writers, they are simply chasing the algorithm Google makes. In the end, Google does really control it all. So if you wanna be mad at someone, I'd say start with the one forcing everyone to do this.
Only way to stop piracy is to make it easier and cheaper to buy the goods legitimately in all corners of the world. Since that won't be happening, and since so much content is an outright gamble if it's even any good, piracy will continue to grow.