no, that's ridiculous. Would be too expensive
cole
joined 1 year ago
Copy-pasting this from a comment I made a few days ago. I’m so tired of this misconception. Google’s business model literally disincentivizes selling personal data. The business model is built on selling targeted advertisements. Google wants to keep this data to itself because it gives them a competitive advantage in the ad space.
Selling your data would give competitors power in the marketplace. So yes, Google collects data and uses it, but no, Google does not sell your data. It sells targeting BASED on your data.
Very different, regardless of if it is any better.
good explanation, thank you! I'm very familiar with ssh key auth so that makes sense
how does the server encrypt the message it sends without the secret? Or is that stored during sign up?
it doesn't work for medium articles in my experience
plot twist, anon is a woman
It was, actually. Many people are still skeptical of that even. Some people still think hydrogen is the future
YouTube streams are so good. Google really has the video streaming tech stack nailed
well, we'll have to agree to disagree on that. I think it's easy to say that with hindsight, but you don't know where standards are needed when things are first getting going
EDIT: the guy I'm replying to edited his comment. Originally he asked something along the lines of "why didn't they mandate the tesla plug"
so the government should've mandated a closed protocol that wasn't a standard?
While I understand with what you're saying, I personally believe that regulating standards during the early days of an industry is just asking for trouble.
It often isn't until later on that we truly understand what we need out of a standard. This can take iterations and different approaches. I think it is too big a risk to potentially be hamstrung with a shitty solution later on
yeah that one's hard to get. Gotta go camp out at their factory sometimes and they limit you to once every 6 months!!