Is there really a good party with only the "right" things in their manifesto?

Democracy usually does not come with À la carte options.

It gets easier with an electoral system other than FPTP (e.g., ranked choice, instant runoff), whereby more than 2 parties appear. You can then mix and match multiple parties that support policies you want in a way that you're aiming for particular policies to become the majority rather than any party.

For example, for issues taxing the rich (TR), taxing the poor (TP), spending on military (SM), spending on infrastructure (SI), privacy protection (PP), and privacy intrusion (PI) and parties A, C, and D, which support TR/SM/PP, TP/SI/PP, and TR/SI/PI, the coalitions the three parties must form to pass individual bills may get you what you really wanted: TR/SI/PP, even though none of the three parties individually support all three.

Person A: Did you know Google removed access to Pixel code repo.

Person B: Well, it didn't go away, they just changed the access method to Google Drive.

Saved us that conversation here, Thanks. No matter what mental gymnastics we may do, it is pretty clear where this is heading.

On a different note, the source download form requires you to accept Google's privacy policy for the information you submit.

Is it ok to tack on accepting additional policies as requirements to access what is allowed under OSS licenses.

Not sure why, but when I see certain diacritics with latin alphabet, my brain tries to place the language somewhere in Europe. I don't know if I can call that an exotic feeling but it certainly feels foreign.

Häagen-Dazs is American, but was apparently meant to sound Danish. To a Scandinavian it absolutely doesn't.

Scandinavia and the Nordics are quite fancy and refined for Americans. Lagom, hygge, fika, the minimalism, the enlightened equality and solidarity, good education, little crime, highest happiness ratings, even prisons are like hotels, etc makes it a kind of imagined lifestyle that's cozy and thoughtful and so on.

That's how they getcha, and then go full midsommar...

Could also be Vietnamese, they are big on diacritics.

Vietnamese can easily be recognized because most words are one syllable and the vowel may even have two diacritics stacked on top.

Thanks to French, who came up with the current writing system.

A Portuguese Jesuit, actually: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_de_Pina

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_branding (especially the Foreign Orthography section)

Lets flip the question, does it have to be at the break neck pace that nobody can catch up without spending huge money?

How many of those features were really organic, driven by actual pressing need and not driven by Google's needs.

In that I fully agree, but the reason it has to be at a fast pace is because when Google adds things to chrome, developers will use them and don't have to care enough about market share. I think unless Firefox gains enough market share to matter, we'll be stuck in this race.

Chrome should be split, Firefox or its forks (if Mozilla continues to mismanage) should be able to receive funds from Google but Chrome should not be allowed to be paid for Google search engine placement at least for the next 5-6 years.

I'm sure many other players will play top dollar to be the default on a browser that virtually commands all the market. That'll let us discover the real price of search engine defaults because the Mozilla payout is partly due to antitrust reasons.

In that case, I think we'll also see a visible decrease in "bugs" affecting Firefox on Google's properties.

"We had a bug in our code, I fixed it"

I've seen this so many times where the same individual introduced and fixed the bug, it is now funny.

This is corporate team level equivalent of "Socializing losses and privatizing profits".

What if "owning" here means the same as "owning" any movie online.

If questioned, I can already imagine someone defending that sort of agreement as a standard consumer, contractual terms and practices of the time.

> The best opportunity to counter China was with full cooperation from the rest of the world.

The policy and the keyword should have been collaboration and not cooperation.

Ok, fair enough.

The whole affair and the blog post feels like proxy signal to potential investors from OpenAI that they have now developed/acquired tech that is worth enough to grab Apple's attention ?

Can you elaborate on the plausible deniability part.

Was your past employer trying to make best of the situation by hoping to fish for information about your next employer's projects via the consulting gig?

I said "never called them on their plausible deniability" to mean I never pulled off the veil of the conversation, so there's nothing to talk about in front of a judge.

FWIW both the company I was leaving and the company I was joining were startups selling dynamic seat pricing systems to airlines. Your call if that's a conflict of interest :).