GoodEye8

There's no way Google would voluntarily sell Chrome. Unfortunately for them, they might be forced to sell Chrome.

They don't want to buy the browser. They want to buy the brand and the users. Chrome makes up over half the browser market. Think of all the data they could extract from Chrome users. It would cost significantly more to fork chromium and grow the user base to a point where they could extract anything valuable from them, and that's assuming they'd be successful enough to make it happen.

Yeah, I would always pick the law over the union. I once had an employer try to fuck me over the pettiest thing. they had incorrectly, probably deliberately, terminated my contract so that I was ineligible for unemployment benefits. They don't pay that benefit and it takes them literally 5 minutes to fix it, so it pretty much would cost them nothing to make that change. But it meant the world for me because that would've been the only way for me to put food on the table. I argued with them for days and the entire time they're gaslighting me with "You don't know what you're talking about, we did everything right. Nothing is wrong." Eventually I got fed up. I told them "I don't need to deal with this shit. Give me the official reason why you can't change the reason for me termination. I'll forward it to the labour office and you can deal with them." literally the next thing they said was "fine, we'll fix it." and 5 minutes later it was done.

I imagine a union would've also helped me in that scenario, but I enjoyed the safety of knowing I could stick the law in their face and tell them to eat shit. My opinion is that worker unions are great but labor laws are even better.

Yeah. You don't need to look far (to lemmy.ml) to find people who argue that Russia is perfectly justified in not respecting the ceasefire. Clearly we won't be changing the mind of those people because to them anything Ukraine related (from the west) is 100% propaganda which means Macron stating the obvious is also just "propaganda" to them. But for people who aren't keeping up with the news it's useful to remind them that the world doesn't believe the tankie sauce certain people seem to think is the truth.

Because it's largely irrelevant? If someone says "This is the best lock you can use on your front door" and someone else replies "not if you leave the key in the lock" do you think that's a important thing to mention? No lock is safe if you leave the key in the lock. Maybe it's important to remind people that you shouldn't leave your key in the lock, but that statement says nothing about the security of the lock.

Similarly maybe it's important to remind people that their phones might already be rooted, but that statement says nothing about whether Signal is good or bad from a security point of view.

Their losses are clearly significant enough to bring a foreign army (North Koreans) to replenish their forces. Maybe not 50% but I don't think it's that far off.

Also, there wouldn't be "a debate" if he admitted making a mistake.

Do you not know history? That is the exact kind of attitude that doomed the league of nations. The UN exists to manage international affairs. If you start kicking out members or start demanding specific resolutions you can't manage international affairs because countries will say "fuck your org, I'll do my own thing".

You give us 50% of your natural resources and we'll give you eggs (no guarantees on getting the eggs though).