Should I assume that you're afraid to elaborate your thoughts, with your doubling down on not elaborating your point at all in spite of three attempts on my part to get you to elaborate?
When you do not have attention span to read to the last sentence before replying, and end up calling other people names because of your severe problems with attention span, you know you're going to win hearts and minds.
If you have the amputate the only major differentiator between you and the competition, and your goal is "to become about as good as your competition in other spheres", you have already lost. The scenario you present has no win-outcome. Only a loss outcome and evenly matched-outcome.
It's clear that we're talking past one another, because either you're espousing things that demonstrate ignorance I was taught in sixth grade, or you're talking about something that is not the topic as I see it. Unlike you, I'm not predisposed to automatically assume the worst about one I'm debating however.
Hence, for the third time. Elaborate on what you are talking about please so we can get back to discussing the topic.
There is not such thing as inexpensive Apple phones, simply because the entire point of Apple brand requires the product to be more costly than competition. If you could get a cheap iphone, it would destroy the brand value. The social value that the brand carries is partially dependent on the "I'm rich enough to overpay for this expensive product", like all luxury brands.
Unless you're talking used, or several year old models. In which case, Apple will push you to upgrade very quickly with various underhanded tricks, as we have seen with the battery fiasco.
The "chromefox" is a meme at this point. Hint: you don't compete with chrome that can be chrome better than you ever will by being more like chrome. You need to differentiate to compete.
For several years now, firefox team has been doing everything they could to remove differentiators and make firefox look and feel more like chrome. At the exact same time frame, firefox slowly sank from one of the most used browsers in the world with over half of browser market share in some countries, into its current position where it's barely a blip on anyone's radar. And the downward trajectory persists.
This is where people invoke the infamous Einstein's saying. Definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing and expect a different result.
You guess is as good as mine when it comes to chromium-derivatives. So far I'm looking at Comodo Dragon, Vivaldi and a couple of others as versions that may be able to satisfy my privacy and usability needs. None of them are perfect, but they are infinitely better than Chrome, and apparently on par or better than Firefox in terms of privacy protection. I.e. telemetry, but to a small company that doesn't have Google's reach.
I'll just say that you have more patience with me when it comes to mozilla. Between the gutting of the interface with 4.0, followed by australis, the only reason I found browser even remotely useful was because I could simply mod the interface because to a reasonably functional state.
With 57, they removed this. All while hiring astroturfing bots to spam every thread about 57 with "how wonderfully quick it is, how I've moved from chrome because of how quick it is, and how this is going to get people to come back from chrome to firefox. Because it's so wonderfully fast!"
I think your statements just triggered that "goddammit, do they still have some PR agency on retainer" reflex. It's all those same talking points that ignore the problem that is removal of that one thing that actually made FF special in comparison to chromium - addons allowing for incredible levels of customizability to almost every aspect of the browser.
Do I find google's tracking policies abhorrent and a complete showstopper? Yes. Absolutely. That's why I'm not talking about chrome, but chromium-based derivatives that stripe all of that out of the browser. That's my primary requirement for the browser - it must respect my privacy. No exceptions. This is why I use other privacy minded addons such as a tracker-blocking addons. But chromium-based derivatives I tend to use are actually better at privacy than firefox nowadays, as firefox has been adding various tracking and telemetry mechanisms to firefox.
Germany without access to global market, considering the current state of European banking sector is a Weimar republic in the making.
Japan without access to global markets doesn't have the consumer base. Their demographics are terminal, and their economy cannot survive without access to global market which they can sell their products to.
Geopolitics reddit wiki actually has a pretty good reading list for someone who's fairly new to the subject of geopolitics and wants to learn about it:
You can't hope to be able to just start reading about the big picture without understanding the fundamentals that underpin it. You won't be equipped to tell a conspiracy theory from realistic analysis. Everything I wrote above can be cross-referenced for facts and found to be true. But I could have just woven a narrative that omits key factors, and you wouldn't be able to tell without knowing the fundamentals.
Firefox is patently worse than chrome when it comes to website compatibility. To claim otherwise is to boldly lie. You yourself confirm this. As a result, by definition firefox is worse than chromium-based derivatives. Just because you state the reason for it does not change this fact for the end user.
Firefox's only advantage over chromium-based derivatives has been customizability via powerful addon API. This has been amputated from the browser with v57, and chromium-like webextensions has been jury-rigged in its place. This effectively amputated the only advantage firefox has over chromium, leaving a crippled browser that is inferior to chromium-based derivatives with no advantages.
P.S. If your technical knowledge is so shallow that you suggest that there is no easy way to download youtube videos on chromium-based derivatives, then you're not equipped to be having this conversation. Otherwise, you're engaging in massive shifting of goalposts from chromium to chrome, which would indicate malicious intent to stop discussion on the topic.
Slashdot Mirror
Should I assume that you're afraid to elaborate your thoughts, with your doubling down on not elaborating your point at all in spite of three attempts on my part to get you to elaborate?
When you do not have attention span to read to the last sentence before replying, and end up calling other people names because of your severe problems with attention span, you know you're going to win hearts and minds.
Is there any evidence at all that "chromium isn't stable enough" for overwhelming majority of users?
If there's not, we go back to "amputating useful components to chase potential success in useless sphere", bringing us again to no win-outcome.
If you have the amputate the only major differentiator between you and the competition, and your goal is "to become about as good as your competition in other spheres", you have already lost. The scenario you present has no win-outcome. Only a loss outcome and evenly matched-outcome.
It's clear that we're talking past one another, because either you're espousing things that demonstrate ignorance I was taught in sixth grade, or you're talking about something that is not the topic as I see it. Unlike you, I'm not predisposed to automatically assume the worst about one I'm debating however.
Hence, for the third time. Elaborate on what you are talking about please so we can get back to discussing the topic.
Please elaborate on specific mechanics of this increase.
There is not such thing as inexpensive Apple phones, simply because the entire point of Apple brand requires the product to be more costly than competition. If you could get a cheap iphone, it would destroy the brand value. The social value that the brand carries is partially dependent on the "I'm rich enough to overpay for this expensive product", like all luxury brands.
Unless you're talking used, or several year old models. In which case, Apple will push you to upgrade very quickly with various underhanded tricks, as we have seen with the battery fiasco.
Please elaborate.
The "chromefox" is a meme at this point. Hint: you don't compete with chrome that can be chrome better than you ever will by being more like chrome. You need to differentiate to compete.
For several years now, firefox team has been doing everything they could to remove differentiators and make firefox look and feel more like chrome. At the exact same time frame, firefox slowly sank from one of the most used browsers in the world with over half of browser market share in some countries, into its current position where it's barely a blip on anyone's radar. And the downward trajectory persists.
This is where people invoke the infamous Einstein's saying. Definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing and expect a different result.
I don't understand what we're disagreeing on. Politics are an integral part of geopolitics. I am talking about geopolitics from my first post onward.
You literally issued a denial of existing reality in your post scriptum. Well done.
So your reasoning for why it was unreasonable is more black and white nonsense.
Ok.
How would to get to over 20% without perfect trait heritability and perfect biological determinism?
You guess is as good as mine when it comes to chromium-derivatives. So far I'm looking at Comodo Dragon, Vivaldi and a couple of others as versions that may be able to satisfy my privacy and usability needs. None of them are perfect, but they are infinitely better than Chrome, and apparently on par or better than Firefox in terms of privacy protection. I.e. telemetry, but to a small company that doesn't have Google's reach.
Same problem as waterfox. Who will maintain the browser once mozilla no longer releases patches for 52.x?
I'll just say that you have more patience with me when it comes to mozilla. Between the gutting of the interface with 4.0, followed by australis, the only reason I found browser even remotely useful was because I could simply mod the interface because to a reasonably functional state.
With 57, they removed this. All while hiring astroturfing bots to spam every thread about 57 with "how wonderfully quick it is, how I've moved from chrome because of how quick it is, and how this is going to get people to come back from chrome to firefox. Because it's so wonderfully fast!"
I think your statements just triggered that "goddammit, do they still have some PR agency on retainer" reflex. It's all those same talking points that ignore the problem that is removal of that one thing that actually made FF special in comparison to chromium - addons allowing for incredible levels of customizability to almost every aspect of the browser.
Do I find google's tracking policies abhorrent and a complete showstopper? Yes. Absolutely. That's why I'm not talking about chrome, but chromium-based derivatives that stripe all of that out of the browser. That's my primary requirement for the browser - it must respect my privacy. No exceptions. This is why I use other privacy minded addons such as a tracker-blocking addons. But chromium-based derivatives I tend to use are actually better at privacy than firefox nowadays, as firefox has been adding various tracking and telemetry mechanisms to firefox.
Germany without access to global market, considering the current state of European banking sector is a Weimar republic in the making.
Japan without access to global markets doesn't have the consumer base. Their demographics are terminal, and their economy cannot survive without access to global market which they can sell their products to.
Your statement is missing "lack of" at the start of second sentence, and then it's factually correct.
Geopolitics reddit wiki actually has a pretty good reading list for someone who's fairly new to the subject of geopolitics and wants to learn about it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/geopo...
You can't hope to be able to just start reading about the big picture without understanding the fundamentals that underpin it. You won't be equipped to tell a conspiracy theory from realistic analysis. Everything I wrote above can be cross-referenced for facts and found to be true. But I could have just woven a narrative that omits key factors, and you wouldn't be able to tell without knowing the fundamentals.
Only if you're of belief that biological determinism is 100%.
I know of no sane people who have this view on the world.
Explain what part of relevant mathematics you find confusing and I'll see if I can help you with it.
Firefox is patently worse than chrome when it comes to website compatibility. To claim otherwise is to boldly lie. You yourself confirm this. As a result, by definition firefox is worse than chromium-based derivatives. Just because you state the reason for it does not change this fact for the end user.
Firefox's only advantage over chromium-based derivatives has been customizability via powerful addon API. This has been amputated from the browser with v57, and chromium-like webextensions has been jury-rigged in its place. This effectively amputated the only advantage firefox has over chromium, leaving a crippled browser that is inferior to chromium-based derivatives with no advantages.
P.S. If your technical knowledge is so shallow that you suggest that there is no easy way to download youtube videos on chromium-based derivatives, then you're not equipped to be having this conversation. Otherwise, you're engaging in massive shifting of goalposts from chromium to chrome, which would indicate malicious intent to stop discussion on the topic.
Which doesn't change the fact that she committed to the same course.
Any available means, ranging from rape, to prostitution, to acceptance of cuckoldry and countless others.
Do you not know how human procreation works in terms of mechanics?
"The reason why wars happen is that there are as many conceptions of what is good as there are people."