Google has no monopoly on app downloads for any platform or market. This complaint from the CEO is just a rant that companies with more resources are more successful than those with fewer.
Hasn't every single company that has ever been in a similar position done exactly the same?
By the way, something isn't abuse because you don't like it. Apple and Google use their position to further their position. They are not abusing it because that would mean they were abusing themselves, and that doesn't even make sense.
A job workable from anywhere is not synonymous with a job workable by anyone. The more companies that think otherwise, the more companies will slowly fail.
Pulling money out one end and putting it in the other does not actually improve the economy. Even if it benefits restaurant owners at the expense of other taxpayers.
Democracy doesn't depend on informed voters. Democracy is nothing more than giving the vote to citizens who are not part of the government. The outcomes will be better, for certain definitions of better, but there's no way to hijack democracy.
End-users pay for their access. They should have the right to control what goes in and out of their personal connection.
ISPs are paid to transfer data, and should no right to decide how that data is moved, other than dealing with technical realities of limited bandwidth (e.g. QoS).
No. I don't know what Oracle's angle is, but for Cisco, non-NN is a clear business win. NN doesn't require much more than dumb routers with a bit of QoS. Those are practically commodity devices, even at the ISP level. Non-NN service, however, requires DPI, and other intrusive analytical devices that will cost much more, require more service and upgrades, as demands and capability increase.
You are so incredibly naive that you would probably also believe Larry if he announced that he was removing all license fees for the Oracle DB.
I don't know what Oracle's angle is, but Larry doesn't support anything that doesn't add to his wealth.
Cisco's angle is obvious. They want to sell DPI, and other, hardware, which will require constant upgrades and service to keep up with demands. Dumb routers are practically commodity these days.
Have you always been retarded, or is your MAGA hat too tight? The poster complaining about Gmail listed a bunch of stuff he doesn't like. None of them are objectively bad.
At the time Samsung was chosen as a supplier, Android didn't even exist in the public sphere. The company hadn't been bought by Google, and no one could have predicted that someone would make it into a competitor and license it to handset manufacturers. So, if you consider not being able to predict the future a screwup, you must think you're Moses.
Giving a tax break to bring money to the US is not actually at the expense of the taxpayers. This is because the alternative is not seeing the money at all, and it isn't seeing the money and taxing it all. If Apple brings the money to the US, it's going to spend it in the US. Even if Apple doesn't pay anything to the government directly, the money will end up there as Apple spends it.
There are only upsides to the US economy for a tax amnesty.
You are a retarded shit. Just thought you should know.
1) Not every single tech-related job goes to an H1B visa holder. 2) Even if all these new jobs did, who cares? It's still a net economic gain for the area, as even H1Bs need to eat, a place to sleep and miscellaneous material items, such as clothes.
The problem with H1Bs isn't their presence, it's that the program is abused to displace existing American employees.
... it is also efficient enough not to generate very large profits because its revenues and its operational expenses are not too far from each other.
The nonsense starts here, and just gets worse. Why the fuck do you think operational efficiency has an inverse correlation
with profits? In the real world, where everyone else lives, operational efficiencies increase profits, it doesn't decrease them.
Slashdot Mirror
Google has no monopoly on app downloads for any platform or market. This complaint from the CEO is just a rant that companies with more resources are more successful than those with fewer.
And, so?
Hasn't every single company that has ever been in a similar position done exactly the same?
By the way, something isn't abuse because you don't like it. Apple and Google use their position to further their position. They are not abusing it because that would mean they were abusing themselves, and that doesn't even make sense.
A job workable from anywhere is not synonymous with a job workable by anyone. The more companies that think otherwise, the more companies will slowly fail.
Pulling money out one end and putting it in the other does not actually improve the economy. Even if it benefits restaurant owners at the expense of other taxpayers.
Yes and no. People who don't need to work look down on those who do. People who work look down on people who need to, but don't.
Yo, Slashdot, your "editor" script is broken again. The original is still on the front page.
Democracy doesn't depend on informed voters. Democracy is nothing more than giving the vote to citizens who are not part of the government. The outcomes will be better, for certain definitions of better, but there's no way to hijack democracy.
Or from being a lawyer. OK, she she was also a politician, but you're just a bigoted shit-wad.
...teasing Down's people
Oh, the sweet irony.
To put it another way:
End-users pay for their access. They should have the right to control what goes in and out of their personal connection.
ISPs are paid to transfer data, and should no right to decide how that data is moved, other than dealing with technical realities of limited bandwidth (e.g. QoS).
No. I don't know what Oracle's angle is, but for Cisco, non-NN is a clear business win. NN doesn't require much more than dumb routers with a bit of QoS. Those are practically commodity devices, even at the ISP level. Non-NN service, however, requires DPI, and other intrusive analytical devices that will cost much more, require more service and upgrades, as demands and capability increase.
You are so incredibly naive that you would probably also believe Larry if he announced that he was removing all license fees for the Oracle DB.
I don't know what Oracle's angle is, but Larry doesn't support anything that doesn't add to his wealth.
Cisco's angle is obvious. They want to sell DPI, and other, hardware, which will require constant upgrades and service to keep up with demands. Dumb routers are practically commodity these days.
Have you always been retarded, or is your MAGA hat too tight? The poster complaining about Gmail listed a bunch of stuff he doesn't like. None of them are objectively bad.
Why is information gained through a Russian hack bad, but information selectively reported by MSM perfectly fine? Both are trying to influence votes.
At the time Samsung was chosen as a supplier, Android didn't even exist in the public sphere. The company hadn't been bought by Google, and no one could have predicted that someone would make it into a competitor and license it to handset manufacturers. So, if you consider not being able to predict the future a screwup, you must think you're Moses.
Khyber is completely illiterate, so he's reading the same summary, but he doesn't understand the big words (those with more than 4 letters).
You apparently have the reading comprehension of the mice.
Mice on the drug, however, could run about 270 minutes -- about 70 percent longer.
Second-to-last sentence of the summary, you illiterate shit face.
If one is not legally bound to pay, then not paying cannot be called theft. Unless you're a greedy, shit-wad who deserves to be tortured.
I have a better idea. Kill yourself in public, to serve as both entertainment and a warning.
Apple, as far as anyone knows, pays every penny they owe the US government in taxes.
Giving a tax break to bring money to the US is not actually at the expense of the taxpayers. This is because the alternative is not seeing the money at all, and it isn't seeing the money and taxing it all. If Apple brings the money to the US, it's going to spend it in the US. Even if Apple doesn't pay anything to the government directly, the money will end up there as Apple spends it.
There are only upsides to the US economy for a tax amnesty.
Thanks for the conspiracy theory. You can go back to yammering about the moon landing set now.
Democrats also love to raise taxes, which is what causes corporations to hoard cash. So, whatever.
Shut the fuck up about taxes already.
You are a retarded shit. Just thought you should know.
1) Not every single tech-related job goes to an H1B visa holder.
2) Even if all these new jobs did, who cares? It's still a net economic gain for the area, as even H1Bs need to eat, a place to sleep and miscellaneous material items, such as clothes.
The problem with H1Bs isn't their presence, it's that the program is abused to displace existing American employees.
... it is also efficient enough not to generate very large profits because its revenues and its operational expenses are not too far from each other.
The nonsense starts here, and just gets worse. Why the fuck do you think operational efficiency has an inverse correlation
with profits? In the real world, where everyone else lives, operational efficiencies increase profits, it doesn't decrease them.