Why does it need to be sold to another big company, why can't they just break Google up so chrome becomes its own business?
Takumidesh
joined 1 year ago
I mean I think the guy is stupid, but let's honestly reflect here, who gives a fuck about some leaked Nintendo game getting played a week or two early. Like honestly, it might not technically be victimless (though even that can be argued), but the 'damage' is so small it's like being upset that someone stepped on your grass.
There is a concept called prior art in patent law. Prior art is information about the invention that exists before filing, it can both help secure a patent as well as prevent someone filing a patent for someone else's existing invention.
I think you may have missed my point.
.gov is not the same as .gov.us (in this example, .gov is not the tld, .us is) Tlds like .io belong to countries, there is no going back to .gov or .com because countries outside of the US never just used .gov or .com.
To add a bit of context:
https://www.parliament.uk/ https://www.parliament.lk/
How do you reconcile both of these websites having .gov? You can't, you either need second level domains (.gov.uk,.gov.ik) or you would need one of them to change their name (parliamentsrilanka.gov)
.gov needs to be differentiated, and you need all of these country TLDs for that.
You could create your own DNS server with its own routes and registrars.
If you got enough people to use your DNS network you could create your own registrars and your own rules.
Users would need to switch to your DNS, but otherwise there isn't anything about how the Internet works that requires you to use the big dog DNS
Who gets .gov? The US?
Other countries never used just .gov or just .com.
Damn, you just SLAMMED me.
Yes, honestly the fact that 'youtube music' is literally just a different frontend for YouTube drives me nuts, it goes both ways, the YouTube app for TV doesn't have proper features either, it's unclear if you are getting the music or video version and the most egregious of them all imo, on the TV app, you can't freaking browse for a different song while music is playing, you have to stop the song to go to the search bar.
Cli doesn't make much sense to me either when the *arr suite has a well documented rest API already.
They don't convey the same information.
Infinity isn't really an amount of something.
view more: next ›
Google could pay chrome billions just like they pay mozillla and apple..
Besides it's not like that's really true anyway, chrome would make tons of money independently, it would just sell user data to Google or other parties instead of Google getting it for free. Chrome 'doesn't make any money' because it doesn't need to on paper, the same way a parking lot doesn't make any money for a grocery store, but if a third party owned the lot, the grocery store would just pay them to use it, or the individual people using the lot would.
Chrome is the biggest browser and successfully collects data on billions of people, additionally, chrome development would absolutely be supported by all of the companies that build chromium based browsers like Microsoft, opera, brave, etc.