HN user

aljones

297 karma
Posts0
Comments140
View on HN
No posts found.

Chrome is heavily promoted on some of the most high traffic websites. Users of those websites are told they should use Chrome. So they do. There's nothing Mozilla can do about that. Mozilla doesn't enforce antitrust. No upheaval within Mozilla will change it.

It is not a very conspicuous signal. I don't know which one of my friends use Amazon Smile. I don't think the dark pattern would work well if Amazon Smile was only social signalling. Seems to me it relies much more upon the fact that actual money is given to charities. Pretty gross of Amazon to add unrelated self serving conditions to such giving.

I can't say that I like the wikipedia reminders, but I don't dislike them. They remind me to pay for a service I use daily. So I do and they don't remind for a while. It is fine.

Ideal competitive markets allow for little profit. Significant profits are a sign that a market lacks competition. One can certainly not expect a company to voluntarily lower prices based on a value judgement. It requires competition or, in unusual cases, regulation.

The US and Russia avoided conflict with each other before and after the atom bomb, and also before and after the UN made it illegal. I'm not sure either were essential or even effective deterrents.

Chrome's growth was bootstrapped with very pushy ads on the highest traffic website on the internet, that typically doesn't allow ads. They also paid to bundle it with unrelated installers.