rydre

This has been debunked, look it up.

I'm sorry, did you just allude to America being more corrupt than China?

I'm saying that America is relatively in my opinion more corrupt than the America of the past.

I'm not comparing it to China, China has a different set of systems. Both systems might work.

Maybe we are seeing the effect of monopolies stifling innovation.

American's will only wake up when it's too late. Zuck will bribe the government in the meanwhile. Corrupt countries become less competitive over time. America is trending on the path of corruption and it's visible to every outsider now, except for unfortunately American's themselves.

As pollution mounts and industrial input into agriculture falls, food production per capita falls. Health and education services are cut back, and that combines to bring about a rise in the death rate from about 2020. Global population begins to fall from about 2030, by about half a billion people per decade. Living conditions fall to levels similar to the early 1900s.

This article is from 2014, so the 2020 bit struck me.

This is at least partly false. First, you need to be Mirandized before being interviewed. You do not need to be Mirandized at the moment you are being arrested.

because they didn’t put a decal on their vehicle.

Dude do you really see no problem with this? My biggest issue is how do I know if they're actual law enforcement agencies or some thugs? If I were in the situation, I would not know to resist the arrest or to comply because I do not know if they're kidnappers or law enforcers.

I do not have much of a problem if I know they're actual law enforcers. But I can easily see this slipping into worse things like gangs pretending to be law enforcement and kidnapping people.

It’s probably easier to buy the whole thing than to buy 30% of it. ‘Cause I say how do you do 30%? Who’s going to get the name? The name is hot, the brand is hot. And who’s going to get the name? How do you do that if it’s owned by two different companies? So, my personal opinion was, you are probably better off buying the whole thing rather than buying 30% of it. I think buying 30% is complicated.

... I did say that if you buy it, whatever the price is, that goes to whoever owns it, because I guess it’s China, essentially, but more than anything else, I said a very substantial portion of that price is going to have to come into the Treasury of the United States. Because we’re making it possible for this deal to happen. Right now they don’t have any rights, unless we give it to ’em. So if we’re going to give them the rights, then it has to come into, it has to come into this country.

It’s a little bit like the landlord-tenant [relationship]. Uh, without a lease, the tenant has nothing. So they pay what is called “key money” or they pay something. But the United States should be reimbursed, or should be paid a substantial amount of money because without the United States they don’t have anything, at least having to do with the 30%.

This could also be interpreted as something akin to extortion.

American social media app's dominate my country. Google 99% market share. Facebook/Instagram 95% market share in social. 5eyes/PRISM (they're not gonna forgive snowden, he ruined their reputation) monitors my country (not part of the anglospehere) and I never consented.

Am I supposed to tell my government to block American apps so that I can compete with American apps or on "national security" grounds? Because this is the trend American's will see. And if Zuck is reading this, you're shooting your own foot. What do you think is gonna happen? You're pitting the government against TikTok because your company cannot compete fairly. You think you'll win like this? Your Facebook/Instagram will get banned in future by other democratic countries in future because of the precedent you're going to be setting.

Let China do it's thing. It may very well turn out that their way of governance is better. Losers stick to old ways, if it turns out it's the superior system, they'll clearly be better.

But for a system to be proven takes decades/centuries. As long as China does not force it's system, it's fine in my eyes.

All media is propaganda. I like consuming the American and CCP kool aid at the same time tho... am I a sinner?

4chan. He wrote it there, afaik from a Twitter comment with screenshot posted many days ago before the Feds announced the kid.

Then bragged about it and went for more accounts. His friends left him when he went for the high profile accounts. I think it was organized on discord.

[deleted]

If there is any rule of law in the country, this should be against the constitution.

If the US does this, they'll be losing a lot of goodwill founders from other countries have about the US.

The US is uniquely thought of as a part of every country for business. If you're from third world country but you'd like to do a tech business in the US, you're free to do so without much hurdles by the government. Open competition. No other country is like that.

This is what separated the US from the rest of countries like China. You'd dream that in case your startup got big, you'd move to the US, and hire quality engineers/researchers there. You'd like American protection on free speech to protect your company. Your company would not be banned for 'hurting' people. Rule of law. This is increasingly no longer the case.

Now the US is starting to feel like China and the EU more and more. Even if China's economy was bigger than the US, the US would still be in a good position because of their appearance and rule of law. When it's going to be similar to China, why not just do business with China first altogether since they're going to be the bigger economy? China is slowly becoming more liberal to founders from 3rd world countries now. While America seems to not notice this right now, China is slowly becoming more open to competition from poorer countries. The difference is stark even compared to 5 years ago.

Maybe China might not be so much fair right now to American companies because of a power imbalance where the US is too far ahead on certain things that they feel like after their companies catch up, they want to allow open competition. And they seem to progressing to this trajectory.

It would bring up opportunity for alternative models for news instead of being tied to search/feed.

YouTube will be difficult to replicate. The long tail channel are too many and useful.

Yeah, I have built a proof of concept for this, but without GPT-3.

Works well except for the edge cases. Aka not fully automatable yet so I never showed it to anyone.

Does Apple treat other video streamers differently than Amazon?

Apple changed it's rules for everyone in this category to get Amazon onboard with their video service.

Why should it take another Amazon in another industry to change rules for that industry? Why did Apple change it's rules in an entire category so that they can get Amazon onboard? Because Amazon is too big and has leverage over Apple? Isn't it?

Well this is precisely why good democracies and competitive countries have anti trust laws.

This also shows that for some arbitrary categories to please companies that have leverage over Apple, Apple will change rules at whim. This also indirectly indicates that Apple does not treat all developers equally - if you look at this in good faith.

Context for those who missed yesterday's anti-trust hearings:

Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple said that Apple treats developers equally - under oath. The problem is that Amazon got a special deal. Baidu (the Chinese Google) got a special deal where Apple fast tracks App Store approval for them and have special assigned Apple employees for their app(s). This might be one of the evidence that Apple's CEO lied under oath.

(do you mean "didn't really happen"?)

I messed up (just edited the comment to correct), what I mean is in a hypothetical scenario where Apple really did this, why would you defend them?

What is really amusing in hindsight was the number of people willing to pile on and argue that this was in fact totally reasonable of Apple to be doing and that we shouldn't be surprised or upset at all about it.

Exactly, while I had doubts about this accusation on Apple, I was surprised about how many people were okay with it. These people (defenders of Apple) vote, but they're not even likely to be Billionaires (it's not wrong to be a Billionaire if you play fair). Why do they defend such an awful practice if it actually happened and wasn't fake news?

Projected revenue for 2021 is $6b. $50B valuation is robbery at day sight by investors. TikTok's China sibling Douyin is projected to make $28 billion this year in China.

TikTok will serve the purpose to Chinese government that Hollywood served for America's elite. It's worth every penny for softpower.

No, it's going to be bigger. I know most people dont use snap but they use tiktok.

Everyone young uses tiktok. It's much bigger than snap could have ever hoped. TikTok is FAANG tier company.

If I were the founder, I'd go the Chinese government and ask them to ban Tesla and put tariff on Apple in retaliation. Tell the U.S. to play free market like they claim. Or lost access for it's companies.

TikTok deserves it's success fully. It's very unfair that the U.S. government is insistent on blocking it. It's not a monopoly. It's not a dirty company. Virtually all of its "privacy violations" are the same violations done by Google, Facebook. Break up BigTech instead of hitting a creative startup.

$50B seems too low for TikTok. It could be atleast as big as Facebook in the next five years.

$200B min if investors are serious.

AMD is the exception, not the norm. There are very few companies that can do that turn around. And AMD was lucky that Intel wasn't able to continue their progress. Had Intel still been ahead of AMD, AMD's revenue's wont be growing.

Companies have growth even after they're dead. When the growth slows, by then it's too late.

If Intel has another delay, they're dead. They'll be like Boeing (but their mistake won't directly kill people). It'll mean that all engineering culture is dead and the best minds have already left the company. Everyone who at Intel who predicted the wrong schedule and not a realistic one should be fired. They have destroyed a national champion in their short term greed.

Currently what you can do as a website owner is to use Google Adsense

Nooo! This is not what I meant. I mean that embedding a search engine to your website without the user moving back to Google. So every website has a search engine for the entire internet. Not just Google. I want search to be kind of affiliate revenue to Amazon. So the developer embeds a search engine on the search page of a news website they get commission off the ads in a search result if the user decide to use search on the news paper's website. A search engine like Google for global search not just site-limited search.

Like do what Google is doing to websites but in reverse. Commoditize search. It'll require something more to get it right/product market fit but it's possible if you be creative.

Google is not the end product, its a compliment to websites. Websites need to commoditize Google instead of it being the other way around.

*I don't entirely understand your search engine idea

Does google allow for iframeing or customizing it's search results? No. A new search engine that has a API/plugin for 3rd party websites so that websites can integrate a global search engine into the website like google integrates websites' content into its instant answers. There is room for innovation here when 3rd party websites get creative in displaying global search results in different ways simple or complicated ways. If there are Ads in results, the website gets paid a % of the ad revenue that the search engine made due to the website embedding it's results.

Search engine's are high margin business, so they should be able to share 50% revenue with websites.

The problem is that website are commodities. The future for original high quality websites is that they should not allow search engines to crawl their content and slowly become a brand which people trust. Stop relying on search for traffic. Be an app, websites for marketing only.

Alternative new search engines are needed that allow for embedding/iframe/integration of global web search results in any 3rd party website free of cost. Then the new search engine should share ad revenue with the website that embeds their results+ads. Google does not allow that, but there is a real opportunity here. Embeddable global search engine that websites would like to integrate with.

A search engine that website would love to integrate. A search engine that websites would advertise themselves because they win too. Unlike the current scenario where only Google wins.

news about my country

I would recommend that if you're from the U.S., just subscribe to the Reuters RSS feed and one Chinese state public broadcast channel (globaltimes.cn). That's it. You'd know what both sides say and form an independent opinion after that.

If you're Chinese, follow one of the reputable American media (not CNN, Fox, New York Times etc they're low quality entertainment sources, not news) but something like AP or Reuters in addition to your own. Never believe one side.

HN/bookface only. Reddit once used to be good for real reviews/opinions. But now it's full of shills/manipulation bots who do not disclose themselves. The conversation and comments do not feel organic either and highly manipulated on international/news/geopolitical/political/sensitive things. It's like someone wants to force us to change our views.