Maybe. A lot of ktec’s posts are like this. Seems very bot-like. I don’t mind too much since the information is interesting to me.

Same way it sticks on every carbon steel pan which are all smooth.

Would you split the ad division apart from all the rest? Or would each piece (Chrome, Android, Search, YouTube) get part of the ad business?

The issue is that ads are the only thing that makes Google any money. Essentially everything Google does has only one purpose: to drive ad revenues.

And I flat out disagree that Chrome could make any money on its own. It is absolutely mediocre without all the integration into Google services. It would not be able to compete with Firefox on a level playing field.

It’s governments that are responsible for a lack of housing: local governments through zoning policy. The homeowners in a given city are politically engaged and they vote to protect their own investment in real estate. Call it NIMBYism if you like but homeowners are never going to voluntarily agree to have their house go down in price. Doing so could put their mortgage underwater and result in losing their home and becoming homeless.

Japan does not have this issue to nearly the same extent because they have structured their governments differently. Zoning laws are set by the national government, not the local one, so problems like this can (and have been) set at the national level.

For other countries to solve their housing problem Japan style would require the national government to take power away from the local governments (and in the case of the US, this would put the federal government in a fight with state governments). It would be an extremely messy fight and probably not work out.

I’m not so worried about unfairness to the companies. They have many billions of dollars in the bank. Even after breaking them up all the pieces would still have billions of dollars.

What I’m not so much worried about but puzzled at is exactly how you would break up something like Google or Apple. Do you make every single app its own company?

So for Google you would have Chrome, Android (sans Chrome), the Google Play Store, Google Search, YouTube, Google Cloud, Gmail, Google Ads… Making all of these into separate companies feels right but I don’t know how they would operate. Chrome on its own doesn’t make any money, for example, it’s just a free browser they use to steer people into their other services. Gmail also doesn’t make any money either, it’s just a vehicle for Google’s ads. Same goes for Search and YouTube. They’re all integrated into the same ad platform. Would each piece have to break off and start selling their own ads individually?

Also Android without Chrome sounds pretty bad. Tons of Android apps are using Chrome under the hood, so they would just stop working altogether.

I think the same story applies to Apple and their operating systems and services. Break them up and iOS just doesn’t work anymore. It would have to be completely rewritten and a lot of apps would as well.

How about the political gap? One of the big trends to come out of the election was the big divide in terms of party and college degree.

That’s legit though. I’m talking about the people who buy jeans that are pre-worn, with big holes and cuts in them from the store!

I’ve heard a ton of dumb things about growing it. Everything from Epsom salts to birth control pills and classical music.

Turns out it actually grows like a weed as long as it gets plenty of sunlight, good quality soil, water, and fertilizer. The only real gotcha is that you need to identify and remove male plants before they release a bunch of pollen.

I have a Wii and a whole bunch of games just collecting dust. Even now that I’m reminded of it I don’t have any desire to play.

I do really want to grab a CRT TV and a NES and SNES. I miss those games far more than anything on the Wii!

You can sell out on anything, no matter how unpopular it is, if you don’t make enough of them. How many of these things did they actually make?

I think most of those voters vote based on who they identify with, not based on policy arguments. Trying to sway those voters with better messaging is a lost cause if they see your candidate as a career politician whom they cannot relate to.

Some other thoughts: a lot of people talking about ignorant voters but not much said about the disastrous state of education in the US, the lack of affordability, nor the ill-preparedness for work of degree-holders. Countless people in the US have degrees that don’t fit their job!

Wow, chill out! I was very careful to use the word more. I didn’t say other countries are ethnically homogenous in the absolute sense, just relative to the US. Take Japan for example. Yes, there are quite a lot of ethnic minorities in Japan (both indigenous and foreign) however well over 90% of the country identifies only as Japanese and nothing else. This is a very different picture from the US.

You can see a similar story many other countries but not all. India, for example, has many ethnic groups which are strongly distinguished by language, religion, and culture. It’s also the case that ethnicity plays a major role in the politics of India and that role has been increasing of late, not diminishing.

The police represent the state’s monopoly over organized violence. If you get rid of the police then what you have is called a failed state and a power vacuum. What happens then? Read about cartel-controlled areas of Mexico, warlord-controlled areas in Central African Republic, jihadist-controlled areas of Nigeria or Syria, or criminal gang-controlled areas in Haiti for examples.

Don’t get me wrong. The police in the US are quite bad. But things could be so much worse. I’m talking about guys driving around in pickup trucks with machine guns mounted on the backs, firing indiscriminately into crowds of people and homes and public places. Mass kidnappings, massacres, rape as a weapon of war. This is ugly, horrific stuff.

That’s because most countries are far more ethnically homogenous than the US. The ones that aren’t show similar patterns. Look at India for example. Or Israel.

Simple solution to that is to shoot your entire wad the day before inauguration!

Yeah I don’t understand shabby fashion at all. I mean if I’m wearing clothing that’s full of holes it’s because I’m too cheap and lazy to buy new clothes.

Having to file income taxes for their children is a burden the poor do not need.

Income taxes in general are regressive, even with all the exemptions and credits. If you want progressive taxation you should be looking at land value taxes and other forms of wealth taxation that rich people can’t avoid.

Yeah so you’re not really serious.

You might as well brush your teeth with this stuff:

(Don’t do this!)

What is a gift though? Is it a gift for your parents to feed you, clothe you, and let you live with them rent free?