What does it solve though? If the purpose of RTO is being together with your team, and you don't have enough desks to bring the team in the office at the same time, this solves basically nothing.
Actually it does play a factor, GDPR had it so the data on EU citizens had to be located within the EU. Now they have alternative options for the UK - then that aspect does as I initially outlined becomes key.
Hence the question of actual costs to Google in hosting in say Ireland (staffing, taxes, rates, utility costs, cooling....) compared with another location outside the EU that may very well have cheaper running costs due to many factors.
I hope that clears up why location is a factor now as it related to running costs and if they can save some money, well, they will.
More so if they suddenly free up capacity in a datacenter which has higher costs than some other locations outside the EU. All these details do very much, however small, stack up at the scale of users Google operates with and for the UK, several million is a large chunk of potential savings.
Installing this extension basically means trusting a random dude (the author) with all the data passing through the browser just to screw over some random people trying to get coarse-grained stats on where people come to their websites from. Sounds like a rather idiotic idea, but I'm sure even this will have its users.
Except that if you install the add-on from the store it will auto-update with any changes (assuming they pass approval) and you likely wouldn't notice unless permissions are changed.
The addon is open source (this HN post even links to the GitHub), and the source code is very short, so it's easy to verify that it's doing only what it says. If you are extra paranoid about the addon in the Chrome store not reflecting what's in the repo, you can always install it from source.
This is wishful thinking. How confident are you that you'll spot a well planted backdoor? Hint: the more capable you are, the less confident you should be.
If you're that paranoid, it's actually not very hard to audit the code in this case. Unless you go so far as to not trust the whole stack it's running on, but in that case you should stop using your browser entirely. For a sane threat model the confidence in your own audit should be reasonably high.
You're being downvoted for injecting a political topic (the Israeli-Palestinian conflict) into an unrelated article on chess and Saudi Arabia, not because of "narrative"
This is a war the Palestinians cannot win conventionally, so it is heavily waged through the court of public opinion. Hamas’s bread and butter is exploiting tragedies for propaganda wins, which is why they fire rockets from schools and hospitals.
The Israelis for their part have strict engagement protocols, although the cynic in me believes avoiding PR issues is at least as big of a factor as avoiding loss of life. From that realpolitik standpoint, they screwed up here.
The fact of the matter is - if you are part of violent protests, even if you are just sitting and waving a flag, you’re taking a risk.
The fact that the propaganda machine is now spinning is business as usual, sadly. And gets neither side closer to a resolution.
I think the real fact here is that whatever Israel does, no matter how wicked and evil or what the evidence shows, you get downvoted to oblivion for stating the facts because they speak against the actions of Israel. Hackernews seems like a slightly more civilized version of reddit, but when it comes to politics, the insane bias shines through.
It is not a topic that can be discussed either rationally or decently most places on the internet.
You bear some responsibility for this too. Coming out charging with flamebait, then blaming others when you get a flamewar, is incongruent. That's independent, by the way, of whether your underlying views are right or wrong, or even whether your indignation is justified.
We ban accounts that use HN primarily for political battle, regardless of which politics. So if you'd like to keep commenting here, please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and take the spirit of this site, i.e. intellectual curiosity, to heart.
Yeah, 3900 CHF and only 2 years of warranty... I can imagine cost of spare parts after it expires. For this price I would expect 7 years warranty as minimum.
Why is it just alcohol and gambling and not, say, cat food and toothbrushes? I understand you don't like alcohol and gambling, but how do you derive that others should be prevented from seeing what you don't like?
I am asking for a filter for my personal feed. I am mot asking for a filter for other people. Sorry I didn't make that clear. This has weak potential for a claim under English law. If I am a person with an addiction to alcohol I might ask YouTube to make a reasonable adjustment: not to show me alcohol adverts.
Allowing users some granularity over ads makes sense for everyone. I am never going to buy nor rent a car so showing me car ads is stupid. Allow me to opt out of seeing car ads and the advertisers save money and the content I'm watchig doesn't get negative associations and I am less likely to install ad blocking software.
But if I create a video and host it on YouTube I would want to prevent adverts for gambling or alcohol to appear next to that video. I'm not sure this is offerred by Google.
