spadros

Well, in this case it's if you want to use their API to show maps in your application. If you're doing that, you're going to need to pay them in terms of total requests to their backend. Their B2B service and advertising probably funds the normal consumer app (ie just logging onto 'maps.google.com' to find your local coffee shop).

Hmm, there is something contradictory to me in the funding of Firefox. If it's funded by big search engines paying to be the default for Firefox, then Firefox's revenues are coming from Google or Baidu's revenues. These search engines' revenues come from advertising and tracking, which is what Firefox is meant to be against. I'm not sure how meaningful it is, but it seems like a strange loop to me.

Yeah, the NSA's trust is down the drain. I wouldn't call them whitehat. Huge conflict of interest to accept anything they propose.

The NSA trying to propose an encryption plan is like letting wolves decide how to secure sheep. Total conflict of interest, especially after Snowden.

https://outline.com/Kah74V for the uninitiated.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. What's the point of a feature like RCS to me when I can only use it with other Fido users? I'm not going to expect my friends and family to stay on my provider, so that actively discourages me from wanting any provider locked in features. Make your dumb pipes better and available to all networks and maybe I'll consider it.

'The cell carriers fear being turned into "dumb pipes" and generally prefer proprietary services that give them customer lock-in.'

Uhh, that's kind of what I pay my service providers to do though; deliver services through their "dumb pipes" and infrastructure. There's not a lot of differentiation in internet or phone services from provider to provider for consumers. The biggest difference I can find is price and network availability. Your job as a provider is to give me access to "dumb pipes".

There's good discrimination and bad discrimination from hiring perspective. Every company should discriminate their employees they want to hire, just not based on gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. There's no laws about discriminating against people with less experience or worse public images, and shouldn't be.

That's not really the way business works, though. If one of your employees is the top result on Google for a dumb meme, it could be a liability to the business' image with clients. Hence, you don't take the risk of hiring them over someone else, even if the dumb memer is more qualified and a better fit overall. It simply wouldn't be worth the risk if there's other, less qualified but less risky, potential hires.

Well, yeah. You should always wear a helmet, though!

E-bikes in Canada don't require a license and are not classified as "motor vehicles". Only real requirement for the rider is to be 16+. More info over here:

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/driver/electric-bicycles.sh...

Now, if only it were actually readable...