nameismypw

No, an externality is an impact you create that isn't a part of your business model. It can be positive or negative. Most of the time people talk about negative externalities these days, especially with airlines, they're talking about profiting from climate change. (Although I don't know that Ryanair is worse than anyone else.)

That might be what's called a "you problem."

This is a very privileged and perhaps even ignorant view to take. Not everybody has the luxury of waiting for a peaceful revolution to happen.

No, it sounded misogynistic.

This post is a good example of why SEO is such a joke. Worse than a joke, actually, because it's actively harmful.

If your search algorithm is penalizing Examine.com, that's a bug in your algorithm. It's not up to websites to jump through Google's hoops. Authors only ought to be concerned with authoring good content.

How well is that turning out? You can't rely on people to get it right 100% of the time. I definitely wouldn't.

I agree with you! Protesters in North Koreans and Hong Kongers, too. Nobody needs to help them break the law, they should just build their own infrastructure.

> The lawsuit accuses Google of violating the First Amendment, among other offenses, and Gabbard is seeking $50 million plus assurances that Google will refrain from “censoring or restricting” the account.

Isn't it common rhetoric that Google _can't_ violate the First Amendment, being a private company? They have the ability to arbitrarily close or censor any account they choose. Politicians don't get special treatment, especially while saying it's fair for Google to close accounts belonging to people whom they personally find objectionable.

Hegemony isn't a good reason.

Developers who respect their work, for one.