Correct, but in this case people went to Google to search for flights, so one may argue the user wants to see, well, flight information. Yet, despite Google knowing the answer, it cannot show to users, per DMA.
Instead, Google needs to send the user to a 3P website, which may or may not have the information the user is looking for. And the 3P website needs to monetize its traffic, so you should expect another wave of ads (in addition to the ones you already saw at google.com), plus cookie consent banners, affiliate links, offer for hotels, car rental, etc.
It's interesting to see the number of folks apparently in favor of DMA and the strict regulatory environment in EU. Genuinely curious: what is the concrete benefit for users (and does it offset the negatives)? And does this foster a healthy and thriving environment for innovation?
In my liberal view it sounds awful for users and entrepreneurs alike. Wondering what are the arguments in favor (other than "apple/google = bad").
E.g.
Consider the DMA’s impact on Europe’s tourism industry. The DMA requires Google Search to stop showing useful travel results that link directly to airline and hotel sites, and instead show links to intermediary websites that charge for inclusion. This raises prices for consumers, reduces traffic to businesses, and makes it harder for people to quickly find reliable, direct booking information.
If you believe in fully remote work, and think that companies should not pay double to have employees in HCOL locations: why would you hire in a crazily expensive market like the US in the first place?
If everyone is remote, why not put your employees in Costa Rica? Or São Paulo? Colombia? Heck, even Canada is cheaper than many places in the US.
And we're only talking about timezone-aligned markets. You can also consider Poland, or India, and now you can hire a lot more resources for the same cost. Sure, it will be less efficient, collaboration tax and all, but 2.5X is quite a difference.
The one thing holding US-based companies from going all-in offshore is the belief that in-person relationships still matter. They would rather pay the extra COL mark up than save 40-70% for a remote employee.
To be clear: the jobs are going to other markets; this is not a either or situation. But at least hybrid RTO has as a dampening effect, and protects the internal job market. We should be celebrating folks like Amazon, not complaining that they don't get it.
In the past we had more demand than supply, which kept salaries stable (read: high). Now there's more supply than demand, and the main thing holding salaries stable is that employers still want warm bodies walking through their doors every day. Remove that, and you get a race to the bottom.
Agree. Contrary to many comments here, I believe this was a disaster meeting for Zelenski personally, and for his political future.
This was a photo op opportunity. His job there was to make Trump look good, so he could secure additional support and funds. He was there to stroke Trump's ego for the media, likely join Trump on the lets-play-the-tough-guy pushing Europe to open the wallet, and maybe, just maybe, lightly mention that ceasefire is a good first step, but it alone is not enough.
Instead the tried to pick a fight with the bulliest of bullies, in their home turf, in front of a hundred journalists recording every second. You don't try to be a smartypants and teach history to the guy who got elected in rewriting history (see them debating the who-did-what in 2015-2016).
I think this was a colossal mistake in the 3D chess of this invasion.
Now he gave all the reasons for Trump to wash their hands of any responsibility, and let Europe fix the mess.
The only thing that may still keep Trump engaged is Trump's own ego. He was seeing this as an opportunity to go in the history books as the biggest peace dealmaker, and potentially a Nobel Peace prize winner. Now.. not so much.
It depends on what you'd consider "untrustworthy", but some (myself included) feel it's hypocritical for Apple to position itself as a privacy conscious choice, and use its marketing / PR machine to give the impression it only makes money on devices/subscriptions, when they're silently managing an ads-funded cash cow, with billions of dollars that go directly to the bottom line, as pure profit.
Here's a few pointers, to get you up to speed [1-5]. Of course there's nothing wrong with monetizing their own user base and selling ads based on their 1PD (or, in the case of Safari, monetizing the search engine placement). But I find it ironic that they make a ton of money by selling ads based on the exact same practices they demonize others for -- user behavior, contextual, location, profile.
Honest question: what kind of "blogs" and "social" would survive without advertising? What kind of content creator can produce quality content in the long run, for free?
The Verge? Nops. Techcrunch? Also not. AnandTech or Business Insider? No and no. Hackaday? Dead. NYT and Bloomberg? Maybe, and likely not. And what about your top 20 favorite YouTube creators? The majority would be gone.
Sure, the long tail of quirky small bloggers would be unaffected -- they don't really make any money today from advertising. But a lot of them are bottom-feeders; they consume content produced by others, and re-hash to add their own takes.
And we're not even talking about the second order effect -- all the ecommerce companies that would be wiped out without qualified leads and traffic. Go to any site - The Verge, Hackaday, Daring Fireball - and see the ads. Most of those companies would disappear.
Is this really the web you want to live in? A web with only a handful of publications with large followings who can command premium subscription (read: The Information, NYT, Stratechery, etc), and the top x% of privileged wealthy folks who can afford paying for a bunch of subscriptions?
Yes, I would call advertising a social necessity. It's like a multi-dimension version of prisoner's dilemma - it may not feel you're winning, but the alternative option is much worse.
If you use Chrome, YouTube Shorts Block [1] is a good extension for that, and removes (mostly) Shorts videos. Not perfect, still leaves some traces (e.g. empty spaces, channel titles in subscriptions), but it helps to declutter your user experience.
And while we're talking about extensions to customize your YT experience, here's three more that I really enjoy:
- Clickbait Remover [2], to remove the usually clickbait-ish video thumbnails
- Unhook [3], to remove the recommended videos entirely. This extension helped me reduce the time spent on YT. I now browse recommendations on my phone much more quickly, add what I want to check out to Watch Later queue, so on desktop I only search, check subscriptions, or consume my WL queue
- Video Speed Controller [4]. This one is super popular, so probably you already have it installed.
100x this. Unless the OP finds someone with an equal drive to build a family and have kids now, 9 out of 10 guys will simply bail out before even trying. No one wants the risk of realizing later that you wasted OP's precious time, so better to not even try.
> Please encouragement only, no discouragement. I’m discouraged enough already.
IMHO, that's exactly the problem. Bear with me for a sec.
Unless you find someone who has the exact same objective and wants to have kids asap (i.e., a more transactional relationship), this will always be a major turn off. Your partner will feel pressured to make a decision quickly, and sooner or later will think the main thing you want is their sperm to have a baby. That's a recipe for folks to back off. Even if you believe you're not putting pressure, I bet they can smell it a mile away. It has a direct impact on your mindset, your behavior, and self-confidence, even if you believe you're effective in masking it.
It may sound counter intuitive, but once you stop trying "to find someone to marry and have kids", you may actually find someone.
The first step is to start accepting yourself and your life as it is -- and being proud of being single and having no kids. It is what it is. Cut the bullshit of dating coaches, hundred dates, dozen of books, and all the mental energy you're wasting obsessing about it. Give up the serial dating, and immerse yourself in work, or a cause you care about, sports, gym, hobbies, church, or whatever suits your fancy. Sure, make new friends and go on dates, but not because you want to "find love and build a family", but because you want to have fun and enjoy having sex every now and then.
Once you do it - truly do it - you'll be seen as more attractive, more powerful, successful, confident, remarkable, independent. You won't need anyone on your side to be the best version of yourself. And there's nothing more f*ing attractive than that.
Pragmatically speaking, you've already frozen your eggs, so you have a plan B for later. For now, internalize that you are enough. Once you accept it, everything else will follow.
Instead, Google needs to send the user to a 3P website, which may or may not have the information the user is looking for. And the 3P website needs to monetize its traffic, so you should expect another wave of ads (in addition to the ones you already saw at google.com), plus cookie consent banners, affiliate links, offer for hotels, car rental, etc.
Is this a better experience for users?