Don't forget that the powerful Firefox extensions like noscript, firebug, imacros,... are what (many) users love about Firefox. Chrome only has "lite" versions of these tools for technical reasons (limited extension API).
So I agree that the very rapid release schedule is the problem here. It brings more problems than it solves. Just because Google does something, does not mean it is good for everyone.
> Don't forget that the powerful Firefox extensions like noscript, firebug, imacros,... are what (many) users love about Firefox.
It depends how you characterize "many". Many users you encounter doesn't necessarily equal many FF users. I think what the vast majority of Firefox users love about it is that it is the browser they use, and have used for a long time. In other words, their loyalty doesn't run so deep. Those are the users this move is for, those that use Firefox habitually instead of for some particular reason and could possibly switch to Chrome.
> Chrome only has "lite" versions of these tools for technical reasons (limited extension API).
Not just Chrome, but Safari & Opera as well. There is a reason for that, it's because it's the smarter way to go. Firefox's extension system is a massive cause of headaches for Mozilla. It's going to go eventually, the only question is how soon.
> So I agree that the very rapid release schedule is the problem here. It brings more problems than it solves.
Problems for you, you mean. Rapid release, seamless updates and a less invasive extension system solves big problems for Mozilla and most end users, problems that are causing them to switch to Chrome.
> Just because Google does something, does not mean it is good for everyone.
Likewise, just because devs want it doesn't mean it's worth compromising the experience for everyone else. They'll find another way, users will just find another product.
What does their lack of transparency have to do with portability? Google is accusing facebook of holding users' data hostage. Both facebook and Google keep lots of aspects of their business private for competitive advantage. Locking users in and intentionally making it as difficult as possible for them to try competitors is a crappy thing for facebook to do, and Google scores a legitimate advantage by doing the opposite.
It's funny because it's unethical. With any luck, he'll get greedy and push the "reporting on companies I invest in" needle so far that it gets too noisey we stop reading (and posting everything he does on HN).
"Truth is, 90 percent of the people there, you will find, they'll do the most stupid things, impulsive things. I know for a fact. At the same time, Americans are bighearted people, and the remaining 10 percent of them are smart. Bloody smart. That's why they rule the world."
Americans have a great can-do attitude and are lucky to have some of the wealthiest land in the world. These two things let them exploit their smarts very well. But bighearted? Not really. Domestic charity doesn't really stand out from the pack and foreign aid is a lesser proportion of GDP than their contemporaries. Their foreign aid is more effective than elsewhere because of the size of their economy, but as a proportion of what is earned, it's not competitive.
My personal experience in the US is that the people are very welcoming and friendly, which leads me to think that Americans are bighearted to people they personally know, but not so much to strangers - eg witness the powerful currents of public opinion against welfare or universal healthcare that don't really exist in contemporary countries.
Also varies based on what you've visited before. English Wikipedia works fine… until you visit the Tiananmen Square Protests article, and then suddenly all of Wikipedia stops working.
In the US it costs maybe a couple hundred bucks and a week or so to set up an LLC and an S-corp(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_corporation). How much would this cost and how long would it take in the EU?
25,000 EUR is a fair bit of money, especially considering the avg. YC investment is < $20k, IIRC. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like a GmbH operates almost nothing like an S-corp.
