[Affric]

Forgive the paraphrasing but:

> Apple should seek to use its monopoly power on iOS browsers to take greater search revenue

This couldn’t possibly end with large suits.

And after:

> Google are bad for privacy

This article is nuts.

[1270018080]

Google is undeniably bad for privacy. That’s the whole reason they pay a premium to be the default search.

[Affric]

They key part you have chosen to ignore is:

> "And after:"

This indicates that the article is nuts for suggesting Apple should attempt to get deeper into advertising and search while decrying Google's model.

Getting deeper into advertising and search can only erode the part of the company that believes in any rights that the user has.

[stouset]

Can you expand on how you believe Google is privacy-promoting?

[Affric]

Interesting that you got that from me suggesting it was nuts for Apple to wade deeper into the mire of search and advertising.

[stouset]

I got that from you saying “this article is nuts” in response to a statement—which you directly quoted—that “Google are bad for privacy”.

[Affric]

It’s interesting that you continue to not read my comment. The first thing written there is “forgive the paraphrasing”. Indicating I am not directly quoting.

And the part of my comment you are referring to is entirely contextualised by the words preceding it.

[belltaco]

> This couldn’t possibly end with large suits

How is their current system using monopoly power to boost another monopoly worse than supporting an underdog in the search market?

[Affric]

Not what I have said at all.

I actually think Apple should have less to do with search funnily enough.