To be fair the situation has changed drastically over the past 12 months.
After 2.0, AOT got enabled by default, drastically reducing size, then 4.0 drastically reduced size, then the build-optimizer (default with 5.0) drastically reduced size.
As a business, the onus is on you to provide a service that incentivizes consumers to move up from the free tier. If your free trials are being abused, that's an issue with the way your business is structured, not how people register.
You are well within your rights as a business to decline potential customers over something like this, but you need them more than they need you.
It is important that in a system where you have an interaction between groups with differing opinions that neither side has more influence over the rating (score?,metric?) in question. If I agree with a post I can perform the single action of upvoting; however, if I disagree I can downvote _and_ report. This leaves more power in the hands of those who disagree, and would almost certainly be abused.
>So basically Google inc (in a tax haven) makes Google Spain pay for the use of the Google brand 8 billions. Google Spain never makes a profit since it needs to pay a fee for using the brand, thus never have to pay taxes on their huge profit, that's how they get away with it.
I've seen you post this several times. Do you have a source that I could read up on this?
If you were developing a product, would you invest time, money, and research into a feature that (maybe) one or two percent of your users would utilize?
Google already said in the above article that "only" 0.1% of its users get targeted by state-sponsored attacks (which by the way is about 500,000 users) - so why even bother building that then, by your logic? Clearly, just a waste of resources (probably the same for two-factor auth, Security Key, etc).
How many times have we heard companies "China has a 1 billion people - imagine if we only got 1% of that market with our product!". But we're talking about a feature of a product here, not an entire product that only gets 1% of a market's userbase.
0.1% here, 1% there, another 10% over there - all of these features add-up to create a great product that everyone loves because of the aggregate of features but also because of that "one" feature they love individually.
Another thing to remember is that the enthusiasts are the market-builders. You can't just win with a product that surveys well with 80% of the market. I don't think most of the phone or smartphone customers in 2007 wanted a touchscreen phone. Probably (well, literally, actually) only 1% of the market wanted it then.
Also, we don't know how important this feature could be to gain Google more trust. Telegram for instance has gotten promoted as a private messenger that uses end-to-end encryption - and yet its end-to-end encryption isn't even enabled by default (so same scenario that I was talking about), while its "normal" encryption is probably worse and less secure than what Google uses for Hangouts.
I'd argue that Google implemented it because they don't want their product to be implicated in a high-profile attack; if someone disappeared because their Gmail credentials were phished, it could easily blow back on Google and contribute to a perception that Google services are fundamentally insecure.
It might be a harder sell to implement E2E crypto, although perhaps the same argument might apply some day. The notifications are probably just low-hanging fruit.
>You should get out daily, for at least 1 hour. Simply because that one hour is for recharging your brain, which again leads to better performance.
This has been pivotal for me when I work from home. I like to go out for breakfast to start the day off and then go out again in the afternoon to run some kind of small errand.
