rather than its counterfactual replacement some years later.
Why later? Perhaps its replacement would have been Yahoo!, created earlier.
Yes, it could have been Yahoo! — what I meant is “counterfactual replacement of the same quality.” It would have taken a while for an existing search engine to reach the same level of quality.
Why later? Perhaps its replacement would have been Yahoo!, created earlier.
Yes, it could have been Yahoo! — what I meant is “counterfactual replacement of the same quality.” It would have taken a while for an existing search engine to reach the same level of quality.