Slashdot Mirror

When they said that hackers could have the doll speak anything they wanted, I was thinking of Talky Tina as well.

... They also have a director of Buddhist meditation, which is kind of weird tbh.

Once you're sitting on that huge pile of money, it's best to look contemplative...
Swimming around in it like Scrooge McDuck is right out!
Unless you're sure no one is looking.

> Your original source is a video by a guy who is famous for dishonestly editing videos... and yet you keep going back to him as a primary source.

There's a bunch of evidence that corroborates it, unless you don't believe the FEC pay stubs or the independent YouTube videos of her lying to the cops?

You don't believe the DC police arrest records?

The evidence speaks for itself. I don't need to consider them credible.

So what? Even if the evidence is right all it means is someone who is passionate about politics to work for a PAC is also passionate enough to engage in underhanded tactics.

As I said, even if your evidence is true, it's irrelevant.

Or like this (The Expanse) https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

> Your original source is a video by a guy who is famous for dishonestly editing videos... and yet you keep going back to him as a primary source.

There's a bunch of evidence that corroborates it, unless you don't believe the FEC pay stubs or the independent YouTube videos of her lying to the cops?

You don't believe the DC police arrest records?

The evidence speaks for itself. I don't need to consider them credible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

You mean this?

Anyone eve have a Heathkit?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Well, Youtube has apparently gone a step further and has taken down the mirror of PewDiePie's video because it violates their policy on hate speech. A quick search on Vimeo turned up nothing, so I don't have a more durable link handy.

This is, uh... an interesting escalation.

I was reminded of this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

> Disney would be daft not to distance themselves from such an inflammatory douchebag.

You mean like Walt Disney himself?

Some of us remember Disney's own past you know.

Bullshit - Facebook's terms of use allow them to redistribute ANYTHING you post to any and all 3rd parties, and even to charge for it.

you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.

I was going to say that's the standard legalese any online service needs to use to give themselves the right to make the service function (you need to grant them the right to reproduce your stuff on the computers of people who are viewing it). But then I noticed a subtle difference in the wording. Here's the equivalent portion of YouTube's terms of service:

For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your Content. However, by submitting Content to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Content in connection with the Service and YouTube's (and its successors' and affiliates') business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the Service (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels.

I've emphasized the important parts. At first glance they seem identical. But if you look carefully, although both ToS use the term "in connection with [the service]", it modifies different things.

• In the Facebook ToS, it modifies "content that you post". That is, anything you post on Facebook, you're giving them a license to do anything they want with. Basically, anything you post on Facebook, they own and can do whatever they want with, including selling it, up until you delete it or your account.
• In the YouTube ToS, it modifies "perform the Content". That is, the license you're granting is only for the purposes of playing the video on YouTube. Anything you post on YouTube, you still own, and YouTube only has rights to broadcast it to people viewing it via YouTube (or an embedded link).

They're already having problems. I looked into what this company does, and among other eclectic things, they produce film titles. Here is one of their productions, and as you can see, they were sacked and replaced by another company (at great expense - and then that company was replaced by yet another company) before the project was completed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Sargon of Akkad did a video explaining the Pewdiepie situation very well. Sadly the only people who want to learn are people who don't know him (like me) or get information from the far left who started the petitions, threats, etc... Those people are stuck in confirmation bias, so will simply call Sargon a [insert_ism/obe]. People who knew him already knew this was coming so don't need the lesson.

I "almost" agree that Youtube has become a better source of information than broadcast "news", but probably for different reasons. There are a few people I subscribe to and follow, but most of the time I use that information to find sources. It takes me 5 minutes to read a transcript versus 5 minutes to read someone's analysis of a transcript. When the majority of media ignores information that does not fit a narrative and cherry picks for an agenda, my time is better spent with the actual source making up my own mind.

What about this clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

When Trump says "CNN is fake news," how can I reasonably disagree?

How does it taste?

From: Better Off Ted Season 1, Episode 2: "Heroes" :

• Jerome [tasting meat made in lab]: It tastes familiar.
• Ted: Beef?
• Jerome: No.
• Linda: Chicken? We'll take chicken.
• Ted: What does it taste like?
• Jerome: Despair.
• Ted: Is it possible it just needs salt?

This is my recent fav CNN edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

People get so appalled by Trump/right-wingers calling CNN "fake news" but I don't understand how anyone can defend CNN when they do shit like this. It's not usually this blatant but it's almost always there. Real "facts," completely made-up context.

I would say the case is the same with PewDiePie here. He clearly wasn't encouraging people to kill Jews. He was actually trying to come up with the very worst thing someone could say, and that's what he came up with. So his actually belief ("The very worst thing you can say is 'kill all jews'") is turned into "PewDiePie wants to kill all Jews." The MSM's context is the exact 180 degree opposite of PewDiePie's stated belief.

The good thing to come out of this is Pewd's 53 million young subscribers who have been watching him for years and know he's not a racist/anti-Semite have now been given an extremely relevant and personal example of how the media lies. Kids critically examining the bias/falsehoods of the mainstream media sounds pretty good to me.

I mostly get my news from youtube channels now. It is a very strange place to be in were I clearly can see that I don't get the whole story from the old giants.
I won't even bother to watch news channels anymore. .

Regarding the pewdiepie thing. It so weird that if I want the level headed insight to that whole thing, I would go watch Philip DeFranco instead of WSJ. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

What the fuck is going on?

Thomas Edison
Ray Kroc
Mark Zuckerberg

So when WSJ, Wired, Gizmodo etc bacially produces fake news, do they get censored too?

Gizmodo's Autistic Screeching at PewDiePie
Is PewDiePie a Racist? - h3h3Productions

And to all the angry old farts who couldn't care less about some youtuber, there's something very disturbing the way that every media now twists everything and seem to be proud of it. I don't watch this guy's videos, but I find this trend alarming.

So when WSJ, Wired, Gizmodo etc bacially produces fake news, do they get censored too?

Gizmodo's Autistic Screeching at PewDiePie
Is PewDiePie a Racist? - h3h3Productions

And to all the angry old farts who couldn't care less about some youtuber, there's something very disturbing the way that every media now twists everything and seem to be proud of it. I don't watch this guy's videos, but I find this trend alarming.

There is a mechanism to tell them the words are wrong. YouTube has a crowd sourced option for subtitles called "Community contributions" that you can turn on as a content owner. You can make it available for anyone to sub your videos http://www.youtube.com/timedtext_cs_panel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

It's incredible the level of deception(and or ignorance) that sites like WSJ, Wired and others are doing.
It really makes one think about what they are doing to news where they are the only source of information.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

> His firing was because he damaged the "brand".

This is a bit ironic if you go look at some of Disney's old cartoons (among others).

> Except that's not what happened at all. He paid them to say words that they had no understanding of.

Can you explain to me what gave you that impression when he wrote an English request on an English website regarding an offering that was posted there in English?

Because you can clearly read the request in English right at the start of this video (the original is dead now). And you can see their request. In English.

While you're at it, would you explain why you seem to have assumed that these people don't understand English? Because that sounds like a pretty mean thing to assume about some random brown kids, but hey, I'm willing to at least listen to your explanation.

In case that was before your time https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

If you go far back, doesn't everyone's true homeland come from the same area? It's rather arbitrary to claim 'this is the starting point and only from this point things matter'. As irrational as calling the 'First Nations' of north america 'natives', when 'First Migrant' is more apt.

Though that one video puts it into a darkly amusing perspective.

I had not heard of this person (or his videos) before the previous article, but his schtick seems in line with the Aristocrats joke of old, where the goal is to be offensive as possible. The joke is rarely funny, but it's interesting to see how far someone will go and what they'll think of when telling it. But I don't think anyone mistakes hearing "The Aristocrats" as advocacy of those actions.

Is he attention-hungry? Yes, but not any more so than anyone else who posts videos on YouTube. Racist, anti-semitic, or fascist? Probably not. At least I can't tell that from the videos.

These same people, were they alive 60 years ago, would have been up in arms about Lenny Bruce (whose routines are available on YouTube and easily as offensive, by the way). I'm not sure that's something they should be proud of.

It doesn't matter if he's a neo-nazi. He put some shit on his little web video and now nobody wants to advertise with him. He made a choice. They made a choice.

Free market at work.

I'll agree that what Pewdiepie did was crass and tasteless, but I would think that his apology (which he gave in that very video...) would cover it.

Speaking of which, you yourself have used more than a few crass racial stereotypes right here on Slashdot. Would you think it was fair if all the newspapers tomorrow were calling you a closet racist and calling on people to shun you. I seem to remember you making satirical statements pretending to be racist as well, but I won't quote you out of context to make a point (a courtesy, I note, that was not extended to Pewdiepie, when in a fit of irony they used "examples" from his video about taking things out of context out of context).

So I have to ask, will you answer for your own crass racial stereotypes before you throw stones at another?

> He is apparantly suprised that broadcasting a sign with "Death To All Jews" on it would get him fired.

Actually, he's surprised that his other video about the media taking things out of context would itself be taken out of context to prove that he was some kind of Nazi.

Even in the original video, in which he was dismayed to find out that someone would actually do those things for a few bucks, he says that he's not proud of this and apologizes to the viewers because he didn't think the people he hired on Fiverr would actually do those things.

But I bet you didn't actually look at any of that, and now the videos are marked as private. The best I can find now is this discussion by a friend of his.

So was Hitler. He just never came out of the closet.

video of them calling me racist when I pointed it out.

Convinced me to NEVER vote DNC for the rest of my life because of that.

So when you called out your local officials for the bike lane, they said you were racist for asking them (the local officials) why they weren't spending money more wisely?

Are any of them accurate? Can you manually enter captions?

Undertake this discourse, actually types.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Sounds like a variation on those 'bad translation' humor videos: use online translators to translate through several languages, before ending back in English and using that. Like Bohemian Rapsody.

There is a video of a promotional event for the new Ghost in the Shell movie including an interview with Takeshi Kitano. The interviewer is asking the questions in English and Kitano is answering in Japanese but the google captions are performing the speech recognition as if it was English. I found it pretty funny.

The interview starts at around 15 min.
Tokyo Event

Redirect all UK government websites to this address instead.

I write closed-captioning on my videos ( https://www.youtube.com/ruddk/ ) in two languages(those with speech) and about 25% of them are viewed with CC on.
Now that might be because of my mumbling and my less than ideal English skills. :) But I was surprised to see that many people using closed-captioning.
But is just a hobby for me because I like tinkering with it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Something is clearly wrong with the translations of the Downfall videos. Sometimes it's about SAP, sometimes it's about the World Cup, but my limited German tells me it's about the fall of the Third Reich.

A whole article about this and not a single mention of Gattaca. And you call yourselves nerds.

Actually, I was thinking about the eyeball lab scene from Blade Runner. Just one of many areas where the movie was better than the book Do Androids dream of Electric Sheep...

To elaborate a bit, it's obvious that Africa isn't in great shape right now. But it should also be acknowledged that things _are_ improving, at least at the moment.

Extreme poverty is on the decline, though work is ongoing (poverty statistics, poverty report) and it seems like Africa is overall starting to move into Stage 3 of population growth (In a Nutshell - Overpopulation)

So colonialism fucked the place up, things are _generally_ getting better since then, but it's still going to take awhile (and more hard work.)

Many of those employees will be shuttled from the new campus opening this year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvkh5udzKds

We have one Republican and one Democratic Federal senator, a Democratic governor, and Republican state houses.

Missouri's current governor is Republican. He used to be a Democrat, but went to the dark side before running for office. His opponent in the last election used to be a Republican, but he too went to the dark side before running for office. In the end, the voters chose explosions-are-cool for governor.

We grow less corn than we used to (we leave that task to the Idiots Out Wandering Around north of us). We grow far less cotton than we used to (mostly south of the Mason-Dixon line). And democrats have fallen by the wayside. But you still have to show us proof.

Will it work? No idea, but at least he's trying.

With Musk the right question is never 'will it work?" but 'will it make any sense factoring in the costs?'

In theory something like the Hyperloop is a great idea. Until you realize that the costs and dangers involved in building a several hundred mile vacuum tube, and keeping it depressurized would cost astronomical amounts of money. The test track the built for the recent pod-competition for hyperloop was less than a mile long and its still the second largest vacuum tube ever built. Took about 30 minutes to depressurize and top speeds were around 60 mph, and that's with them being pushed by an external motor unit, the pods themselves didn't even have functioning engines. The moment the external motor 'released' the pods they pretty much froze, with most of them not even making it across the finish line.

The practical difficulties in doing this on the scale and speeds that the hyperloop project has been painting (600 MPH over a distance of hundreds of miles) are so enormous especially taking into consideration the kind of safety features that'd have to be included that economically speaking the hyperloop is not going to happen in any foreseeable future barring major technological breakthroughs in vacuum technology and structural engineering. The cost-benefit ratio is simply way too poor.

Now theoretically, you can eliminate some of the technical issues such as thermal expansion by by burying the hyperloop underground, but that increases the cost even more.

Is he crazy? Since he has so much money, and since he's not destructive, no, he is not crazy, he's eccentric.

Agreed. He's an eccentric man with a lot of ideas, some of which turn out to be economically feasible/profitable, while other are not so.

So, I have to re-register every time I shave in order to use apple pay? Oh, you are wearing a baseball cap, so you have to take that off to pay? Oh, you want to unlock your phone while walking down the street. Better take off your sunglasses... Apple, why you gotta keep losing desired functionality?!?!

I know that venting your outrage over everything that Apple does is great fun but please do not trash talk facial recognition just because Apple is using it. You are severely underestimating what modern face recognition algorithms can do. If you set out to do it and if this: http://www.webrok.com/news/201... is your taste in sunglasses, you can certainly screw up facial recognition systems but modern facial recognition software has pretty impressive success rates even with subjects wearing headgear, different hair styles, 'normal' sunglasses or regular eye glasses and obscured faces (beards, scarves, veils). engineers@google.com already tried integrating face recognition login into Android and it turned out to be an embarrassing fail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... because the Android camera could not distinguish between an actual 3D face and a 2D picture of one. Hence the mention of 3D laser scanning module for the new iPhones in the article summary because 3D scanning is what you need for pattern recognition based security features that are hard to fool regardless of whether you are talking about face recognition or fingerprint scanning. On an unrelated note a 3D laser scanning module sounds like a pretty awesome addition to a smartphone for all kinds of reasons having nothing to do with facial recognition and a lot to do with a long standing desire on my part (as, I am sure, many others here) to own a fully functional Start Trek tricorder. A 3D laser scanning module built into your phone would be a major step in that direction. Being able to scan an object on my kitchen table with a smartphone and then sending it to a 3D printer after a short stopover on my laptop to clean up the scan would be nothing short of awesome.

Let me guess: you're from the great lakes area and have heard of the musician Pat Dailey... https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=...

Not my favorite version of the song, but 2/3 of the way into the song .... Is the appropriate verse.