I think these videos show the same principle at work (at least as I understand them). It seems to be important that the formed bubbles are vacuums (i.e. formed by pulling joints apart rather than evaporating gas) because that's what allows them to collapse.
"We fired an engineer for being aware of basic biology and psychology, and we constantly curate the front page and trending vidlist to exclude viewpoints we don't like. Oh, and we also hired 10,000 thought police. How could this happen???" -Youtube
That only gives you a Google-generated (and Google-hosted) thumbnail, not the original image, whether you do it on the main results list or the expanded details box after you click a result. That is not an acceptable workaround for any original image much above thumbnail size (i.e. almost all of those that someone is likely to search for).
I find the most controllable and least painful way to handle an unwanted sneeze is to press the tongue against the roof of the mouth, in the same way as when you imitate a machine gun. It makes a weird noise but at least it works in private . . . is there a (safe) silent way to deal with a sneeze?
During the testing phase, an engineer and a driver will be in the car -- but the windows will be heavily tinted so customers can't see them. And both have been instructed not to interact with people at all.
So with the current facts, it appears absolutely certain that the customers assumed they were talking to (at least) the car's driver (a real human). This looks like a complete non-story.
So of course they said thank you . . . unless the operator wasn't visible (like that prank where the guy diguised himself as a car seat), which probably means they reasoned that someone was listening even though the car was completely empty. In that case I ask: were they right or wrong?
The reporting attempts to imply these customers behaved nonsensically, when all the reported facts show the opposite.
We know exactly what Damore's memo said. There are no quotes from Altheide's posts in the article, except thread titles (“If you think women in tech is just a pipeline problem, you haven’t been paying attention" and "Just Asking Questions").
Why do I have the suspicion that these posts weren't as well reasoned (and backed up by cited scientific research) as Damore's memo?
This response if fairly typical of anything that isn't a clear black and white issue.
Even then, it's a mistake to assume good faith. Sites like Twitter and Facebook, and the media who one-sidedly covers "harassment," are attempting to outright redefine terms, and it's not out of confusion.
Disagreement is now harrassment.
Mockery is now hate speech.
Offense is now trauma.
Criticism is now abuse.
Compelling criticism is now violence.
Anyone who talks about subjects the MSM wants to suppress is now a troll. Anyone at random is a racist/sexist/white supremacist/nazi/etc if they say so.
The use of this alarmist (and usually, simply wrong) language is ubiquitous and deliberate. It's all a pretense to justify a disproportionate censorial "response," especially when they know no response is warranted at all.
Watching the celestial event outside her boyfriend's workplace, she noticed the changes around her, as it looked like dusk during the day. Payne looked up at the sun with her naked eye for a few seconds, but it was too bright.
She approached a woman nearby and asked whether she could borrow her glasses. The woman did not appear interested in viewing the eclipse and said she was "blind as a bat anyway." She told Payne she had borrowed them from a friend and agreed to let Payne use them.
Payne put on the glasses and looked up at the partial eclipse for 15 to 20 seconds. She didn't know what eclipse glasses were supposed to look like, but she remembered that the sun seemed particularly bright -- like looking at it with sunglasses on.
"But it didn't bother me, because I thought it would be a great experience to catch a solar eclipse the proper way," Payne told CNN.
She removed the glasses, returned them to the woman and left.
Six hours later, Payne noticed a weird dark spot in the center of her vision. She told her friends and family, but they told her to wait a day. After all, everyone had been outside looking up at the sun, and it was normal to feel "weird."
The next day, Payne lost vision in the center of her left eye.
So "a few seconds" is six, according to TFS. The borrowed glasses story sounds exactly like something someone would make up to shift blame from themselves, but we'll never know for sure. Besides, she admits she only sought glasses after staring at the sun bare-eyed proved "too bright."
So far, it's a nightmare, and sometimes it makes me very sad when I close my eyes and see it," Payne said. "It's embarrassing. People will assume I was just one of those people who stared blankly at the sun or didn't check the person with the glasses.
She is literally "one of those people," as she stared at the sun. She then borrowed glasses she couldn't verify as safe. I don't know what it means to "check the person with the glasses" but the fact that they were already blind might have been a red flag.
And you're aiding them by desperately trying to tie those stories to the bullshit Russian narrative, instead of the legitimate concerns about data collection.
More people would be on board if you were actually concerned about privacy instead of using it as an excuse to push censorship and pretend DNCLeaks didn't happen. Clinton lost because of Clinton. Deal with it.
Climate change activists should wholeheartedly welcome greater Social Justice influence and mission creep into their movement. Its proven track record of swaying public opinion can only have a positive impact on the debate.
IMO Roku makes the best hardware box specifically because they have no significant streaming service, so it's in their best interest to ensure it works well (or at least acceptably) with all the streaming services that matter.
I can see why Roku themselves might want to ruin it all (for their customers) by becoming a big streaming player, which they could leverage to get onto other platforms and stop doing all that hard work of making their own good hardware (Hell, maybe even sabotage Rokus for competing services or stop supporting them). But in the long run wouldn't that inevitably devalue their most valuable business segment (hardware), and probably leave them in a much worse position as "just another streaming service" on platforms owned by someone else (Google/Apple/etc.)?
P.S. When I set up my Roku 3, it demanded I give it a pointless Roku user/pass and credit card number. There's an alternate activation URL that bypasses the CC# requirement, but you'd only learn it if you were pissed off enough to call Roku tech support (or simply google for it, as I did). So at the moment Roku's ambitions are merely a temporary annoyance, but that sounds likely to change for the worse.
What do you mean nobody wanted a microphone and HD camera focused 24/7 on their living room or bedroom (or kid's bedroom)?
In addition to the forced Kinect, the launch of X-Bone was crippled by the announced constant DRM, the attempt to kill off 2nd hand game sales and zero backwards compatibility. It was also intended as a platform to force-feed ads, first and foremost: https://www.vg247.com/2013/07/...
“On Xbox, the ad is part of the actual experience, it’s not something that is outside. The only difference is that the advertisement we have is quite small and not disruptive so people are not aware of clicking on the banners because they know this is a part of the whole experience on the dash.
“So the users know that this is something that when they click on it, they won’t be hit by something crazy or something dangerous like on the web. Everything that lands there, we create.”
One source called the development of adverts for Xbox One “exciting”, because, “the 360 console wasn’t built with advertising in mind, it was more of an afterthought, so we’ve had to adapt to the technology and how we work to fit them in to the console, whereas this new one is going to have advertising in mind.
“So a lot of the limitations that we have now, hopefully the release of the boundaries will widened so the opportunities will be a lot greater.”
The Xbox is developing native advertising, where ad content is displayed alongside relevant material, either embedded in search results, promoted on a network like Facebook, or a "Liked X? You'll Love Y!" style of marketing. Not to worry, though -- the company plans to use Kinect to make these advertisements even more engaging than their current counterparts. In the future, Kinect may offer you a "Choose Your Own Adventure" style narrative in which you speak commands or give orders to an ad as its playing to change the final outcome.
The other way the company wants to use Kinect is to monitor what's going on in the living room to serve you group-appropriate content, rather than resorting to the plain old method of bombarding you with non-interactive advertising for things you don't care about. Microsoft claims that the demographic data the ad team can access is very limited, but it's hard not to see shadows of the same patent for movie licensing that the company applied for last year.
Slashdot Mirror
I think these videos show the same principle at work (at least as I understand them). It seems to be important that the formed bubbles are vacuums (i.e. formed by pulling joints apart rather than evaporating gas) because that's what allows them to collapse.
Collapsing vacuum bubbles in a fluid:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
How the principle explains another real world phenomenon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
"We fired an engineer for being aware of basic biology and psychology, and we constantly curate the front page and trending vidlist to exclude viewpoints we don't like. Oh, and we also hired 10,000 thought police. How could this happen???" -Youtube
Stop trying to make excuses for the Democrats' horrible candidate who couldn't win even though the entire establishment was behind her.
That only gives you a Google-generated (and Google-hosted) thumbnail, not the original image, whether you do it on the main results list or the expanded details box after you click a result. That is not an acceptable workaround for any original image much above thumbnail size (i.e. almost all of those that someone is likely to search for).
Here's an old TAL segment about him meeting the love of his life (at the time):
https://www.thisamericanlife.o...
I like to do a little game where I replace 'women' with another minority. Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, Jews. Take your pick.
Women are not a minority.
I find the most controllable and least painful way to handle an unwanted sneeze is to press the tongue against the roof of the mouth, in the same way as when you imitate a machine gun. It makes a weird noise but at least it works in private . . . is there a (safe) silent way to deal with a sneeze?
During the testing phase, an engineer and a driver will be in the car -- but the windows will be heavily tinted so customers can't see them. And both have been instructed not to interact with people at all.
So with the current facts, it appears absolutely certain that the customers assumed they were talking to (at least) the car's driver (a real human). This looks like a complete non-story.
Ok, why is it worth being mentioned?
That's a great question. From TFS:
An operator was inside the car
So of course they said thank you . . . unless the operator wasn't visible (like that prank where the guy diguised himself as a car seat), which probably means they reasoned that someone was listening even though the car was completely empty. In that case I ask: were they right or wrong?
The reporting attempts to imply these customers behaved nonsensically, when all the reported facts show the opposite.
We know exactly what Damore's memo said. There are no quotes from Altheide's posts in the article, except thread titles (“If you think women in tech is just a pipeline problem, you haven’t been paying attention" and "Just Asking Questions").
Why do I have the suspicion that these posts weren't as well reasoned (and backed up by cited scientific research) as Damore's memo?
This response if fairly typical of anything that isn't a clear black and white issue.
Even then, it's a mistake to assume good faith. Sites like Twitter and Facebook, and the media who one-sidedly covers "harassment," are attempting to outright redefine terms, and it's not out of confusion.
Disagreement is now harrassment.
Mockery is now hate speech.
Offense is now trauma.
Criticism is now abuse.
Compelling criticism is now violence.
Anyone who talks about subjects the MSM wants to suppress is now a troll.
Anyone at random is a racist/sexist/white supremacist/nazi/etc if they say so.
The use of this alarmist (and usually, simply wrong) language is ubiquitous and deliberate. It's all a pretense to justify a disproportionate censorial "response," especially when they know no response is warranted at all.
Maybe it helps that DC headliners haven't (yet) been replaced with disastrous forced diversity versions?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
YOU Wouldn't DOWNLOAD a BITCOIN
http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/07/...
Watching the celestial event outside her boyfriend's workplace, she noticed the changes around her, as it looked like dusk during the day. Payne looked up at the sun with her naked eye for a few seconds, but it was too bright.
She approached a woman nearby and asked whether she could borrow her glasses. The woman did not appear interested in viewing the eclipse and said she was "blind as a bat anyway." She told Payne she had borrowed them from a friend and agreed to let Payne use them.
Payne put on the glasses and looked up at the partial eclipse for 15 to 20 seconds. She didn't know what eclipse glasses were supposed to look like, but she remembered that the sun seemed particularly bright -- like looking at it with sunglasses on.
"But it didn't bother me, because I thought it would be a great experience to catch a solar eclipse the proper way," Payne told CNN.
She removed the glasses, returned them to the woman and left.
Six hours later, Payne noticed a weird dark spot in the center of her vision. She told her friends and family, but they told her to wait a day. After all, everyone had been outside looking up at the sun, and it was normal to feel "weird."
The next day, Payne lost vision in the center of her left eye.
So "a few seconds" is six, according to TFS. The borrowed glasses story sounds exactly like something someone would make up to shift blame from themselves, but we'll never know for sure. Besides, she admits she only sought glasses after staring at the sun bare-eyed proved "too bright."
So far, it's a nightmare, and sometimes it makes me very sad when I close my eyes and see it," Payne said. "It's embarrassing. People will assume I was just one of those people who stared blankly at the sun or didn't check the person with the glasses.
She is literally "one of those people," as she stared at the sun. She then borrowed glasses she couldn't verify as safe. I don't know what it means to "check the person with the glasses" but the fact that they were already blind might have been a red flag.
The company just wanted negative stories to stop.
And you're aiding them by desperately trying to tie those stories to the bullshit Russian narrative, instead of the legitimate concerns about data collection.
More people would be on board if you were actually concerned about privacy instead of using it as an excuse to push censorship and pretend DNCLeaks didn't happen. Clinton lost because of Clinton. Deal with it.
Climate change activists should wholeheartedly welcome greater Social Justice influence and mission creep into their movement. Its proven track record of swaying public opinion can only have a positive impact on the debate.
Warmist regards,
ExxonMobil
If you want to see what happens when the federation goes to war then you need to go watch Star Trek: Deep Space 9.
Or just check out the source material.
n/t
SLAC = Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, renamed to SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory in 2008.
IMO Roku makes the best hardware box specifically because they have no significant streaming service, so it's in their best interest to ensure it works well (or at least acceptably) with all the streaming services that matter.
I can see why Roku themselves might want to ruin it all (for their customers) by becoming a big streaming player, which they could leverage to get onto other platforms and stop doing all that hard work of making their own good hardware (Hell, maybe even sabotage Rokus for competing services or stop supporting them). But in the long run wouldn't that inevitably devalue their most valuable business segment (hardware), and probably leave them in a much worse position as "just another streaming service" on platforms owned by someone else (Google/Apple/etc.)?
P.S. When I set up my Roku 3, it demanded I give it a pointless Roku user/pass and credit card number. There's an alternate activation URL that bypasses the CC# requirement, but you'd only learn it if you were pissed off enough to call Roku tech support (or simply google for it, as I did). So at the moment Roku's ambitions are merely a temporary annoyance, but that sounds likely to change for the worse.
In addition to the forced Kinect, the launch of X-Bone was crippled by the announced constant DRM, the attempt to kill off 2nd hand game sales and zero backwards compatibility. It was also intended as a platform to force-feed ads, first and foremost:
https://www.vg247.com/2013/07/...
“On Xbox, the ad is part of the actual experience, it’s not something that is outside. The only difference is that the advertisement we have is quite small and not disruptive so people are not aware of clicking on the banners because they know this is a part of the whole experience on the dash.
“So the users know that this is something that when they click on it, they won’t be hit by something crazy or something dangerous like on the web. Everything that lands there, we create.”
One source called the development of adverts for Xbox One “exciting”, because, “the 360 console wasn’t built with advertising in mind, it was more of an afterthought, so we’ve had to adapt to the technology and how we work to fit them in to the console, whereas this new one is going to have advertising in mind.
“So a lot of the limitations that we have now, hopefully the release of the boundaries will widened so the opportunities will be a lot greater.”
http://hothardware.com/news/mi...
The Xbox is developing native advertising, where ad content is displayed alongside relevant material, either embedded in search results, promoted on a network like Facebook, or a "Liked X? You'll Love Y!" style of marketing. Not to worry, though -- the company plans to use Kinect to make these advertisements even more engaging than their current counterparts. In the future, Kinect may offer you a "Choose Your Own Adventure" style narrative in which you speak commands or give orders to an ad as its playing to change the final outcome.
The other way the company wants to use Kinect is to monitor what's going on in the living room to serve you group-appropriate content, rather than resorting to the plain old method of bombarding you with non-interactive advertising for things you don't care about. Microsoft claims that the demographic data the ad team can access is very limited, but it's hard not to see shadows of the same patent for movie licensing that the company applied for last year.
Can we prosecute the hackers for child porn if we catch them with a few minutes of particularly sensitive accelerometer data?
This would be a good time to point out how many vulnerable (and probably forever unpatched) devices would result from the push for IoT.
Yes, and there was a real contest. The 2nd was in 2015, and it's genuinely entertaining:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...