I do not think it is supposed to be particularly easy to join hamas, particularly for an American. You do not just look up "Terrorist" in the yellow pages and call 1-800-alQ-aeda.
The ability to join a known terrorist organization is limited to a few people based on genes, friendships, and geography.
The ability to hate the government and to build bombs is universal.
Ergo, most terrorists will most likely not have any affiliation is known terrorist organizations.
You have control over that though. You can like something and mark as not seeing anything from it. And as far as I have seen companies have public profiles that never require likes to see.
Well I think the idea is that for 99% of accounts that is not possible. There is more content than you could ever read (1500 posts per day).
So FB can either filter out the content based on chronology. Or it can take an educated guess like, he always reads, and often comments on John's posts, so instead of hiding them, we will put them right at the top of his feed when he logs in. And he had never even paused scrolling when confronted with a post from the official Coca Cola page, so maybe he cares less if we filter these out.
I do not know about you, but I do not want to miss some major announcement for my best friend, simply because I liked coca cola and they posted 20 things after he made the announcement.
Will not any ranking necessarily be skewed towards eye catching posts? And who said that what is most eye catching is something you agree with and like? Rather than something you inherently hate and disagree with?
In content ads have always been a thing, for example the number of starbucks cups in Fight Club is a well known joke (hell there is some site called starbucksfightclud that exist only to document these cups). And The Philadelphia Experiment had like a 2 minute advertisement for the brand new futuristic coke in an aluminum can.
But some ads nowadays have taken it to extreme, such that if I am going to continue watching a TV series is as much about the ads as anything else. Castle, season 1, had an entire episode devoted to some espresso maker, which continued to guest star in subsequent episodes. Like the story, itself, was based around this amazing espresso machine.
Carefully arranging sets to highlight product labels is bad enough, and taking time out of the show to actually have the actors comment on how great this product is is far worse, but having the writers base the entire story around some product[s] completely kills the show.
Lay your own cable to all your friends houses, then run your own encrypted email server.
Then learn to accept that the NSA installed a hardware backdoor in your router and is reading your emails (and now they are monitoring your for suspected terrorist activities), and China installed one in your computer hardware and are doing the same.
How does Google do this for one person? If they suddenly started scanning images for this, you think they would uncover a few thousand people at a time. Are we supposed to believe that they specially targeted him, or that he is the only person to ever send naked pictures of children through gmail?
It is also the only reasonable theory form a biological standpoint, as Testosterone has been studied exhaustively and simply does not in anyway reduce cooperation or friendliness. In fact in general testosterone seems to be positively correlated to number of friends and ability to cooperate.
Why should it have the opposite effect in ancient humans?
Google collects metadata about people, but since that is secret stuff they keep to themselves no one asks them to forget it.
Google also collects metadata about websites, which is publically searchable. But when Joe Smith wants some comment removed, Google did not have that data collected to begin with.
"some multi-billion-dollar megacorp decides to step in with technology", you mean writing? I am not sure who invented writing, but I do not think it was a corporation.
I do not see how this can be considered circumvention or contempt. Google has a long history of being transparent in this way. They make public what content they delist because of copyright violations and it is only right that they inform a website when they do similar for "right to be forgotten".
You might argue that it is really the website's duty to begin with to comply with rights to be forgotten, and they are the only ones responsible for any possible contempt, but since no one contacted them to begin with asking to be forgotten I think that they are legally in the clear.
If it is actual evidence, and not just gossip, of real law breaking that is something only your conscience can decide.
As for everything else, including things that are clearly breaking company policy, as long as it is nothing or little to do with your job ignore it. You are not paid to rat on your peers. And telling your boss that Bob in accounting steals office supplies is not going to earn you any promotions or friends.
Everyone must be signed up? Isn't it big big business to take people just off planes or long range busses? Isn't the out of towner/tourist like 50% of the reason taxis exist? how is that supposed to work?
"fully autonomous highway driving under regular conditions."
I would argue it very much is not that. Autonomous driving is so so so much more than just not ramming into the car in front of you and not changing lanes. If it is 100% unable to react to what is going on to the sides and behind it is just slightly better cruise control.
Umm.
You realise the different between some freeze dried sample in a jar, in a sealed drawer, in a sealed room, and a living human being infected with it and being transfered all over the place? Right?
Does anyone actually care about fan noise? The only reason to ever think about forgoing fans, imho, is dust. If you can seal a case from the outside world, great. You would have a lot less trouble down the line.
It looks like the burning of steel wool is basically just a corrosion based chemical reaction that is seriously sped up and self sustained by the heat. So, no, most likely copper is immune.
Slashdot Mirror
I do not think it is supposed to be particularly easy to join hamas, particularly for an American. You do not just look up "Terrorist" in the yellow pages and call 1-800-alQ-aeda.
The ability to join a known terrorist organization is limited to a few people based on genes, friendships, and geography.
The ability to hate the government and to build bombs is universal.
Ergo, most terrorists will most likely not have any affiliation is known terrorist organizations.
You have control over that though. You can like something and mark as not seeing anything from it. And as far as I have seen companies have public profiles that never require likes to see.
Well I think the idea is that for 99% of accounts that is not possible. There is more content than you could ever read (1500 posts per day). So FB can either filter out the content based on chronology. Or it can take an educated guess like, he always reads, and often comments on John's posts, so instead of hiding them, we will put them right at the top of his feed when he logs in. And he had never even paused scrolling when confronted with a post from the official Coca Cola page, so maybe he cares less if we filter these out. I do not know about you, but I do not want to miss some major announcement for my best friend, simply because I liked coca cola and they posted 20 things after he made the announcement.
Will not any ranking necessarily be skewed towards eye catching posts? And who said that what is most eye catching is something you agree with and like? Rather than something you inherently hate and disagree with?
For knitting with lead wire to protect yourself from brain reading satellites and superman.
You might be surprised.
In content ads have always been a thing, for example the number of starbucks cups in Fight Club is a well known joke (hell there is some site called starbucksfightclud that exist only to document these cups). And The Philadelphia Experiment had like a 2 minute advertisement for the brand new futuristic coke in an aluminum can. But some ads nowadays have taken it to extreme, such that if I am going to continue watching a TV series is as much about the ads as anything else. Castle, season 1, had an entire episode devoted to some espresso maker, which continued to guest star in subsequent episodes. Like the story, itself, was based around this amazing espresso machine. Carefully arranging sets to highlight product labels is bad enough, and taking time out of the show to actually have the actors comment on how great this product is is far worse, but having the writers base the entire story around some product[s] completely kills the show.
Lay your own cable to all your friends houses, then run your own encrypted email server.
Then learn to accept that the NSA installed a hardware backdoor in your router and is reading your emails (and now they are monitoring your for suspected terrorist activities), and China installed one in your computer hardware and are doing the same.
How does Google do this for one person? If they suddenly started scanning images for this, you think they would uncover a few thousand people at a time. Are we supposed to believe that they specially targeted him, or that he is the only person to ever send naked pictures of children through gmail?
It is also the only reasonable theory form a biological standpoint, as Testosterone has been studied exhaustively and simply does not in anyway reduce cooperation or friendliness. In fact in general testosterone seems to be positively correlated to number of friends and ability to cooperate.
Why should it have the opposite effect in ancient humans?
Of course it is not an accident, this is just Google following their long standing policy of transparency when delisting websites.
Google collects metadata about people, but since that is secret stuff they keep to themselves no one asks them to forget it. Google also collects metadata about websites, which is publically searchable. But when Joe Smith wants some comment removed, Google did not have that data collected to begin with.
"some multi-billion-dollar megacorp decides to step in with technology", you mean writing? I am not sure who invented writing, but I do not think it was a corporation.
I do not see how this can be considered circumvention or contempt. Google has a long history of being transparent in this way. They make public what content they delist because of copyright violations and it is only right that they inform a website when they do similar for "right to be forgotten". You might argue that it is really the website's duty to begin with to comply with rights to be forgotten, and they are the only ones responsible for any possible contempt, but since no one contacted them to begin with asking to be forgotten I think that they are legally in the clear.
"Giant Douche" and "Turd Sandwich"?
Well of course unless it goes strongly against your conscience or the law you do what you are asked.
If it is actual evidence, and not just gossip, of real law breaking that is something only your conscience can decide. As for everything else, including things that are clearly breaking company policy, as long as it is nothing or little to do with your job ignore it. You are not paid to rat on your peers. And telling your boss that Bob in accounting steals office supplies is not going to earn you any promotions or friends.
You ignore it. Don't think about, don't gossip it around, pretend you did not see anything.
I guess the question must be, how much data do they require.
I guess if they only require a working unique email address that would work.
Everyone must be signed up? Isn't it big big business to take people just off planes or long range busses? Isn't the out of towner/tourist like 50% of the reason taxis exist? how is that supposed to work?
I thought the big thing is that they have some great app on some smartphone display or something in their cars.
I would argue it very much is not that. Autonomous driving is so so so much more than just not ramming into the car in front of you and not changing lanes. If it is 100% unable to react to what is going on to the sides and behind it is just slightly better cruise control.
Umm.
You realise the different between some freeze dried sample in a jar, in a sealed drawer, in a sealed room, and a living human being infected with it and being transfered all over the place? Right?
Does anyone actually care about fan noise? The only reason to ever think about forgoing fans, imho, is dust. If you can seal a case from the outside world, great. You would have a lot less trouble down the line.
It looks like the burning of steel wool is basically just a corrosion based chemical reaction that is seriously sped up and self sustained by the heat. So, no, most likely copper is immune.