...learn the difference between a forum and a social network...
The difference is that you see the same discussions on both, but in the forum people feel superior to the people on social networks. See too much crap on FB? Get rid of the "friends" posting that crap and keep the ones posting the stuff you're interested in.
When organizing an event for more than a few people, FB offers several advantages over text messages. It's not the only alternative, but it's a popular one. In this case, popularity helps.
I've never felt the need to join FB or other social media to date.
That fix that users get from "Likes" and "Replies" on FB is very similar to the fix you get from "Mods" and "Replies" on/. . A lot of my interaction on FB is discussion of news articles, similar to my interaction on/. . (Yes, some actual headlines make it to FB. On my feed it's CNN, BBC News, or whatever sources my friends post.) I see you post on here all the time - You've got the same bug as the FB users. You just feel superior because you're on a different platform (doing the same thing) and FB bashing is popular here.
...in case you don't get it, FB does not show anything that remotely resembles 'news' to me
I follow CNN & BBC News on FB and see some headlines in my feed, but there's a strange selection of what's presented. I wouldn't list it as one of my news sources, but I do see some legitimate headlines. YMMV.
I disagree. FB shouldn't be a news source. FB isn't a reliable news source. But, it's as close as many people get to following the news. It is their news source. It's just not a good one.
Do people do this? Wikipedia is largely a collection of summaries and links to actual references. If somebody cited Wikipedia itself for a paper, an 'F' seems entirely appropriate.
It wasn't real complicated, but the motivation was very different. Is a low-res copy of the image a "hash"? I'm willing to call it one, but it grays the line. It would wash out the most minor changes. It would give a similarity score. Is a high similarity as good as a match? I'm used to hashes that either match or don't, although I'm not married to the idea. There's no option to flag it for human review if the images aren't stored. Changing a single pixel would give a high (possibly perfect) similarity score. Flipping the image horizontally would obliterate the similarity using this method - A histogram might be more useful there. Using both might require our evil-doer to apply a filter. A low-res copy of the pic would help, but not remotely solve the problem.
Phoenix, Arizona. Probably one of the driest spots in the USA, and one with nice, straight roads. Hmmm... Is it possible that the Waymo / Alphabet / Googleplex cars are not that good at self-driving?
When you're running code for the first time, do you present it with the most complicated input you can imagine? Maybe if you're really sure of yourself and have little consequence for errors. I start with simple test cases and work my way up. My dad was always fond of telling me to "shoot the cripples first."
The link you provided describes a method for finding differences between two images. Using those two images. It says nothing about comparing images based on a hash.
Nobody trusts FB. At least nobody should. I don't see any motivation for them to store the image, so I'd like to think they wouldn't, but they do make a habit of collecting everything they can get their mitts on.
If these hashes work the same way as the hashes I'm familiar with, circumvention will require the sophistication to make a minor alteration to a single pixel.
...since they were told about it years ago and haven't lifted a finger to fix the quality of the music... to heck with 'em.
There's now a "Higher quality audio" option that warns, "Music will sound better, but may skip more often." I don't know if the higher quality would meet your needs, but I assume it's comparable with the other services. I don't know why it wouldn't be.
You almost certainly did not mean you needed "access" to those things but rather that you wish everybody had those actual things given to them, whether they worked to earne them or not.
Yep. That's what I meant. Where was the confusion?
Incidentally, "wishing that DJT would stop tweeting" guarantees that you are NOT a classical "liberal", who in an earlier era would have said that he disagreed with possibly everything DJT tweeted but would defend to the death his right to tweet.
I wish that people with BO would stop getting on elevators too. Doesn't mean I'm fighting to ban them.
'Liberal' shares a root with 'liberty' and can mean anything from "generous" to "loose" to "broad-minded." Politically, it means "“a person who believes that government should be active in supporting social and political change."
...
Liberal is commonly used as a label for political parties in a number of other countries, although the positions these parties take do not always correspond to the sense of liberal that people in the United States commonly give it. In the US, the word has been associated with both the Republican and Democratic parties (now it is more commonly attached to the latter), although generally it has been in a descriptive, rather than a titular, sense.
You could have saved a lot of typing and just said, "I'm a leftist."
Plenty of people on both sides of the aisle would like to see DJT's tweets reined in. It has nothing to do with being a "leftist." This seems to be the one topic where our country's united.
If you infer that "wishing" everyone had those things meant that they would materialize from thin air, then you are right that everyone would wish that. What I meant was that I would like to see those things made available by mandate even with the consequences that carries. You're not wrong; I'm not either. Forcing everyone to pay for health insurance whether they want it or not is a liberal idea that I like.
Slashdot Mirror
...learn the difference between a forum and a social network...
The difference is that you see the same discussions on both, but in the forum people feel superior to the people on social networks. See too much crap on FB? Get rid of the "friends" posting that crap and keep the ones posting the stuff you're interested in.
When organizing an event for more than a few people, FB offers several advantages over text messages. It's not the only alternative, but it's a popular one. In this case, popularity helps.
I've never felt the need to join FB or other social media to date.
That fix that users get from "Likes" and "Replies" on FB is very similar to the fix you get from "Mods" and "Replies" on /. . A lot of my interaction on FB is discussion of news articles, similar to my interaction on /. . (Yes, some actual headlines make it to FB. On my feed it's CNN, BBC News, or whatever sources my friends post.) I see you post on here all the time - You've got the same bug as the FB users. You just feel superior because you're on a different platform (doing the same thing) and FB bashing is popular here.
Instead? Those are my two main news sources. Some of what they post to their feed isn't on their front page.
...in case you don't get it, FB does not show anything that remotely resembles 'news' to me
I follow CNN & BBC News on FB and see some headlines in my feed, but there's a strange selection of what's presented. I wouldn't list it as one of my news sources, but I do see some legitimate headlines. YMMV.
FB isn't a news source...
I disagree. FB shouldn't be a news source. FB isn't a reliable news source. But, it's as close as many people get to following the news. It is their news source. It's just not a good one.
I wasn't a fan of that short lived meme, but at least do it correctly.
Only one person can settle this: Natalie Portman, naked and petrified, covered in hot oatmeal.
They could be showing Daesh videos of people being barbecued and eaten alive...
The trick to eating somebody alive is to barbecue them very lightly.
...citing Wikipedia...
Do people do this? Wikipedia is largely a collection of summaries and links to actual references. If somebody cited Wikipedia itself for a paper, an 'F' seems entirely appropriate.
Actually there's nothing wrong with that and I have too. But only when the consequences of failure are slight or beneficial.
It wasn't real complicated, but the motivation was very different. Is a low-res copy of the image a "hash"? I'm willing to call it one, but it grays the line. It would wash out the most minor changes. It would give a similarity score. Is a high similarity as good as a match? I'm used to hashes that either match or don't, although I'm not married to the idea. There's no option to flag it for human review if the images aren't stored. Changing a single pixel would give a high (possibly perfect) similarity score. Flipping the image horizontally would obliterate the similarity using this method - A histogram might be more useful there. Using both might require our evil-doer to apply a filter. A low-res copy of the pic would help, but not remotely solve the problem.
Phoenix, Arizona. Probably one of the driest spots in the USA, and one with nice, straight roads. Hmmm... Is it possible that the Waymo / Alphabet / Googleplex cars are not that good at self-driving?
When you're running code for the first time, do you present it with the most complicated input you can imagine? Maybe if you're really sure of yourself and have little consequence for errors. I start with simple test cases and work my way up. My dad was always fond of telling me to "shoot the cripples first."
The link you provided describes a method for finding differences between two images. Using those two images. It says nothing about comparing images based on a hash.
...what you call an account is not what I would call an account.
Yes, I referred to a shadow profile as an "account". It fits the bill in my head. Semantics.
I have never used Experian either.
You sound very certain of that. How can you know? They don't ask for volunteers.
But do you really trust Facebook that much?
Nobody trusts FB. At least nobody should. I don't see any motivation for them to store the image, so I'd like to think they wouldn't, but they do make a habit of collecting everything they can get their mitts on.
If these hashes work the same way as the hashes I'm familiar with, circumvention will require the sophistication to make a minor alteration to a single pixel.
That is why I never have had nor do I ever plan on having an account there.
You never signed up for an account there. I'd be shocked if you didn't have one. Did you sign up for Experian?
...the random adding of "artist" adds for paid subscribers, where you have to turn it off per channel.... it just got to be a bit much.
I agree that the artist inserts are annoying, but they can now be turned off once universally rather than "per channel."
...since they were told about it years ago and haven't lifted a finger to fix the quality of the music... to heck with 'em.
There's now a "Higher quality audio" option that warns, "Music will sound better, but may skip more often." I don't know if the higher quality would meet your needs, but I assume it's comparable with the other services. I don't know why it wouldn't be.
You almost certainly did not mean you needed "access" to those things but rather that you wish everybody had those actual things given to them, whether they worked to earne them or not.
Yep. That's what I meant. Where was the confusion?
Incidentally, "wishing that DJT would stop tweeting" guarantees that you are NOT a classical "liberal", who in an earlier era would have said that he disagreed with possibly everything DJT tweeted but would defend to the death his right to tweet.
I wish that people with BO would stop getting on elevators too. Doesn't mean I'm fighting to ban them.
Sad!
No, more frightened.
Not everyone agrees with you.
'Liberal' shares a root with 'liberty' and can mean anything from "generous" to "loose" to "broad-minded." Politically, it means "“a person who believes that government should be active in supporting social and political change."
...
Liberal is commonly used as a label for political parties in a number of other countries, although the positions these parties take do not always correspond to the sense of liberal that people in the United States commonly give it. In the US, the word has been associated with both the Republican and Democratic parties (now it is more commonly attached to the latter), although generally it has been in a descriptive, rather than a titular, sense.
You could have saved a lot of typing and just said, "I'm a leftist."
Plenty of people on both sides of the aisle would like to see DJT's tweets reined in. It has nothing to do with being a "leftist." This seems to be the one topic where our country's united.
That's what I meant by:
You're not wrong; I'm not either.
It appears that I'm failing effective communication today. I was agreeing with GP and attempting to clarify.
If you infer that "wishing" everyone had those things meant that they would materialize from thin air, then you are right that everyone would wish that. What I meant was that I would like to see those things made available by mandate even with the consequences that carries. You're not wrong; I'm not either. Forcing everyone to pay for health insurance whether they want it or not is a liberal idea that I like.
...coastal liberals, they make my day.
Wishing that DJT would stop tweeting does not make me a liberal. Wishing that everyone had access to food, shelter, and healthcare makes me a liberal.