I only follow 2 accounts, both belonging to the same person. I check his tweets every morning because they very well may have global consequences. I'm waiting in terror for the day we see this:
NK too afraid of US might to follow through with EMPTY threats. FAKE NUKES!!
Time spent on a page or how deeply I scroll down an article is no indication of how likely that corporation is to separate me from some of my money.
I think the advertisers would disagree with you on that. A big goal of advertising is simple brand-recognition. The longer they can keep their brand in front of your eyes, the better. I believe that they believe this works.
Be careful, the same people who think www.breitbart.com is run by neo-Nazi also think it's perfectly OK for Gawker to out an homosexual CEO, or publish wrestling star illegal sex-tape... under the idea of "freedom of the press". Go figure.
Having an opinion about Breitbart's content does not necessarily mean someone is against "freedom of the press." If somebody called for Breibart to be shut down because of the garbage they crank out, that would be another issue. Nobody's saying Breitbart should be silenced, just ignored.
This quick link breaks down news consumption by social media outlet. Unfortunately, a great many people fit your definition of "complete idiot." Fortunately, they check their news sources against what's trending, so what could go wrong?
Bad closed captions allowed me to grasp the idea of most scenes of a picture I wanted to watch.
When I'm watching something in a language I don't understand, inaccurate CCs are nearly as good as accurate ones, as I have no idea that they don't match up. I prefer the original language with subtitles because the dubbed audio lacks the actors' inflections plus I don't like it when lips and words don't match. I often watch movies or TV programs with subtitles on, but avoid automated CC - When my eyes and ears don't match the conflict distracts me.
...the movie keeps playing and you get to understand who is the hero and who's the villain, at least.
I can typically do that with the film muted, can't you?
You did say URI. You could have said URL. It was, after all, a URL. This page gives a good description of the difference as well as a guide for responding to the statement, "Actually, that’s called a URI, not a URL"
The response to this correction can range from quietly thinking this person needs to get out more, to agreeing indifferently via shoulder shrug, to removing the safety clasp on a Katana.
I was more implying that there was nothing banning people from producing racist content for profit. GP said that nobody had the "right to be paid." Having the "right to be paid," in my mind, is not the same as having a guaranteed payment. I have the rights to do a great many things that will never happen.
CNN has gotten bad about this lately. I've had several stories that I clicked on that had a small video window that would start playing automagically with the sound on. That's obnoxious at home and a problem at work. I now keep my work system muted as I wasn't willing to stop visiting CNN.
I occasionally browse FB while watching videos in another window. Having a FB video hijack me or start playing over what I'm already watching will be enough to bitch about.
Hitting a tree is to be avoided, but sometimes swerving off the road is a better course of action than just coming to a "dead stop" - If you can avoid a collision altogether, that's the right decision. In a situation like that, it can be hard even after the fact to determine what the "right" course of action would have been - Plus when you're panicked you make hasty decisions. I'm not arguing that the alcohol didn't contribute to making a bad decision, I'm saying that there may have been a bad decision made anyway and we have no way to know. I don't know this woman or her driving ability, so how could I predict how she'd react to a wrong-way driver sober or not?
Some people fail driving tests stone cold sober and doing their absolute best to do things right.
And someone probably forced her to buy a sports car.
No, nobody forced her and she didn't. Her passenger (her boss) bought the sports car and let her drive it (because he was too drunk?) Since they wrecked avoiding a wrong-way vehicle, it's impossible to know how things would have turned out if she'd been sober.
There are no Ukrainian boots on Russian soil, didn't seem to work out that well for them.
Clearly it isn't sufficient to just defend yourself if you want peace. It might be a good start but something else is needed beyond that.
Are you implying that Ukraine should have invaded Russia? That seems like a terrible idea for the Ukrainians. Even worse than the situation they're in now.
(A little secret I've learned is no matter how much power a car has it will still only accelerate as hard as you push down on the gas pedal!!!)
That's true, but applying the same pressure to the gas pedal can produce radically different results depending on the car. There is a learning curve involved with driving a supercar.
Having said that, my employer, the Department of Defense, uses Outlook and a card with a chip in it that stores my credentials, and I can encrypt an email simply by clicking on a button.
At my last position, with the Department of Energy, we used Entrust along with Lotus Notes and credentials stored on the chip on our badge. It was very straightforward even for the non-tech-savvy among us.
It in particular likes to get the user to look at advert videos in order to get extra lives, etc.
Perhaps they've cleaned up the setup since then.
That's still the case. All three of the variants I mentioned offer in-game niceties in exchange for watching ads. I was referring to the mandatory ads being relatively sparse. If you're counting discretionary ads, I guess there can be more as desired. In "Angry Birds Friends Tournament," you can watch an ad up to once a day for a spin on their power-up wheel. In "Angry Birds Seasons," you can choose to watch an ad when offered in exchange for 10 minutes with a scope for your sling. In "Angry Birds 2," you can watch ads for extra lives, extra tournament entries, and possibly more. So I guess if somebody really wants to trade their time for power-ups, the ads could be prominent.
The newer one just bombards you with adverts constantly.
Which version are you referring to as the "newer one"? There are at least a few that are actively maintained. With "Angry Birds 2," "Angry Birds Seasons," and "Angry Birds Friends Tournament," I see relatively few ads. "Relatively" meaning far fewer than "Words with Friends," which is the only other game on my phone that's run often enough for me to notice ad frequency.
Those adverts themselves are often malicious looking. ("battery" boosters, fake "you've won a prize" shit, etc etc.
I do believe I remember seeing a "battery booster" ad. I'm pretty sure I would have remembered seeing a fake "You've won a prize" ad - I don't think I have. What I see almost exclusively in the Angry Birds games is ads for other games.
I agree - Having access to that bulk of human knowledge in your pocket is incredible. Wikipedia isn't perfect and it's easy to nit-pick if one is so inclined, but that doesn't stop it from being amazing. I run into almost no graffiti - A far cry from here. I'd be genuinely curious about the percentage of unique users vs troll posts on/. . My guess would be just a few dedicated bad eggs.
Not all employers will be happy with you running your own VPN at work. I don't know what my current employer would say (other than "WTF are you doing that for?"), but at my last couple of positions (Department of Energy), it would have been an major no-no.
...they changed from someone...laying out the route by eye to laying out the routes by analysis...
UPS made their first major deployment of ORION (their routing implementation) in 2013. What professional driver in 2013 was still laying out routes "by eye"? GPS mapping had been widely available for over a decade.
Slashdot Mirror
wtf is twitter even for?
I only follow 2 accounts, both belonging to the same person. I check his tweets every morning because they very well may have global consequences. I'm waiting in terror for the day we see this:
NK too afraid of US might to follow through with EMPTY threats. FAKE NUKES!!
Time spent on a page or how deeply I scroll down an article is no indication of how likely that corporation is to separate me from some of my money.
I think the advertisers would disagree with you on that. A big goal of advertising is simple brand-recognition. The longer they can keep their brand in front of your eyes, the better. I believe that they believe this works.
Of course, it'll be fine. If I change my mind, I'll just take it back down. You know, delete it from the Internet. How hard can that be?
I tried Swedish. It went very well.
Me too - Same result. Just meatballs, but they were great!
Be careful, the same people who think www.breitbart.com is run by neo-Nazi also think it's perfectly OK for Gawker to out an homosexual CEO, or publish wrestling star illegal sex-tape... under the idea of "freedom of the press". Go figure.
Having an opinion about Breitbart's content does not necessarily mean someone is against "freedom of the press." If somebody called for Breibart to be shut down because of the garbage they crank out, that would be another issue. Nobody's saying Breitbart should be silenced, just ignored.
It still begs the question. Why? It's a waste of money and resources that could be focused on actually contributing to society.
Just think of the money we'll make selling hunts!
This quick link breaks down news consumption by social media outlet. Unfortunately, a great many people fit your definition of "complete idiot." Fortunately, they check their news sources against what's trending, so what could go wrong?
Bad closed captions allowed me to grasp the idea of most scenes of a picture I wanted to watch.
When I'm watching something in a language I don't understand, inaccurate CCs are nearly as good as accurate ones, as I have no idea that they don't match up. I prefer the original language with subtitles because the dubbed audio lacks the actors' inflections plus I don't like it when lips and words don't match. I often watch movies or TV programs with subtitles on, but avoid automated CC - When my eyes and ears don't match the conflict distracts me.
...the movie keeps playing and you get to understand who is the hero and who's the villain, at least.
I can typically do that with the film muted, can't you?
You did say URI. You could have said URL. It was, after all, a URL. This page gives a good description of the difference as well as a guide for responding to the statement, "Actually, that’s called a URI, not a URL"
The response to this correction can range from quietly thinking this person needs to get out more, to agreeing indifferently via shoulder shrug, to removing the safety clasp on a Katana.
That's not an IP address, it is a URI
He called it an address, not an IP address. "URL" is close enough to being synonymous with "web address."
I was more implying that there was nothing banning people from producing racist content for profit. GP said that nobody had the "right to be paid." Having the "right to be paid," in my mind, is not the same as having a guaranteed payment. I have the rights to do a great many things that will never happen.
I think we're arguing semantics.
CNN has gotten bad about this lately. I've had several stories that I clicked on that had a small video window that would start playing automagically with the sound on. That's obnoxious at home and a problem at work. I now keep my work system muted as I wasn't willing to stop visiting CNN.
I occasionally browse FB while watching videos in another window. Having a FB video hijack me or start playing over what I'm already watching will be enough to bitch about.
That doesn't give anyone the right to be paid to produce it.
I'm curious. Why does nobody have the right to be paid for producing racist content?
You're still not allowed near my puppy.
Hitting a tree is to be avoided, but sometimes swerving off the road is a better course of action than just coming to a "dead stop" - If you can avoid a collision altogether, that's the right decision. In a situation like that, it can be hard even after the fact to determine what the "right" course of action would have been - Plus when you're panicked you make hasty decisions. I'm not arguing that the alcohol didn't contribute to making a bad decision, I'm saying that there may have been a bad decision made anyway and we have no way to know. I don't know this woman or her driving ability, so how could I predict how she'd react to a wrong-way driver sober or not?
Some people fail driving tests stone cold sober and doing their absolute best to do things right.
And someone probably forced her to buy a sports car.
No, nobody forced her and she didn't. Her passenger (her boss) bought the sports car and let her drive it (because he was too drunk?) Since they wrecked avoiding a wrong-way vehicle, it's impossible to know how things would have turned out if she'd been sober.
If they were collecting publicly funded pensions, they were a net drain, and their premature death would actually be a win.
Damn. If your entire metric for worth is $$ generated - $$ consumed, remind me never to let you near my puppy.
There are no Ukrainian boots on Russian soil, didn't seem to work out that well for them.
Clearly it isn't sufficient to just defend yourself if you want peace.
It might be a good start but something else is needed beyond that.
Are you implying that Ukraine should have invaded Russia? That seems like a terrible idea for the Ukrainians. Even worse than the situation they're in now.
(A little secret I've learned is no matter how much power a car has it will still only accelerate as hard as you push down on the gas pedal!!!)
That's true, but applying the same pressure to the gas pedal can produce radically different results depending on the car. There is a learning curve involved with driving a supercar.
Having said that, my employer, the Department of Defense, uses Outlook and a card with a chip in it that stores my credentials, and I can encrypt an email simply by clicking on a button.
At my last position, with the Department of Energy, we used Entrust along with Lotus Notes and credentials stored on the chip on our badge. It was very straightforward even for the non-tech-savvy among us.
It in particular likes to get the user to look at advert videos in order to get extra lives, etc.
Perhaps they've cleaned up the setup since then.
That's still the case. All three of the variants I mentioned offer in-game niceties in exchange for watching ads. I was referring to the mandatory ads being relatively sparse. If you're counting discretionary ads, I guess there can be more as desired. In "Angry Birds Friends Tournament," you can watch an ad up to once a day for a spin on their power-up wheel. In "Angry Birds Seasons," you can choose to watch an ad when offered in exchange for 10 minutes with a scope for your sling. In "Angry Birds 2," you can watch ads for extra lives, extra tournament entries, and possibly more. So I guess if somebody really wants to trade their time for power-ups, the ads could be prominent.
The newer one just bombards you with adverts constantly.
Which version are you referring to as the "newer one"? There are at least a few that are actively maintained. With "Angry Birds 2," "Angry Birds Seasons," and "Angry Birds Friends Tournament," I see relatively few ads. "Relatively" meaning far fewer than "Words with Friends," which is the only other game on my phone that's run often enough for me to notice ad frequency.
Those adverts themselves are often malicious looking. ("battery" boosters, fake "you've won a prize" shit, etc etc.
I do believe I remember seeing a "battery booster" ad. I'm pretty sure I would have remembered seeing a fake "You've won a prize" ad - I don't think I have. What I see almost exclusively in the Angry Birds games is ads for other games.
I agree - Having access to that bulk of human knowledge in your pocket is incredible. Wikipedia isn't perfect and it's easy to nit-pick if one is so inclined, but that doesn't stop it from being amazing. I run into almost no graffiti - A far cry from here. I'd be genuinely curious about the percentage of unique users vs troll posts on /. . My guess would be just a few dedicated bad eggs.
I thought that's what vpn were for...
Not all employers will be happy with you running your own VPN at work. I don't know what my current employer would say (other than "WTF are you doing that for?"), but at my last couple of positions (Department of Energy), it would have been an major no-no.
...they changed from someone...laying out the route by eye to laying out the routes by analysis...
UPS made their first major deployment of ORION (their routing implementation) in 2013. What professional driver in 2013 was still laying out routes "by eye"? GPS mapping had been widely available for over a decade.