The reality here is that if you want to build a service that helps connect everyone in the world, then there are a lot of people who can't afford to pay.
Without realizing that advertisers won't pay to advertise to people with no money it sort of makes you sound like an idiot.
Maybe these people vote (or could be motivated to do so). Not all advertising is targeted to product purchases.
Every breath you take, Every move you make, Every bond you break, Every step you take, I'll be watching you. Sting
Try The Hymn of Acxiom for a more direct take by Vienna Teng. If you can someone singing into a fan, anyway:
The Hymn of Acxiom
somebody hears you. you know that. you know that. somebody hears you. you know that inside. someone is learning the colors of all your moods, to (say just the right thing and) show that you’re understood. here you’re known.
leave your life open. you don’t have. you don’t have. leave your life open. you don’t have to hide. someone is gathering every crumb you drop, these (mindless decisions and) moments you long forgot. keep them all.
let our formulas find your soul. we’ll divine your artesian source (in your mind), marshal feed and force (our machines will) to design you a perfect love— or (better still) a perfect lust. o how glorious, glorious: a brand new need is born.
now we possess you. you’ll own that. you’ll own that. now we possess you. you’ll own that in time. now we will build you an endlessly upward world, (reach in your pocket) embrace you for all you’re worth.
I have somewhat of a similar story, but it gets me to wondering whether the time when I did have the app was in the wild west of Android permissions that the articles are talking about.
C) Putting an idiot as a "backup driver" in an experimental vehicle is something really, really stupid to do, as others correctly commented the car should have at least a "riding shotgun" technician following the actions of the system and a professional driver in front of the wheel to act in case of problems;
I can't help but remember that time Google (pre-Waymo?) stopped loaning its SDVs to employees after that one guy got caught on camera crawling into the back seat to get a device charger while the car was driving him to work.
(which Firefox suggests should be spelled "Shackleton").
Hey fellows, you want to spend countless hours working in shitty conditions to complete a meaningless task faster than anyone else? Later on, you can say "we did it," and bring it up in a job interview where you can tell the panel about all of your "experience."
I don't know about this. DefCon is gearing up for a Chinese event, and I don't see any problem with British hackers going. Or German, or American, or whoever.
She is saying you need to understand how you acquire knowledge and she says you need to examine the sources of that knowledge. There's no blind trust anywhere in her writing.
This is interesting, but I'm not sure how helpful. The internet allows a nominal budget to build an enormous corpus of self-supporting and self-citing literature promoting falsehoods. It is mentally exhausting to determine the truth content for oneself. I'm pretty sure this is by-design.
My wife sent me something she heard that upset her. I thought it sounded suspicious, so I pulled up the source. The website purported to be American, but a quick whois showed a Macedonian registrar for a Slavic name at a Danish address. Somehow, though, this source wound up cited by a national radio programme (and not even talk-radio; this was music).
I bring this up because my wife here is reputation-delegating out to me. And here I am, blindly (but quite confidently) making assumptions about agitprop registered in another country.
I recognize this is a trap, but I think it could be done. It'd be harder, certainly, if you only accepted elected officials, but perhaps possible even then.
Devil's Advocate: the disclosure(s) is (are) vague as hell on exploit details, let alone demonstrations or proof-of-concepts, so there is that.
I'm not disagreeing here, and I know nothing about the details, but wouldn't that be the ideal competitor-funded FUD? "I'm not going to tell you all the details, but here's an elephant being electrocuted by AC^H^H AMD. How do you explain that, Mr. Tesla?"
Of course, what I'm doing here is Intel-FUD, so maybe I'm just a shill the other way.:^O
I cannot tell those opposing him not to use the legal tools at their disposal.
Assert.Bullshit();
You can absolutely tell them not to use those tools. Just like you can (for instance) tell them not to sponsor misleading but legal attack ads. Furthermore, they can then proclaim that they don't use them, and then have serious conversations about whether such a practice ought to be legal without looking the hypocrite.
I appreciate your work under the one hat. I would like to appreciate your work under the other, and I understand how the situation is difficult for you. But it is doublespeak to tell us you can't say a thing that you are not only capable of uttering but also claim to believe and MobyDisk is right to call you on it.
Slashdot Mirror
Dear Mark,
When you say things like:
Without realizing that advertisers won't pay to advertise to people with no money it sort of makes you sound like an idiot.
Maybe these people vote (or could be motivated to do so). Not all advertising is targeted to product purchases.
The service is free and lures folks in with "fast". When a service is free, you're the product (see recent FB kerfuffle).
Wikipedia is free.
With Wikipedia, you curate the product. Also, Jimmy keeps trying to guilt you into donating.
Every breath you take,
Every move you make,
Every bond you break,
Every step you take,
I'll be watching you.
Sting
Try The Hymn of Acxiom for a more direct take by Vienna Teng. If you can someone singing into a fan, anyway:
The Hymn of Acxiom
somebody hears you. you know that. you know that.
somebody hears you. you know that inside.
someone is learning the colors of all your moods, to
(say just the right thing and) show that you’re understood.
here you’re known.
leave your life open. you don’t have. you don’t have.
leave your life open. you don’t have to hide.
someone is gathering every crumb you drop, these
(mindless decisions and) moments you long forgot.
keep them all.
let our formulas find your soul.
we’ll divine your artesian source (in your mind),
marshal feed and force (our machines will)
to design you a perfect love—
or (better still) a perfect lust.
o how glorious, glorious: a brand new need is born.
now we possess you. you’ll own that. you’ll own that.
now we possess you. you’ll own that in time.
now we will build you an endlessly upward world,
(reach in your pocket) embrace you for all you’re worth.
is that wrong?
isn’t this what you want?
amen.
This was worth the price of admission today.
... Doubly so that there was an employee Uber was able to throw under the bus for this. ...
Is the bus self-driving, too?
I have somewhat of a similar story, but it gets me to wondering whether the time when I did have the app was in the wild west of Android permissions that the articles are talking about.
C) Putting an idiot as a "backup driver" in an experimental vehicle is something really, really stupid to do, as others correctly commented the car should have at least a "riding shotgun" technician following the actions of the system and a professional driver in front of the wheel to act in case of problems;
I can't help but remember that time Google (pre-Waymo?) stopped loaning its SDVs to employees after that one guy got caught on camera crawling into the back seat to get a device charger while the car was driving him to work.
Poe's Law? I can't ever tell.
(which Firefox suggests should be spelled "Shackleton").
Hey fellows, you want to spend countless hours working in shitty conditions to complete a meaningless task faster than anyone else? Later on, you can say "we did it," and bring it up in a job interview where you can tell the panel about all of your "experience."
It's just the new "may," as in: "Research papers may be less accurate and truthful than in the past."
I also heard that real Scotsmen only take off their kilts to shave their nuts, and sometimes not even then.
I don't know about this. DefCon is gearing up for a Chinese event, and I don't see any problem with British hackers going. Or German, or American, or whoever.
Obama uses Big Data to great effect and is celebrated for it. Trump use it and OMG!
Perhaps in some circles. In others, the team you play for doesn't matter as much as what you stand for.
She is saying you need to understand how you acquire knowledge and she says you need to examine the sources of that knowledge.
There's no blind trust anywhere in her writing.
This is interesting, but I'm not sure how helpful. The internet allows a nominal budget to build an enormous corpus of self-supporting and self-citing literature promoting falsehoods. It is mentally exhausting to determine the truth content for oneself. I'm pretty sure this is by-design.
My wife sent me something she heard that upset her. I thought it sounded suspicious, so I pulled up the source. The website purported to be American, but a quick whois showed a Macedonian registrar for a Slavic name at a Danish address. Somehow, though, this source wound up cited by a national radio programme (and not even talk-radio; this was music).
I bring this up because my wife here is reputation-delegating out to me. And here I am, blindly (but quite confidently) making assumptions about agitprop registered in another country.
I recognize this is a trap, but I think it could be done. It'd be harder, certainly, if you only accepted elected officials, but perhaps possible even then.
I think you need to see this for a good laugh.
Break Motherland's rules and she grounds you. Literally.
Not just Windows.
Amazon is focused on one thing and one thing only. BEING THE MARKET LEADER ANY MARKET THEY ENTER.
Just wait until the market is "Government."
you're ableism is showing check your privilege
Your grammar competency is showing. Check your sentences.
Isn't that what the Romans said about Christianity?
And by Zeus they were right...
Perhaps you meant to invoke Jupiter?
And yet I have seen all of these opinions on Slashdot (except for the last one; that's clearly daft).
Devil's Advocate: the disclosure(s) is (are) vague as hell on exploit details, let alone demonstrations or proof-of-concepts, so there is that.
I'm not disagreeing here, and I know nothing about the details, but wouldn't that be the ideal competitor-funded FUD? "I'm not going to tell you all the details, but here's an elephant being electrocuted by AC^H^H AMD. How do you explain that, Mr. Tesla?"
Of course, what I'm doing here is Intel-FUD, so maybe I'm just a shill the other way. :^O
Hate to break it to you, but your cat may have expired.
I cannot tell those opposing him not to use the legal tools at their disposal.
Assert.Bullshit();
You can absolutely tell them not to use those tools. Just like you can (for instance) tell them not to sponsor misleading but legal attack ads. Furthermore, they can then proclaim that they don't use them, and then have serious conversations about whether such a practice ought to be legal without looking the hypocrite.
I appreciate your work under the one hat. I would like to appreciate your work under the other, and I understand how the situation is difficult for you. But it is doublespeak to tell us you can't say a thing that you are not only capable of uttering but also claim to believe and MobyDisk is right to call you on it.