"Emergency" isn't a binary state, I'd argue most client issues are on a continuum of some kind of urgency requiring action of some kind -- even if its just client communication -- within 24 hours, anything same day is likely perceived as an emergency by somebody.
It'd be nice to work in self-enforced isolation, but as part of an organization with clients, it's not possible. Wanting to communicate with a peer, client or vendor isn't rude and thoughtless, it's *communication*.
I think incomplete, barely comprehensive texts and IMs are rude and thoughtless. They pop up demanding attention but don't deliver anything useful relative to their attention-grabbing alert nature.
A longer text with some description of the nature of the problem would be enormously helpful.
This kind of passive-aggressive short chatting may work for figuring out if you want to have pizza or drinks later, but it's a massive time sink for business communication.
And part of the reason a phone call is so much more efficient is that, especially with technical issues, texts get long and cumbersome.
Telling me about a problem that I may be needed to help with isn't intrusive, it's my job. Short texts actually communicates an assumed level of unimportance to the problem and will likely get shoved further to the back burner.
I'm 51 and definitely from the generation that always answered the phone.
I notice as my fellow employees get younger there is much less use of voice calls, with instant messaging and emails being preferred instead. The problem is that these communication methods often seem really inefficient and are as easy to ignore or under-respond to as a phone with a ringer on silent.
We've had problems crop up with clients and you'd never know what the nature and magnitude of them is when you get short texts like "Do you know about the issue at MZR?"
Does either response provide any value? I can answer "Yes" without actually knowing because the dumb text made it seem like there was one. I can answer no and what value does that add to the person asking?
Had they just fucking called we both would have been able to quickly sort out who knew what and who was going to do anything about it.
Happy to know that it's not just some crazy-ass dumb idea that has no basis in reality. I know that Tyler Cowen also has his own spin on the concept of stagnation.
Slightly disappointed to note that it's an old idea, somewhat discredited. But I think economic stagnation is kind of an existential risk of any economy, and the failure of any given prediction of stagnation doesn't necessarily mean that any given economic situation can't be described by some kind of structural stagnation.
I also think its likely that as the global economy matures, stagnation generally seems more likely and amplified by structural problems like wealth inequality, capital hoarding, income inequality, resource contention and so on.
It may also be that growth stagnation isn't really a problem, and that income inequality and great wealth inequality are the actual problems. Growth is seen as a way of producing sufficient surpluses that mediate inequality (through demand for labor increasing wages, mostly), but really we can't rely on growth for mediating inequality.
In fact, there may even be an argument that income and wealth inequality and capital hoarding by firms are actually symptoms of economic stagnation -- they're signs that there is diminished faith in growth producing surpluses, resulting in a desire to "corner the market" prior to even worse future scarcity.
AFAIK, Windows doesn't have any native RAM disk capability. There are third party applications that can add this, but conceptually it seems a lot different than having what amounts to disk storage in RAM slots.
A system running a RAM disk doesn't really care what pages get used for RAM disk and the memory control of the kernel treats all RAM pages equally.
I don't doubt Linux has some kind of special memory modes evolved from SoC usage or something where flash and RAM are already mapped to a common memory space. But it also seems likely that this is mostly a hardware gimmick to eliminate disk controllers and the applications need some intelligence to know whether they're writing to flash pages or RAM pages unless the kernel memory manager automatically makes a disk out of flash pages and only exposes real RAM to applications.
It strikes me that without a special memory control manager that knows about flash pages vs. ram pages, a generic OS booted on an optane equipped system would just not work well unless it treated those pages differently.
It would be interesting to have several terabytes of non-volatile memory that was accessible at DRAM speed. You would have a single unified memory space for data and executables. No waiting to move data from storage to RAM.
You could turn off the power and turn it back on and regain the exact state of execution without any of the delays associated with hibernation or the power consumption of sleep.
If I remember the hype correctly, Optane is supposed to be some multiple faster than SSD with superior durability. My guess this is some kind of gimmick to break through disk bus bandwidth limits but without using NVMe slots.
A lot of servers seem to have a bunch of empty DIMM slots, so it maybe makes sense to sell Optane that can be plugged into existing DIMM slots.
What's not clear is how they plan to present this to the computer -- is it going to be as a disk device, or is it just going to be mapped to RAM? My understanding is that Optane is still much slower than RAM, so it would seem to make sense to present it as a disk device somehow. I'm not sure any OS would even have a way of dealing with "these memory pages act like non-volatile storage, not like RAM".
I'm also curious what having a couple of TB of Optane as storage on your memory bus would do for memory access times. I think we're already cursed going to main memory as it is, having that bus tied up with large Optane traffic sounds like it would make memory access worse.
Maybe Intel's plan is to just use DDR as some kind of backplane/interconnect and plans multiple memory busses in some future chipset release that allows for Optane and DRAM to not get in each other's way.
I remember that test and another one that used an 850 Pro with similar results.
I kept waiting for someone to gut the enterprise storage market by putting out cheap, flash based storage devices but it never happened. I still see prices in the thousands for "read intensive" SSDs.
I think there's also a kind of capital trap, where successful companies have so much capital on hand but don't see any way to invest it that guarantees rates of return better than short term investments.
But at the same time, they're successful enough that there's not enough shareholder demand that they invest in new markets so they don't invest it, and the capital remains tied up in Treasuries rather than flowing through the economy as physical plants, wages and raw material purchases.
My theory is that organic economic growth in the capitalist West has somehow stalled, and corporations looking for increasing profits are increasingly relying on cost cutting to boost profits.
Eliminating older workers in favor of cheaper and more disposable young people and immigrants is a way to obtain cost reductions.
It also helps to gut the middle class so that you produce an ever larger population of more economically disenfranchised young people who are willing to take low-paying jobs.
Usually I find that orgs that demand a lot of data without any stated purpose are the worst managed. While there can be a reasonable stage in any organization where any data is valuable, usually the better managed organizations have some direction or goal for the organization and are choosing data that helps them further or refine the goal.
Managers who just want to hoard data don't know what they're doing and hope that they can find some answers in the data.
We're switching to a new "system" at work which demands even more data and I honestly think its just to further the owners need to micromanage.
Modern high quality SSDs have really good write durability, but do they have enough to really survive in a DVR that's recording constantly at least at the price points acceptable enough for warehouse store security camera bundles?
It'd be an interesting thing to try out. I could see where the increased throughput of flash media could make for enhanced DVR features, like high frame rate recording but extremely fast time lapse scanning, although I assume they've kind of figured out how to do that with slower rotational media.
I wonder if it helps prop up the price of smaller natural diamonds.
If good and big man-made diamonds become relatively cheap, it seems like they would become a natural alternative for the type of person who judges quality by quantity. So now you have "low class" people sporting large diamonds, creating the social association of big diamonds with the trailer park crowd.
Your high-class moneyed crowd who previously might have liked making a statement with a 2 carat ring now finds themselves unable to impress anyone with a large diamond, or worse, gets mistaken for the wrong social class.
So they revert to small natural diamonds -- since nobody would buy a small man-made diamond when you could buy a big one, now expensive and small diamonds are seen as a statement of wealth.
I have to say, I'm more than a little impressed at the brass balls you must have had to do this if that's what you actually did.
Lying to labor officials about layoff criteria doesn't seem that risky. For the most part, unless there's substantial proof of sexual discrimination (against women) or racial discrimination (against blacks, really) I don't think state labor agencies really have much authority or power.
For the most part, beefs with employers are outsourced to the legal system. If a lawyer thinks you have a case worth contingency you might get someplace.
Most "sh" variants are pretty close and derivative, leading to reasonable portability among them.
I don't know that bash is "the best" but it is pretty widely used and basing PowerShell off its syntax would have provided a lot of existing compatibility. I guess Microsoft was really looking to do something else.
Experienced workers are more likely to be resistant to "culture and process change" because they've been down that road before and seldom seen it actually result in meaningful changes. At best its a workable rearrangement of existing process, at worst its a distortion of the process that makes it worse.
Younger and less experienced workers are more likely to fall for a charismatic sales pitch, not knowing that the changes will probably be a net zero change at best, or believe they have something to gain by attaching themselves to a "change agent" and their agenda.
These days these process changes seem even worse than in the past because they so often seem to be tied to just generating more data for managers vs. any actual improvement in work product or work process.
I often wonder what the Windows/Linux balance of power would look like if MS had released PowerShell with full BASH support, GNU tools and then the Microsoft-specific PowerShell commands as just extensions.
I know PS advocates make a lot of noise about PS being object oriented but I don't see why that demands a completely new command line syntax. The shell may need object awareness to handle pipelining between PS object generators/consumers, but a totally new syntax from the ground up seems to be just a barrier.
I worked in advertising 1993 - 2005 and what got me was the how artistic nearly everyone in "creative" thought they were. I mean, a handful of them were decent illustrators and one guy seriously could have worked for a comic book type company but they were the least arrogant and elitist of the bunch.
The ones that worked on television commercials fancied themselves to be Hollywood directors even though the production of actual commercials was totally contracted out to actual production companies. There was even a secret memo scolding broadcast producers and creative directors for renting Range Rovers and staying at high-line Hollywood hotels when supervising shoots.
The rest fancied themselves serious writers or other various forms of visual artists because of their knack for picking out stock photos or something.
The sure way to piss them off was to ask them what kind of sugar cereal or adult diapers Martin Scorsese or Picasso worked on.
They've been relining the water mains here to limit leaks and pipe failures. It's been going on across the city for several years now, and this is a really well managed, self-funded (ie, water fees pay for the water system) water system that's mostly newer than 120 years (good chunks maybe less than 75 years old), run by a more or less functional city government.
Can you imagine what Karachi's water plant is like? I'll bet just creating documentation as to where the pipes are would be a decade-long odyssey and it probably wouldn't uncover miles of unauthorized extensions and tapping into the system.
Fixing the leaks is a good idea, but I'd bet in Karachi building a desal plant is probably actually more cost effective compared to detangling the mess they have.
I see these chargers in some parking ramps, mostly government owned ones in my not-little urban city. They're almost always 100% unoccupied.
I'm mostly convinced that these charging spots get put in by the local government as a virtue signaling thing, not because there's some unmet demand for charging. Politicos who approve budgets and their green-oriented planners like to show they're doing something, even if the something goes unused.
And its not like 3-5 charging spots is any kind of a "solution" -- the lot/ramp as HUNDREDS of parking spots, if electric cars take off, 3-5 spots won't be beneficial and I seriously doubt money will be available to wire the 1/3+ to be truly useful. And then the cost reality of supplying a half-megawatt of free electricity will kick in, too.
I seldom see them in private parking lots unless the owner or influential tenant drives a Tesla. And then it's like 3 chargers with one of them that says "RESERVED - B. JONES, CEO". Otherwise it's like a boutique decoration for some high-end business.
I knew somebody would debate this, but what exactly does "reckless" mean?
I think it is ambiguous enough that it leaves room for someone arguing that 60 in a 30 zone is fine because they're super good at driving, there's nobody using the road, or some other reason.
I think some speed limits represent real concerns, like the time to stop relative to the potential for someone to cross the road, or to provide a predictable velocity of oncoming traffic for people trying to cross a road on foot or in a car.
Nearly every law passed is done so with the idea -- not even consciously considered -- that enforcement isn't 100% automatic and perfectly efficient.
Speed enforcement is pretty good example -- nearly everyone rationally accepts that there should be speed limits on most roads for general safety. Yet speed cameras face a ton of opposition and probably from the same people who wouldn't even argue for Autobahn-style "no speed limits" in Montana.
I think if we get to the point of perfect enforcement of any law due to technology, we will need to re-think what kinds of laws we pass or re-calibrate the penalty mechanism to have much more finely graded penalties. Going above the posted speed limit violates that law, but is going above it by 2 mph for 2 seconds on an empty road the same violation as going above it by 50 MPH for 30 minutes on a crowded freeway?
My guess would mean the traditional Facebook service would be split from Messenger which would be split from Instragram.
It doesn't make a ton of logical sense compared to a typical anti-trust kind of situation, but perhaps we're reached the point where you need a new argument around products with a giant network affect or social media specifically, and need to argue that these network effects mean that these kinds of business can only be allowed to encompass one kind of social media "service".
It might also mean that they can own other social media companies, but bars them from integrating them into a common business structure, and that the products need to be available on a stand-alone basis with zero participation in other products to use any one of them.
Thus if I want messenger, I can get messenger without a Facebook account. If the company doesn't want to do that, then that feature must only be available as an integrated component of their other application and cannot be made available as an apparently stand-alone product.
Because there was that one time where that one photogenic kid of photogenic parents got kidnapped and killed but could have been identified and saved (maybe!) if an alert about the missing kid had been rammed down everyone's throats *and* a politician was running for re-election and needed a PR win, so he helped pass a law thanks to weepy photogenic parents crying in committee meetings.
Plus, in addition to wanting to track us the next thing high on the government's list is being able to broadcast propaganda to us.
I mean, is there a better explanation? We have had "missing" kids for years and years, the actual risk level is near-zero if you factor out divorced parents in a pissing match.
The latter part always amazes me -- why the fuck would you fight your spouse over custody of the kids? I would be fighting my spouse to make her KEEP the kids. Isn't the whole point of divorce liberation from the harpy and the brats?
Slashdot Mirror
"Emergency" isn't a binary state, I'd argue most client issues are on a continuum of some kind of urgency requiring action of some kind -- even if its just client communication -- within 24 hours, anything same day is likely perceived as an emergency by somebody.
It'd be nice to work in self-enforced isolation, but as part of an organization with clients, it's not possible. Wanting to communicate with a peer, client or vendor isn't rude and thoughtless, it's *communication*.
I think incomplete, barely comprehensive texts and IMs are rude and thoughtless. They pop up demanding attention but don't deliver anything useful relative to their attention-grabbing alert nature.
A longer text with some description of the nature of the problem would be enormously helpful.
This kind of passive-aggressive short chatting may work for figuring out if you want to have pizza or drinks later, but it's a massive time sink for business communication.
And part of the reason a phone call is so much more efficient is that, especially with technical issues, texts get long and cumbersome.
Telling me about a problem that I may be needed to help with isn't intrusive, it's my job. Short texts actually communicates an assumed level of unimportance to the problem and will likely get shoved further to the back burner.
I'm 51 and definitely from the generation that always answered the phone.
I notice as my fellow employees get younger there is much less use of voice calls, with instant messaging and emails being preferred instead. The problem is that these communication methods often seem really inefficient and are as easy to ignore or under-respond to as a phone with a ringer on silent.
We've had problems crop up with clients and you'd never know what the nature and magnitude of them is when you get short texts like "Do you know about the issue at MZR?"
Does either response provide any value? I can answer "Yes" without actually knowing because the dumb text made it seem like there was one. I can answer no and what value does that add to the person asking?
Had they just fucking called we both would have been able to quickly sort out who knew what and who was going to do anything about it.
Happy to know that it's not just some crazy-ass dumb idea that has no basis in reality. I know that Tyler Cowen also has his own spin on the concept of stagnation.
Slightly disappointed to note that it's an old idea, somewhat discredited. But I think economic stagnation is kind of an existential risk of any economy, and the failure of any given prediction of stagnation doesn't necessarily mean that any given economic situation can't be described by some kind of structural stagnation.
I also think its likely that as the global economy matures, stagnation generally seems more likely and amplified by structural problems like wealth inequality, capital hoarding, income inequality, resource contention and so on.
It may also be that growth stagnation isn't really a problem, and that income inequality and great wealth inequality are the actual problems. Growth is seen as a way of producing sufficient surpluses that mediate inequality (through demand for labor increasing wages, mostly), but really we can't rely on growth for mediating inequality.
In fact, there may even be an argument that income and wealth inequality and capital hoarding by firms are actually symptoms of economic stagnation -- they're signs that there is diminished faith in growth producing surpluses, resulting in a desire to "corner the market" prior to even worse future scarcity.
AFAIK, Windows doesn't have any native RAM disk capability. There are third party applications that can add this, but conceptually it seems a lot different than having what amounts to disk storage in RAM slots.
A system running a RAM disk doesn't really care what pages get used for RAM disk and the memory control of the kernel treats all RAM pages equally.
I don't doubt Linux has some kind of special memory modes evolved from SoC usage or something where flash and RAM are already mapped to a common memory space. But it also seems likely that this is mostly a hardware gimmick to eliminate disk controllers and the applications need some intelligence to know whether they're writing to flash pages or RAM pages unless the kernel memory manager automatically makes a disk out of flash pages and only exposes real RAM to applications.
It strikes me that without a special memory control manager that knows about flash pages vs. ram pages, a generic OS booted on an optane equipped system would just not work well unless it treated those pages differently.
It would be interesting to have several terabytes of non-volatile memory that was accessible at DRAM speed. You would have a single unified memory space for data and executables. No waiting to move data from storage to RAM.
You could turn off the power and turn it back on and regain the exact state of execution without any of the delays associated with hibernation or the power consumption of sleep.
If I remember the hype correctly, Optane is supposed to be some multiple faster than SSD with superior durability. My guess this is some kind of gimmick to break through disk bus bandwidth limits but without using NVMe slots.
A lot of servers seem to have a bunch of empty DIMM slots, so it maybe makes sense to sell Optane that can be plugged into existing DIMM slots.
What's not clear is how they plan to present this to the computer -- is it going to be as a disk device, or is it just going to be mapped to RAM? My understanding is that Optane is still much slower than RAM, so it would seem to make sense to present it as a disk device somehow. I'm not sure any OS would even have a way of dealing with "these memory pages act like non-volatile storage, not like RAM".
I'm also curious what having a couple of TB of Optane as storage on your memory bus would do for memory access times. I think we're already cursed going to main memory as it is, having that bus tied up with large Optane traffic sounds like it would make memory access worse.
Maybe Intel's plan is to just use DDR as some kind of backplane/interconnect and plans multiple memory busses in some future chipset release that allows for Optane and DRAM to not get in each other's way.
You're not supposed to look at the specs, you just need to purchase at least 3 variations of Optane for every new server.
I remember that test and another one that used an 850 Pro with similar results.
I kept waiting for someone to gut the enterprise storage market by putting out cheap, flash based storage devices but it never happened. I still see prices in the thousands for "read intensive" SSDs.
I think there's also a kind of capital trap, where successful companies have so much capital on hand but don't see any way to invest it that guarantees rates of return better than short term investments.
But at the same time, they're successful enough that there's not enough shareholder demand that they invest in new markets so they don't invest it, and the capital remains tied up in Treasuries rather than flowing through the economy as physical plants, wages and raw material purchases.
My theory is that organic economic growth in the capitalist West has somehow stalled, and corporations looking for increasing profits are increasingly relying on cost cutting to boost profits.
Eliminating older workers in favor of cheaper and more disposable young people and immigrants is a way to obtain cost reductions.
It also helps to gut the middle class so that you produce an ever larger population of more economically disenfranchised young people who are willing to take low-paying jobs.
Usually I find that orgs that demand a lot of data without any stated purpose are the worst managed. While there can be a reasonable stage in any organization where any data is valuable, usually the better managed organizations have some direction or goal for the organization and are choosing data that helps them further or refine the goal.
Managers who just want to hoard data don't know what they're doing and hope that they can find some answers in the data.
We're switching to a new "system" at work which demands even more data and I honestly think its just to further the owners need to micromanage.
Modern high quality SSDs have really good write durability, but do they have enough to really survive in a DVR that's recording constantly at least at the price points acceptable enough for warehouse store security camera bundles?
It'd be an interesting thing to try out. I could see where the increased throughput of flash media could make for enhanced DVR features, like high frame rate recording but extremely fast time lapse scanning, although I assume they've kind of figured out how to do that with slower rotational media.
I wonder if it helps prop up the price of smaller natural diamonds.
If good and big man-made diamonds become relatively cheap, it seems like they would become a natural alternative for the type of person who judges quality by quantity. So now you have "low class" people sporting large diamonds, creating the social association of big diamonds with the trailer park crowd.
Your high-class moneyed crowd who previously might have liked making a statement with a 2 carat ring now finds themselves unable to impress anyone with a large diamond, or worse, gets mistaken for the wrong social class.
So they revert to small natural diamonds -- since nobody would buy a small man-made diamond when you could buy a big one, now expensive and small diamonds are seen as a statement of wealth.
I have to say, I'm more than a little impressed at the brass balls you must have had to do this if that's what you actually did.
Lying to labor officials about layoff criteria doesn't seem that risky. For the most part, unless there's substantial proof of sexual discrimination (against women) or racial discrimination (against blacks, really) I don't think state labor agencies really have much authority or power.
For the most part, beefs with employers are outsourced to the legal system. If a lawyer thinks you have a case worth contingency you might get someplace.
Most "sh" variants are pretty close and derivative, leading to reasonable portability among them.
I don't know that bash is "the best" but it is pretty widely used and basing PowerShell off its syntax would have provided a lot of existing compatibility. I guess Microsoft was really looking to do something else.
Experienced workers are more likely to be resistant to "culture and process change" because they've been down that road before and seldom seen it actually result in meaningful changes. At best its a workable rearrangement of existing process, at worst its a distortion of the process that makes it worse.
Younger and less experienced workers are more likely to fall for a charismatic sales pitch, not knowing that the changes will probably be a net zero change at best, or believe they have something to gain by attaching themselves to a "change agent" and their agenda.
These days these process changes seem even worse than in the past because they so often seem to be tied to just generating more data for managers vs. any actual improvement in work product or work process.
I often wonder what the Windows/Linux balance of power would look like if MS had released PowerShell with full BASH support, GNU tools and then the Microsoft-specific PowerShell commands as just extensions.
I know PS advocates make a lot of noise about PS being object oriented but I don't see why that demands a completely new command line syntax. The shell may need object awareness to handle pipelining between PS object generators/consumers, but a totally new syntax from the ground up seems to be just a barrier.
I worked in advertising 1993 - 2005 and what got me was the how artistic nearly everyone in "creative" thought they were. I mean, a handful of them were decent illustrators and one guy seriously could have worked for a comic book type company but they were the least arrogant and elitist of the bunch.
The ones that worked on television commercials fancied themselves to be Hollywood directors even though the production of actual commercials was totally contracted out to actual production companies. There was even a secret memo scolding broadcast producers and creative directors for renting Range Rovers and staying at high-line Hollywood hotels when supervising shoots.
The rest fancied themselves serious writers or other various forms of visual artists because of their knack for picking out stock photos or something.
The sure way to piss them off was to ask them what kind of sugar cereal or adult diapers Martin Scorsese or Picasso worked on.
They've been relining the water mains here to limit leaks and pipe failures. It's been going on across the city for several years now, and this is a really well managed, self-funded (ie, water fees pay for the water system) water system that's mostly newer than 120 years (good chunks maybe less than 75 years old), run by a more or less functional city government.
Can you imagine what Karachi's water plant is like? I'll bet just creating documentation as to where the pipes are would be a decade-long odyssey and it probably wouldn't uncover miles of unauthorized extensions and tapping into the system.
Fixing the leaks is a good idea, but I'd bet in Karachi building a desal plant is probably actually more cost effective compared to detangling the mess they have.
I see these chargers in some parking ramps, mostly government owned ones in my not-little urban city. They're almost always 100% unoccupied.
I'm mostly convinced that these charging spots get put in by the local government as a virtue signaling thing, not because there's some unmet demand for charging. Politicos who approve budgets and their green-oriented planners like to show they're doing something, even if the something goes unused.
And its not like 3-5 charging spots is any kind of a "solution" -- the lot/ramp as HUNDREDS of parking spots, if electric cars take off, 3-5 spots won't be beneficial and I seriously doubt money will be available to wire the 1/3+ to be truly useful. And then the cost reality of supplying a half-megawatt of free electricity will kick in, too.
I seldom see them in private parking lots unless the owner or influential tenant drives a Tesla. And then it's like 3 chargers with one of them that says "RESERVED - B. JONES, CEO". Otherwise it's like a boutique decoration for some high-end business.
I knew somebody would debate this, but what exactly does "reckless" mean?
I think it is ambiguous enough that it leaves room for someone arguing that 60 in a 30 zone is fine because they're super good at driving, there's nobody using the road, or some other reason.
I think some speed limits represent real concerns, like the time to stop relative to the potential for someone to cross the road, or to provide a predictable velocity of oncoming traffic for people trying to cross a road on foot or in a car.
This should be upvoted.
Nearly every law passed is done so with the idea -- not even consciously considered -- that enforcement isn't 100% automatic and perfectly efficient.
Speed enforcement is pretty good example -- nearly everyone rationally accepts that there should be speed limits on most roads for general safety. Yet speed cameras face a ton of opposition and probably from the same people who wouldn't even argue for Autobahn-style "no speed limits" in Montana.
I think if we get to the point of perfect enforcement of any law due to technology, we will need to re-think what kinds of laws we pass or re-calibrate the penalty mechanism to have much more finely graded penalties. Going above the posted speed limit violates that law, but is going above it by 2 mph for 2 seconds on an empty road the same violation as going above it by 50 MPH for 30 minutes on a crowded freeway?
My guess would mean the traditional Facebook service would be split from Messenger which would be split from Instragram.
It doesn't make a ton of logical sense compared to a typical anti-trust kind of situation, but perhaps we're reached the point where you need a new argument around products with a giant network affect or social media specifically, and need to argue that these network effects mean that these kinds of business can only be allowed to encompass one kind of social media "service".
It might also mean that they can own other social media companies, but bars them from integrating them into a common business structure, and that the products need to be available on a stand-alone basis with zero participation in other products to use any one of them.
Thus if I want messenger, I can get messenger without a Facebook account. If the company doesn't want to do that, then that feature must only be available as an integrated component of their other application and cannot be made available as an apparently stand-alone product.
Because there was that one time where that one photogenic kid of photogenic parents got kidnapped and killed but could have been identified and saved (maybe!)
if an alert about the missing kid had been rammed down everyone's throats *and* a politician was running for re-election and needed a PR win, so he helped pass a law thanks to weepy photogenic parents crying in committee meetings.
Plus, in addition to wanting to track us the next thing high on the government's list is being able to broadcast propaganda to us.
I mean, is there a better explanation? We have had "missing" kids for years and years, the actual risk level is near-zero if you factor out divorced parents in a pissing match.
The latter part always amazes me -- why the fuck would you fight your spouse over custody of the kids? I would be fighting my spouse to make her KEEP the kids. Isn't the whole point of divorce liberation from the harpy and the brats?