The objective isn't to earn money selling advertising, needing viewership/readership to accomplish that. The objective is to dictate what people think about...everything. It's mind control, not business. It has a financial payoff, but it's not as direct as subscriber numbers or advertising revenue.
Shipping is free on any order over $25. Put some low-dollar stuff you want but don't need right away in your cart or on your wishlist, and add one of those items to your cart when you need to get it over $25.
The only reason to have prime is if you are always in a hurry to receive things, and if you instead only pay for that when you need it, you may be better off without prime.
I've learned to plan ahead, and I've become comfortable with ebay and other sources, and not only do I not have to pay for prime, I usually find a better price than Amazon. Particularly on small things and on grocery items, Amazon prices are kinda crap.
The downside of canceling prime is that Bezos is a vindictive SOB. They will hold your orders for up to eight days before shipping. Sometimes they do that, sometimes they ship almost as fast as prime. You just don't know how long an Amazon order will take without prime, so learn to plan ahead. Order stuff before you absolutely need it. If you're in a hurry, get it elsewhere, or pay for shipping.
I've followed The_Donald since early 2016 as a hostile observer and it is clear to me that they don't know what any of these words mean. Not in the political sense.
Almost the entire Democratic party is centrist. Google "new democrats". Bill Clinton set them on this path. The party has become both neoliberal (free-market capitalist) and neoconservative (American exceptionalism, interventionist foreign policy).
They are very much NOT leftist, NOT liberal, NOT progressive. Those words have all become meaningless, because people are still using them to describe the Democrats, when they are very much none of those things any more.
Nobody creates a boring fake news story. Lots of real news is uninteresting. There's your difference. When it is believed, fake news travels faster because it is more interesting.
They've been demonetizing and rendering less-findable videos that don't satisfy mainstream sensibilities for at least a year. This has affected political content on both the left and right.
Still unrecognized in the media that you are allowed to see is that a new axis has opened in the political landscape: establishment vs anti-establishment. The six corporations (soon to be five) that control all the media are on the establishment side, of course, and they are having a tantrum over supporters of both Trump and Sanders (as well as all third parties).
you'll still be able to mail-order CDs, just not walk into a Best Buy
Not being able to get them at Best Buy means the market for them will shrink, which will make them more expensive, shrinking the market farther, and possibly convince labels to stop making them.
It's the Walmart effect. The purchase decisions of other people do affect you.
Shipping is maddening without prime. They don't just ship a slower carrier. They hold it for up to a week before shipping. And some things you find are prime-only, so you can't order them at all. I got used to ordering things from ebay, and I learned to like walmart and some other sellers' direct website.
This is the opposite of my experience. Until recently, every modern US generation had it better than their parents, and knew it. It's only been this century that the realization has sunk in that the standard of living is no longer going up, when things like healthcare, job opportunities, housing costs and debt are considered. We have cheap toys and internet. Everything else is starting to suck.
The observation described in the article is quite old. That is, while people raking in the bucks during the internet boom were young, their elders were still happier. While those same people were young, their elders were happier. While *those* people were young, their elders were happier.
You, provided you have basic needs covered in your old age, which is far from guaranteed, will be happier than your grandkids.
You describe a real problem, but the point of the article still stands.
Bana Alabed is a seven-year-old Syrian Girl. She's also a pawn in the propaganda war. CNN manufactured a story of a seven-year-old Syrian girl asking America to liberate Syria from its tyrant president. Problem is, she doesn't understand English, so her CNN interview is implausible.
And by "whine" I mean "have been squelched and are complaining."
This policy covers topics such as war and Syria. You can't report on war or Syria, as in "the war in Syria", and expect to be monetized. If you have "war" or "syria" in the title, it'll be automatically unmonetized.
You can't report on anything the nanny state has determined might be in opposition to mainstream news. Use the word "lawsuit" or the name "seth rich" and you're probably going to be unmonetized, even if your video parrots the mainstream propaganda, as in, "the DNC lawsuit is bunk", or "the seth rich story is conspiracy nonsense". Got naughty keywords? No ads for you.
And you sure as hell can't describe the dnc lawsuit or the seth rich story, fairly or not, and expect ad revenue.
Want to talk about propaganda? Call it something else.
Hillary Clinton? Be nice to her or her paid trolls (Correct the Record, now ShareBlue) will report you.
Something you want to describe as "rigged"? Don't do that.
Think you want to report on news and use words like murder or conspiracy or conflict? Yeah, nanny state don't like those words anymore.
Say something unapproved today? They're going to go through all your videos now and unmonetize the ones they don't like.
This might be google appeasing advertisers, as they say it is, or it might be google exerting political influence, like they do in search listings, or it might just be google realizing that political commentators will continue to produce content for their platform even if they don't pay them anything. Whatever it is, it's definitely not just a smack down on conservatives. Progressives are complaining, too.
The following anonymous coward putinbot posts are mine. I don't normally bother signing in to slashdot because it isn't worth the trouble:
WaPo, CIA conflict of interest rag Guccifer 2.0 is a fraud TL;DR
I'm a Democrat, not a Republican or a Trump fan or a putin bot. I resist propaganda because propaganda is more dangerous than Trump. I resist propaganda because it is a symptom of a system that is so stacked against ordinary citizens that it may be too late to ever wrest control of our government back from the oligarchs, deep state and military industrial complex.
But since you mention bots, I'll mention paid trolls (not claiming you are one): Correct the Record, ShareBlue. Paid trolls working for Hillary, according to sources I think you'll agree aren't Putin-friendly:
The DNC leak taught the DNC and the Obama administration a lesson. They tried to ignore it, but a couple higher-ups actually apologized for their participation, ruining any chance they might have to later deny the content of the emails was authentic.
So now they are getting out in front of the next leak. They are discrediting it by planting the story that the Russians did it, and the Russians might alter or fabricate documents.
We don't know what it will be, but we know it was those damned commies.
Go back to your entertainment, citizen. Nothing to see here.
To play Devil's Advocate, though, wouldn't that mean that it would be 'easier' to impersonate him, in terms of a username?...If someone was inclined to impersonate him, the fact that he uses the same handle makes it easier to do so.
So, this person who was impersonating him had the forethought to create a reddit posting history for him before the Clinton server was even widely known?
FBI never once considered looking for emails from people Hillary frequently sent emails to, to verify no work related emails were deleted. FBI from the beginning decided to not recommend indictment
They apparently did not get a single subpoena, and perhaps did not even request a grand jury, which would have been necessary to get subpoenas.
You've been downvoted because slashdot users are too smart to believe that, and indeed you're probably being sarcastic, but IP logs are indeed a smoking gun. By themselves they leave reasonable doubt, but combined with other evidence they are convincing.
To believe he didn't do it, you'd have to believe that there's reasonable doubt someone else, who used a distinctive name that is the same as one he's used, used his IP address to request information that is relevant to his profession and job, on the day after a congressional order dealing with the subject of the requested information.
Any part of that leaves wiggle room, but together...smoking gun.
If this were propaganda, designed to lessen the impact of future leaks by suggesting the Russians may alter or fabricate documents, would we be able to tell?
1) The Department of Homeland Security wants to secure our elections for us, aka power grab. 2) The leaks are being discredited with the suggestion that the Russians are modifying or fabricating the documents, aka cover up.
Here is a story AP published that turned out to be fiction. It originated with Jon Ralston and was quickly picked up by AP and then other major media outlets. No corroboration ever materialized for the story, despite there being 3000 cameras in the room, and those that streamed live told a different story. The only media outlet to retract the story was NPR, and PBS fired Ralston.
Note also that this is the story that the DNC leadership instructed its members to pass around "without attribution", i.e. covertly smear Sanders with it. It's also the email that Assange has singled out as the most damming.
And also remember that much of the brouhaha over the leaked DNC emails was over collusion with the media.
In short, if you aren't yet skeptical of mainstream media this year, you need to start paying closer attention.
Title 18 of the U.S. Code of the Espionage Act in sections 793, 798 and 1001
Section 793 applies to anyone who has been “entrusted” with information relating to the national defense. The law applies to a federal official who “through gross negligence permits” information “to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, to be lost, stolen, abstracted or destroyed.”
Section 798 applies to any government official who “knowingly and willfully communicates” information “to an unauthorized person.” Section 1001 addresses giving “false statements.”
Clinton and her aides also could be charged under section 1924, which is a misdemeanor. This was the April, 2015, charge former CIA Director David Petraeus negotiated with prosecutors for sharing classified information with a mistress who also served as his biographer.
Espionage act. Negligent disregard for securing state secrets is a federal crime. Obstruction of justice. Destroying protected information. Destroying evidence. That much is certain. Less certain is public corruption, also a federal crime. Taking money for delivering favors through your government position. It's obvious that she's done it, but it's unknown if her emails contain proof, though lesser figures have been jailed on patterns alone, and her patterns have many more data points.
Slashdot Mirror
CNN's ratings are down 20%...I cannot understand how they believe what they're doing is in their best interests.
You have to stop thinking about "the news" as a business. I have an article that will help:
Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos signed the $250 million Washington Post deal with no due diligence
The objective isn't to earn money selling advertising, needing viewership/readership to accomplish that. The objective is to dictate what people think about...everything. It's mind control, not business. It has a financial payoff, but it's not as direct as subscriber numbers or advertising revenue.
Shipping is free on any order over $25. Put some low-dollar stuff you want but don't need right away in your cart or on your wishlist, and add one of those items to your cart when you need to get it over $25.
The only reason to have prime is if you are always in a hurry to receive things, and if you instead only pay for that when you need it, you may be better off without prime.
I've learned to plan ahead, and I've become comfortable with ebay and other sources, and not only do I not have to pay for prime, I usually find a better price than Amazon. Particularly on small things and on grocery items, Amazon prices are kinda crap.
The downside of canceling prime is that Bezos is a vindictive SOB. They will hold your orders for up to eight days before shipping. Sometimes they do that, sometimes they ship almost as fast as prime. You just don't know how long an Amazon order will take without prime, so learn to plan ahead. Order stuff before you absolutely need it. If you're in a hurry, get it elsewhere, or pay for shipping.
far left leaning liberal progressive
I've followed The_Donald since early 2016 as a hostile observer and it is clear to me that they don't know what any of these words mean. Not in the political sense.
Almost the entire Democratic party is centrist. Google "new democrats". Bill Clinton set them on this path. The party has become both neoliberal (free-market capitalist) and neoconservative (American exceptionalism, interventionist foreign policy).
They are very much NOT leftist, NOT liberal, NOT progressive. Those words have all become meaningless, because people are still using them to describe the Democrats, when they are very much none of those things any more.
Nobody creates a boring fake news story. Lots of real news is uninteresting. There's your difference. When it is believed, fake news travels faster because it is more interesting.
The guy who exposed the Russian troll farm in 2015 thinks the hysteria is overblown. If you report on that you get your live streaming ability cut.
https://youtu.be/m6IeEldlcFE
They've been demonetizing and rendering less-findable videos that don't satisfy mainstream sensibilities for at least a year. This has affected political content on both the left and right.
Still unrecognized in the media that you are allowed to see is that a new axis has opened in the political landscape: establishment vs anti-establishment. The six corporations (soon to be five) that control all the media are on the establishment side, of course, and they are having a tantrum over supporters of both Trump and Sanders (as well as all third parties).
you'll still be able to mail-order CDs, just not walk into a Best Buy
Not being able to get them at Best Buy means the market for them will shrink, which will make them more expensive, shrinking the market farther, and possibly convince labels to stop making them.
It's the Walmart effect. The purchase decisions of other people do affect you.
Shipping is maddening without prime. They don't just ship a slower carrier. They hold it for up to a week before shipping. And some things you find are prime-only, so you can't order them at all. I got used to ordering things from ebay, and I learned to like walmart and some other sellers' direct website.
This is the opposite of my experience. Until recently, every modern US generation had it better than their parents, and knew it. It's only been this century that the realization has sunk in that the standard of living is no longer going up, when things like healthcare, job opportunities, housing costs and debt are considered. We have cheap toys and internet. Everything else is starting to suck.
The observation described in the article is quite old. That is, while people raking in the bucks during the internet boom were young, their elders were still happier. While those same people were young, their elders were happier. While *those* people were young, their elders were happier.
You, provided you have basic needs covered in your old age, which is far from guaranteed, will be happier than your grandkids.
You describe a real problem, but the point of the article still stands.
Do they have COBOL experience before you hire them?
Bana Alabed is a seven-year-old Syrian Girl. She's also a pawn in the propaganda war. CNN manufactured a story of a seven-year-old Syrian girl asking America to liberate Syria from its tyrant president. Problem is, she doesn't understand English, so her CNN interview is implausible.
https://www.youtube.com/result...
And by "whine" I mean "have been squelched and are complaining."
This policy covers topics such as war and Syria. You can't report on war or Syria, as in "the war in Syria", and expect to be monetized. If you have "war" or "syria" in the title, it'll be automatically unmonetized.
You can't report on anything the nanny state has determined might be in opposition to mainstream news. Use the word "lawsuit" or the name "seth rich" and you're probably going to be unmonetized, even if your video parrots the mainstream propaganda, as in, "the DNC lawsuit is bunk", or "the seth rich story is conspiracy nonsense". Got naughty keywords? No ads for you.
And you sure as hell can't describe the dnc lawsuit or the seth rich story, fairly or not, and expect ad revenue.
Want to talk about propaganda? Call it something else.
Hillary Clinton? Be nice to her or her paid trolls (Correct the Record, now ShareBlue) will report you.
Something you want to describe as "rigged"? Don't do that.
Think you want to report on news and use words like murder or conspiracy or conflict? Yeah, nanny state don't like those words anymore.
Say something unapproved today? They're going to go through all your videos now and unmonetize the ones they don't like.
This might be google appeasing advertisers, as they say it is, or it might be google exerting political influence, like they do in search listings, or it might just be google realizing that political commentators will continue to produce content for their platform even if they don't pay them anything. Whatever it is, it's definitely not just a smack down on conservatives. Progressives are complaining, too.
The following anonymous coward putinbot posts are mine. I don't normally bother signing in to slashdot because it isn't worth the trouble:
WaPo, CIA conflict of interest rag
Guccifer 2.0 is a fraud
TL;DR
I'm a Democrat, not a Republican or a Trump fan or a putin bot. I resist propaganda because propaganda is more dangerous than Trump. I resist propaganda because it is a symptom of a system that is so stacked against ordinary citizens that it may be too late to ever wrest control of our government back from the oligarchs, deep state and military industrial complex.
But since you mention bots, I'll mention paid trolls (not claiming you are one): Correct the Record, ShareBlue. Paid trolls working for Hillary, according to sources I think you'll agree aren't Putin-friendly:
How a super PAC plans to coordinate directly with Hillary Clinton’s campaign
David Brock's Army of "Nerd Virgins" Has Hillary's Back
Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls
The making of a Hillary Clinton echo chamber
The DNC leak taught the DNC and the Obama administration a lesson. They tried to ignore it, but a couple higher-ups actually apologized for their participation, ruining any chance they might have to later deny the content of the emails was authentic.
So now they are getting out in front of the next leak. They are discrediting it by planting the story that the Russians did it, and the Russians might alter or fabricate documents.
We don't know what it will be, but we know it was those damned commies.
Go back to your entertainment, citizen. Nothing to see here.
To play Devil's Advocate, though, wouldn't that mean that it would be 'easier' to impersonate him, in terms of a username?...If someone was inclined to impersonate him, the fact that he uses the same handle makes it easier to do so.
So, this person who was impersonating him had the forethought to create a reddit posting history for him before the Clinton server was even widely known?
FBI never once considered looking for emails from people Hillary frequently sent emails to, to verify no work related emails were deleted. FBI from the beginning decided to not recommend indictment
They apparently did not get a single subpoena, and perhaps did not even request a grand jury, which would have been necessary to get subpoenas.
How is it unclear? IP logs are a smoking gun.
You've been downvoted because slashdot users are too smart to believe that, and indeed you're probably being sarcastic, but IP logs are indeed a smoking gun. By themselves they leave reasonable doubt, but combined with other evidence they are convincing.
To believe he didn't do it, you'd have to believe that there's reasonable doubt someone else, who used a distinctive name that is the same as one he's used, used his IP address to request information that is relevant to his profession and job, on the day after a congressional order dealing with the subject of the requested information.
Any part of that leaves wiggle room, but together...smoking gun.
If this were propaganda, designed to lessen the impact of future leaks by suggesting the Russians may alter or fabricate documents, would we be able to tell?
There are two things we are being prepared for:
1) The Department of Homeland Security wants to secure our elections for us, aka power grab.
2) The leaks are being discredited with the suggestion that the Russians are modifying or fabricating the documents, aka cover up.
Here is a story AP published that turned out to be fiction. It originated with Jon Ralston and was quickly picked up by AP and then other major media outlets. No corroboration ever materialized for the story, despite there being 3000 cameras in the room, and those that streamed live told a different story. The only media outlet to retract the story was NPR, and PBS fired Ralston.
Note also that this is the story that the DNC leadership instructed its members to pass around "without attribution", i.e. covertly smear Sanders with it. It's also the email that Assange has singled out as the most damming.
And also remember that much of the brouhaha over the leaked DNC emails was over collusion with the media.
In short, if you aren't yet skeptical of mainstream media this year, you need to start paying closer attention.
Once upon a time the icon would have been a shark. Sigh.
Will it replace 30-year-old recordings with newer, compressed (made louder) versions?
none of it was per se illegal
Copy-pasted from here:
Title 18 of the U.S. Code of the Espionage Act in sections 793, 798 and 1001
Section 793 applies to anyone who has been “entrusted” with information relating to the national defense. The law applies to a federal official who “through gross negligence permits” information “to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, to be lost, stolen, abstracted or destroyed.”
Section 798 applies to any government official who “knowingly and willfully communicates” information “to an unauthorized person.” Section 1001 addresses giving “false statements.”
Clinton and her aides also could be charged under section 1924, which is a misdemeanor. This was the April, 2015, charge former CIA Director David Petraeus negotiated with prosecutors for sharing classified information with a mistress who also served as his biographer.
Espionage act. Negligent disregard for securing state secrets is a federal crime. Obstruction of justice. Destroying protected information. Destroying evidence. That much is certain. Less certain is public corruption, also a federal crime. Taking money for delivering favors through your government position. It's obvious that she's done it, but it's unknown if her emails contain proof, though lesser figures have been jailed on patterns alone, and her patterns have many more data points.