He thinks it's cool, I don't personally see the need for one as I just use my phone for most of those things.
I think this is the source of my bafflement about the appeal of these devices: they don't seem to do anything that isn't already a function that comes with smartphones, so I wasn't (and still don't, really) see the point.
Your son's use case is the first one in this list of responses that addresses something that can't be replicated with a smartphone (unless you give a smartphone to your son).
Since you've indicated that you have one of these devices, I have an honest question for you (I promise I am not being disparaging here, and won't argue with your response):
What is the appeal of the device? What benefit are you getting from it? I've been utterly baffled by this ever since they came out.
No, it's a difference thing. Babies aren't saying "not my race!", they're saying "something I've never seen!" It's adults that put the special weight on the racial differences and project that weight onto babies.
First you say it can be eased with education... then you say it doesn't exist.
Huh? Where did I do that? Perhaps I was unclear... I'm saying that people pointing to those studies as proving racism is inborn are misunderstanding the studies. I'm not saying racism doesn't exist. It clearly does.
My usage of the word "specifically" was intended to clarify this distinction. Obviously, it failed to do so.
I'm not. I'm debunking one of the common excuses they use.
But I'm not going to avoid stating things that I think are true just because scumbags might misunderstand or misuse what I say. They're scumbags and aren't worth that amount of consideration.
Those studies don't support your conclusion. What those studies show is that infants fear anything that is different from what they've been experiencing. It's not specifically a race thing. It's also why infants tend to be picky about their food, are suspicious of new toys, don't like it when their living space is redecorated, etc.
The reason is pretty well established, too: it is safer to stick with what you know is OK than to risk something that you don't have experience with.
And, the effect eases with experience and education. Nothing about these studies indicates that racism, specifically, is hardwired or that it's inevitable.
Yes, plus -- almost every movie trailer that I've seen these days utterly fails to do the one thing I need a movie trailer to do: tell me what the damned movie is about.
Governor Walker told reporters that many of the companies he met with on the trip were already "every interested in how they could come to Wisconsin and partner for that new ecosystem."
Well, duh! What company wouldn't be interested in seeing if they can get their hands on large amounts of free money?
I don't have the problems you mention with KDE. It works fine for me.
But then, I disable almost all of the bells and whistles it comes with. Most of them are either bad or extremely buggy, and the KDE team has been consistently making the situation worse by adding more bloat and useless stuff with each release.
Especially Akonadi. It's the poster child for "piece of shit software".
The reason I used the fishmonger is because markets predates any advertising we know now.
But it doesn't predate advertising.
Perhaps you've misunderstood what I was saying, because you seem to be agreeing with me here. I was saying that advertising as it exists now is terrible and harmful. I was also saying that it wasn't always so bad, and that the concept of advertising generally is not inherently a bad thing.
I don't see how it can be considered a bad thing for people who are selling something to tell other people that they're selling it. That, at heart, is what advertising is. Your fishmonger yelling in the market that he has fresh fish available was advertising.
And in the mobile space, Safari accounts for over half of the web browsing being done. Not only that, but Apple users are considered a premium advertising niche because they are wealthier and spend more readily than the general population.
It's the other way around -- PM bought Nabisco (and then merged the two brands as RJR Nabisco). That was years ago, though, and since then Nabisco has been bought and sold a couple of times. It's currently owned by Mondelz International.
You know that means you're still getting ad network tracking cookies, right? Ad networks contract with many websites to have the websites themselves place the cookies, specifically to work around people who block third-party cookies.
This is the entire reason that Apple is implementing this new functionality.
Slashdot Mirror
He thinks it's cool, I don't personally see the need for one as I just use my phone for most of those things.
I think this is the source of my bafflement about the appeal of these devices: they don't seem to do anything that isn't already a function that comes with smartphones, so I wasn't (and still don't, really) see the point.
Your son's use case is the first one in this list of responses that addresses something that can't be replicated with a smartphone (unless you give a smartphone to your son).
How much do you trust Amazon to protect your privacy vs the manufacturer of your TV?
About the same amount.
Since you've indicated that you have one of these devices, I have an honest question for you (I promise I am not being disparaging here, and won't argue with your response):
What is the appeal of the device? What benefit are you getting from it? I've been utterly baffled by this ever since they came out.
The people South Park is ridiculing, of course.
But it is still a race thing.
No, it's a difference thing. Babies aren't saying "not my race!", they're saying "something I've never seen!" It's adults that put the special weight on the racial differences and project that weight onto babies.
First you say it can be eased with education ... then you say it doesn't exist.
Huh? Where did I do that? Perhaps I was unclear... I'm saying that people pointing to those studies as proving racism is inborn are misunderstanding the studies. I'm not saying racism doesn't exist. It clearly does.
My usage of the word "specifically" was intended to clarify this distinction. Obviously, it failed to do so.
Dude, why are you making excuses for racists?
I'm not. I'm debunking one of the common excuses they use.
But I'm not going to avoid stating things that I think are true just because scumbags might misunderstand or misuse what I say. They're scumbags and aren't worth that amount of consideration.
this all does seem a little bit like fake news
What about this makes you think the stories are lies?
It's not really a dupe, as it involves entirely different companies.
Those studies don't support your conclusion. What those studies show is that infants fear anything that is different from what they've been experiencing. It's not specifically a race thing. It's also why infants tend to be picky about their food, are suspicious of new toys, don't like it when their living space is redecorated, etc.
The reason is pretty well established, too: it is safer to stick with what you know is OK than to risk something that you don't have experience with.
And, the effect eases with experience and education. Nothing about these studies indicates that racism, specifically, is hardwired or that it's inevitable.
Hoards of free porn aficionados say that you're wrong.
Google told BuzzFeed News that just because a phrase is eligible does not guarantee an ad campaign will run against it.
You'd think a company as rich as Google could afford a competent spokesperson who wouldn't say really stupid shit like that.
Yes, plus -- almost every movie trailer that I've seen these days utterly fails to do the one thing I need a movie trailer to do: tell me what the damned movie is about.
Of course! CyberSmart.
Refundable tax credits are not quite the same as just cutting a check outright, but they're pretty close to that.
The difference is that the check that gets cut has tax deducted from it first. But it's still a cash payment.
Governor Walker told reporters that many of the companies he met with on the trip were already "every interested in how they could come to Wisconsin and partner for that new ecosystem."
Well, duh! What company wouldn't be interested in seeing if they can get their hands on large amounts of free money?
"AI" has simply joined "Web 2.0", "Cloud", and countless other terms that are meaningless buzzwords for use by marketing departments.
I don't have the problems you mention with KDE. It works fine for me.
But then, I disable almost all of the bells and whistles it comes with. Most of them are either bad or extremely buggy, and the KDE team has been consistently making the situation worse by adding more bloat and useless stuff with each release.
Especially Akonadi. It's the poster child for "piece of shit software".
How many people outside the tech world use email often?
Quite a lot. Pretty much everyone that I know uses email. Not exclusively, but frequently.
There's be no serious law passed and no serious enforcement action in place.
And there won't be. Government is an arm of business, after all. That's the largest part of why it's impossible.
The reason I used the fishmonger is because markets predates any advertising we know now.
But it doesn't predate advertising.
Perhaps you've misunderstood what I was saying, because you seem to be agreeing with me here. I was saying that advertising as it exists now is terrible and harmful. I was also saying that it wasn't always so bad, and that the concept of advertising generally is not inherently a bad thing.
I don't see how it can be considered a bad thing for people who are selling something to tell other people that they're selling it. That, at heart, is what advertising is. Your fishmonger yelling in the market that he has fresh fish available was advertising.
And in the mobile space, Safari accounts for over half of the web browsing being done. Not only that, but Apple users are considered a premium advertising niche because they are wealthier and spend more readily than the general population.
Wait, doesn't Nabisco own Philip Morris?
It's the other way around -- PM bought Nabisco (and then merged the two brands as RJR Nabisco). That was years ago, though, and since then Nabisco has been bought and sold a couple of times. It's currently owned by Mondelz International.
You know that means you're still getting ad network tracking cookies, right? Ad networks contract with many websites to have the websites themselves place the cookies, specifically to work around people who block third-party cookies.
This is the entire reason that Apple is implementing this new functionality.
Random ads for penis enlargements and Russian mail order brides like the internet used to be?
That would be better than we have now. Or, at least, it wouldn't be worse.
Basically, you hurt people.
Not quite. While they hurt some people they provide income to others to cover their costs.
So, in other words, they hurt people. That other people may derive benefit from them doesn't change that fact.
The solution would be to make them stop hurting people rather than to make them disappear.
It appears that stopping the harm they do is essentially impossible, leaving "make them disappear" the only option left.