And still it can be an advantage, that information is lost to machines. Maybe the blind are collateral damage, maybe the person is just talking shit about the blinds;-).
Okay, you're stopping a few people from reading it, but that's your decision. And as said, at least the search engines are kept out, while blind people may have helping (ocr) software to read it.
Connecting with which people? You don't think facebook's only sorting "news". They are sorting stuff your friends are posting and even the people you are seeing. Maybe if you only add people you know in real life and visit each of their pages by its own, you can avoid facebook sorting their content for you, but with normal usage facebook decides what you see and in which order.
I do not fear ads. Even without adblocker. Let them tailor the ads.
I fear their control over me and me losing control. First just the usability. I fear, that they optimize my timeline and stuff so i miss things, which i wanted to see (because i want to see what i subscribed for, not what facebook thinks which is relevant to me) Seconds, the control. Serve me more of the one side, less of the other one. You may be able to manipulate me that way. Hide stuff, make it harder to find... and people will read it less. Emphasise it and more people will click, read and notice.
Optimizing ads is a business model i could accept. Even using my content and feeding it into the systems of the advertisers would be okay in a perfect world, where i can be sure it is never used out of scope. There would be no problem with data collections, even ones which are never deleted, if it would be clear, that they never leak, get abused or change scope. An advertiser with a whole dossier about me would be no danger, if i could be sure he won't cooperate with the next facebook to lead me to the "correct" political articles.
But in the real world, data is collected, then it's minded and used for whatever idea somebody has. It's sold and bought and the ToS said they are allowed to do so. The new startup buys it as soon as it has enough money and they know you even before you sign up. And they use it to make you sign up, not just to tailor ads to you. They use it to sell you things (you would not have bought otherwise) or make you pay in other ways. And finally there are political actors, which make companies use the data in their sense. If it's just telling them which policial claim will get them popularity or if it's serving you the correct content to form your opinion... you do not know.
Who cares? Nobody who saw it will tell you. You will not know. So how does it affect you? It doesn't hurt. What happend before is what hurt. And thus they should use all their power to prevent action, not existing videos. They can start to hunt for digital material, when they caught all the criminals and really have nothing to do. Until then, they should do something actually useful.
The question is, what do you want to protect? I guess you want to protect humans. And then the most important step is... to protect humans, not to hunt down the path of some images. Except you have a real chance to find the source.
Let good algorithms work and they provide the users results from their input. This may result in things like Tay, or it may result in actually getting results from the filter bubble you're trying to build. Both does not support injecting sponsored / endorsed content. So some human needs to add this, like paying for ads and selecting a target group. For political action, some facebook employees need to fix the trends.
Twitter at least adds a "sponsored by" to bought "trends" (not only tweets), facebook is not that transparent.
The problem is, there are way less people making than "consuming". So a bust catching 5000 perverts only works, if posession is illegal. And catching people by tracing ips is way more easy... and gets you the downloaders more often than the (very careful) uploaders. So they get the easy ones, which make good pr, instead of the dangerous ones, which only make one headline.
a IM client based on mail would want to have some MDN, but not in the way you're thinking about. More like a "last answer received" timestamp (which would not acknowledge the last message you sent, but all before).
Don't misunderstand Torvalds. He has a nice attitude to beginners. Just not to idiots (which refuse to take advice) or beginners, who insist to do it their way without understanding why it's done another way. If you're a dick, Torvalds will tell you. If you ask a dumb question, he will try to help (or at least ignore you).
People (including you) do not like to send MDN. But for a messanger based on SMTP/IMAP it's not like a MDN, but like a blue checkmark in Whatsapp. So you cannot compare the two features.
Slashdot Mirror
And still it can be an advantage, that information is lost to machines. Maybe the blind are collateral damage, maybe the person is just talking shit about the blinds ;-).
Okay, you're stopping a few people from reading it, but that's your decision. And as said, at least the search engines are kept out, while blind people may have helping (ocr) software to read it.
There already is a limit to 4 images. For links its more complicated now, i guess.
And of course apps will break, at least their layout.
Simple. They sms you, what somebody wrote:
"@[18charsusername][space][message]"
Think of twitter being a mailinglist for sms.
At least that's how it started. You send a sms to a special number and people following you read it.
this can be an advantage.
But no option to get it at this price. Either out of stock or sold for a lot more.
Connecting with which people? You don't think facebook's only sorting "news". They are sorting stuff your friends are posting and even the people you are seeing.
Maybe if you only add people you know in real life and visit each of their pages by its own, you can avoid facebook sorting their content for you, but with normal usage facebook decides what you see and in which order.
I do not fear ads. Even without adblocker. Let them tailor the ads.
I fear their control over me and me losing control. ... and people will read it less. Emphasise it and more people will click, read and notice.
First just the usability. I fear, that they optimize my timeline and stuff so i miss things, which i wanted to see (because i want to see what i subscribed for, not what facebook thinks which is relevant to me)
Seconds, the control. Serve me more of the one side, less of the other one. You may be able to manipulate me that way. Hide stuff, make it harder to find
Optimizing ads is a business model i could accept. Even using my content and feeding it into the systems of the advertisers would be okay in a perfect world, where i can be sure it is never used out of scope. There would be no problem with data collections, even ones which are never deleted, if it would be clear, that they never leak, get abused or change scope. An advertiser with a whole dossier about me would be no danger, if i could be sure he won't cooperate with the next facebook to lead me to the "correct" political articles.
But in the real world, data is collected, then it's minded and used for whatever idea somebody has. It's sold and bought and the ToS said they are allowed to do so. The new startup buys it as soon as it has enough money and they know you even before you sign up. And they use it to make you sign up, not just to tailor ads to you. They use it to sell you things (you would not have bought otherwise) or make you pay in other ways. ... you do not know.
And finally there are political actors, which make companies use the data in their sense. If it's just telling them which policial claim will get them popularity or if it's serving you the correct content to form your opinion
simple. okcupid doesn't ask for your realname at all. Usernames are pretty bad.
Who cares? Nobody who saw it will tell you. You will not know. So how does it affect you? It doesn't hurt. What happend before is what hurt. And thus they should use all their power to prevent action, not existing videos. They can start to hunt for digital material, when they caught all the criminals and really have nothing to do. Until then, they should do something actually useful.
never seen a html5 ad? Lucky one ... they are there and they are hard to block, if you want the interactive part of some html5 pages (i.e. games).
that's just normal firefox settings, no need for pale moon. And i would recommend against pale moon. Nice idea, but horrible realization.
As chromium does not package pepper flash and google is too arrogant to use npapi plugins anymore.
No problem. And from the named sites ... amazon needs flash? youtube? Search engines like yahoo and yandex?
No. They work without it pretty well.
Why not? Not for the tracker, but for the search interface ...
Read 10 Things, which make you sad on slashdot. Number 5 will make you cry.
The question is, what do you want to protect? ... to protect humans, not to hunt down the path of some images. Except you have a real chance to find the source.
I guess you want to protect humans. And then the most important step is
FTFY YMMD
Let good algorithms work and they provide the users results from their input. This may result in things like Tay, or it may result in actually getting results from the filter bubble you're trying to build.
Both does not support injecting sponsored / endorsed content. So some human needs to add this, like paying for ads and selecting a target group. For political action, some facebook employees need to fix the trends.
Twitter at least adds a "sponsored by" to bought "trends" (not only tweets), facebook is not that transparent.
The problem is, there are way less people making than "consuming". So a bust catching 5000 perverts only works, if posession is illegal. ... and gets you the downloaders more often than the (very careful) uploaders.
And catching people by tracing ips is way more easy
So they get the easy ones, which make good pr, instead of the dangerous ones, which only make one headline.
No hero. A manager. Look how he keeps the drama out. Other projects discuss about Codes of Conduct, the Linux ML discusses about code instead.
that's the point.
a IM client based on mail would want to have some MDN, but not in the way you're thinking about. More like a "last answer received" timestamp (which would not acknowledge the last message you sent, but all before).
Don't misunderstand Torvalds. He has a nice attitude to beginners. Just not to idiots (which refuse to take advice) or beginners, who insist to do it their way without understanding why it's done another way. If you're a dick, Torvalds will tell you. If you ask a dumb question, he will try to help (or at least ignore you).
People (including you) do not like to send MDN. But for a messanger based on SMTP/IMAP it's not like a MDN, but like a blue checkmark in Whatsapp. So you cannot compare the two features.
no text
you're thinking about mail, not about an IM implemented with SMTP/IMAP.