The problem with only running javascript from a webpage's own site is that these days many web pages spread their 'site' over multiple URLs, using CDNs for jQuery and such (which could be handled with a whitelist, but can't cover everything), CSS, images, font's with icon sets, etc...
I'm sure before too long someone (let's be honest. Google.) will develop a full 'machine learning' system to learn which javascript to block, etc, automatically (and then someone will find a way to use it to end... i don't know, the world or something, I guess):)
30 years ago there was no suspicion that the RC craft was recording HD video.
Just the same as if in 30 more years time (hypothetically) high quality x-ray photography is consumer available, you'll treat that guy taking pictures of your house (daughter's bedroom) from the street with a slightly different attitude too.
And yeah, next year if some guy is hovering over my back yard in a jetpack snapping pictures of my daughter sunbathing, I'm not gonna start suggesting better angles to him, or tell her to improve her posture.
(Sure I'm not gonna shoot him down either, cause a) I'm in Australia, so I don't have a gun, or much of a need to worry about them, and b) It's a person, not a machine, and shooting (or even just disabling) it will probably lead to human death or injury, which is a whole different scenario and while protecting my privacy is worth more to me than someone else's toy, it's not worth more to me necessarily than someone else's life.)
Again, I wouldn't take it as being pin-point accurate, but it read 250ft altitude. That plus the video clearly proves the drone was well above the tree line.
250ft altitude compared to what?
Where it took off from?
Sea level?
Wherever it was previously configured?
One thing I doubt is that the operator calibrated it to the ground level of the property he flew over.
That's not spy sat imagery but commercial sat imagery, I read the full article.....
I highly doubt the NSA is in the habit of sharing the cutting edge of their tech with the public, let alone other countries publics (and governments).
On the other hand, I don't care if a government can see my nude sunbathing in the backyard or my daughter. If government employees are willing to breaking regulation for titillation, then I suspect they'll satisfy themselves far better using their mobile phones to legal porn than random strangers, and even if they did, for the sake of argument, perv on my teenage daughter, so long as they keep that top secret and no one she knows sees them, it's a moot issue.
So I'll worry about my privacy being abused if and when that abuse is realised. (And some random stranger thinking 'dirty' thoughts under pretty much any stimulus isn't going to abuse me in and of itself, it'd be the sharing/publicising of that information as relates to me or mine that would be abusive)
So yeah, get that drone out of my backyard, it's going to cause damage and end up on youtube or worse probably, but the NSA/whatever government/corporations satellites isn't going to impact my personal privacy. Doesn't mean I like or approve of government surveillance per se; however I'm not going to take it personally like I would if it was an unknown flying a camera drone around me or mine.
Let's hope that doesn't happen. Drone delivery is inefficient, expensive and dangerous.
A list of things that could be referred to loosely as "inefficient, expensive and dangerous":
Cars (well, any automated transport really, to varying degrees)
Wind Farms, Industrial Farming and scalp reduction (according to google)
Pretty much any new technology.
Sex (last but not least)
Well, this is going to be fun once delivery drones start flying.
The delivery drones are a nice idea that sounds better on paper than in real life.
The first time a medical helicopter is brought down by one and it ends up on CNN, the drone flights will have to stop. It would cost a crap ton of money to make drones able to avoid other aircraft 100% of the time.
There is no way to have flying drones land in random locations in neighborhoods, there are too many obstructions, kids on bikes, etc.
I love the idea, but the execution is miles from reality.
Why do I keep seeing people type stuff like this? The first time a drone brings down a medical helicopter (let's assume it'll happen sometime or other in the next billion years) you have no idea what the result will be. It could be anything from a footnote on a log file to a three-ring media circus.
As for your other reasons we will never have drones - obstructions and kids - well, Human's have a pretty long history of finding ways to deal with both those issues, with varying degrees of success. I hardly think I'll be reading a newspaper article in a decade or so saying "We would have had drone deliveries but for those pesky kids and the obstructions", I rather suspect I'll read something like "Remember when everyone was up in arms about how drone's would be such a big problem, was that somehow tied into that Y2k bug?"
Just noticed I'm rambling at a probable troll, no way that could be a serious thought out post. I'm gonna stop now.
OK, that is very simple. As the delivery drone gets close to the address it is supposed to deliver to, it has to descend in order to make the delivery. Entire neighborhood? No. A couple of houses / apartments? Yes, it will have to be low enough to make a safe delivery. This means it will go very low past at least a couple of residences.
How about make the drone obvious as carrier, similar to FedEx or UPS trucks? For example, COLOR it in a way that people will see the differences? You are talking as if all drones must look the same or similar, so people can't distinguish them.
Oh please do this, then all the pervs can paint their drone's yellow (or orange or whatever) and spy away without causing any concern.
On a more serious note, however, a set of visual alerts - flashing lights, beeping (like trucks backing up) or whatever may very well help mitigate privacy concerns as people would have some sort of warning. This might at least alleviate the problem.
A little harder for a drone to surreptitiously hover outside your bedroom window, and free reign on shooting down silent drones:)
A toy drone that is filming your daughters swimming is a threat and the owner of such drone needs to be thrown in jail. He is no better than people who put video cameras in dressing rooms and toilets.
Or all those nasty perverts I see taking photos at beaches ( Of all places! you know how many people's daughters are swimming at beaches?!?!? )
I think you'll find the key problem here was the invasion/expectation of privacy. There's nothing intrinsically immoral or illegal about taking pictures of people swimming.
Also, why is the UAV a toy? I mean, call it what you like, just wondering how that is relevant, and I think that's what really made me feel your whole statement was loaded.
Kind of like all those tens of millions of fake Twitter accounts that the company knows about, but doesn't mind;)
Similar, until you get to the part where Twitter doesn't charge you to interact with the bots by pretending they're real women who want to sleep with you, though I'd love to see that.
You're right. They warn that some parts of their website are for entertainment only. Here are the terms and conditions, and the relevant portion reproduced below:
Other Aspects of the Ashley Madison Service – For Your Entertainment
Our Site and our Service gives users the opportunity to explore their fantasies and to interact with others in the Site. However, there is no guarantee you will find a date or partner on our Site or using our Service. Our Site and our Service also is geared to provide you with amusement and entertainment. You agree that some of the features of our Site and our Service are intended to provide entertainment.
Others Using the Site for Entertainment
You also understand and agree that there are users and members on the Site that use and subscribe to our Service for purely entertainment purposes. Those users and subscribers are not seeking physical meetings with anyone they meet on the Service, but consider their communications with users and members to be for their amusement.
You acknowledge and agree that any profiles of users and members, as well as, communications from such persons may not be true, accurate or authentic and may be exaggerated or fantasy. You acknowledge and understand that you may be communicating with such persons and that we are not responsible for such communications.
Of course, in another section the prohibit you from using bots, and in another section, prohibit you from using fake profile pictures. So the only ones who could be doing these things..............
Thanks for the quote, Emphasis mine.
They wrote the bots that sent the communications, which makes them responsible. The wording around that clearly insinuates that 'real other people may lie to you' not 'we will lie to you and compound it by pretending the liar is another real user' I can see that bit bringing it all crashing down on them as it is clearly deceptive.
There is/was a 'theme park' in France that does a similar thing, Futuroscope. I don't know if it's still purely visual trickery but at least ~15 years ago it was.
Do you deny he violated his bail conditions, fled to a foreign embassy, and refused to come out in response to the reasonable legal demands of his state?
I deny that he's a proven criminal. Innocent until proven guilty, right?
A dead-flat touchpad is no replacement for a proper keyboard. I know of no half-way decent typist that can come anywhere near their typing speed on a touch-screen. And mice have the advantage that they work in most applications requiring a pointer. I don't need an overlay to do this.
At best, this is a low-rent replacement for a Wacom, but not as precise; there's a reason Digitizers don't use simple pressure sensors. (And graphics tablets have had overlays since forever... I remember using an AutoCAD overlay a quarter-century ago.)
That is kind of the point of the overlays - to stop it being 'dead flat'.
If you read the kickstarter page - they're 3D printed to whatever you like, pretty much (although I assume that excessive thickness of small areas could/would impact the sensitivity - think more chicklet thickness of keys than old fashioned mechanicals)
And 3D printers are advancing fast, I personally assume that in a year or two (around the time I might get one of these new touchpads) I'll also have relatively easy access to a 3D printer (or my own) and at that point I can make whatever tactile surface I desire - the possibilities are uncountable.
The main possibility I think this could take off with is if someone creates an application that allows you to generate custom tactile keyboard layouts based off individual hand size and wrist angle, etc. (sure, they won't be the pleasing mechanical clicky goodness of an IBM model M, but that's a sacrifice I have to make on a daily basis - I currently use a ms surface pro plastic keyboard, a MS generic at work, logitech wireless and mac wireless, and the macbook pro keyboard - I've realised that while I would far prefer one perfect mechanical keyboard I could use for all of them that that's basically an impossibility - trade-offs and compromises are made, and this product sounds like a pretty fantastic compromise of flexibility and useability)
Why lug all those things around when the whole point of a tactile-sensitive surface is to liberate people from carrying around peripherals?!?
I already have a wireless keyboard, no thicker than their (expensive) overlay, that cost $10.
I already have a wireless mouse, so their product doesn't help me there.
I already have a WACOM tablet, so it doesn't help me there.
I already have a WACOM-type tablet with an underlying video display, so their thing doesn't help there, either.
I already have a USB piano keyboard, so how are they helping me?
It has sliders, pots, and 8 drum-pad inputs, so their product doesn't help for full audio production.
What else is there? Trackballs, game-pads, specialist tools. All of these can be had at reasonable prices.
No consumer is going to buy their (very impressive) touch-surface, and also buy a bunch of plastic clip-on things for it as well. The biggest problem is that it reduces the precision of the link between overlay and their super-sensitive surface with a mechanical-interaction layer — that's right, the overlays have to touch the surface. The consumer is back to square one, at best.
Hmm, If I were you, the possibility of having:
a wireless keyboard
a wireless mouse
a wacom tablet
usb piano keyboard
(just picking out those 4)
In any case, having one device replace those 4 sounds kind of like a step up to me.
Of course, it would primarily be of convenience to you. As you already have all the separate devices, you can easily skip this product.
But if I were similar to you, and needed all those devices, however didn't have half or more of them, I'd think this product would definitely be one of interest.
As for some of your other complaints about the product (lets take the last one in bold), I haven't used it to refute, but there's a lot of stuff on the kickstarter page, including videos of prototypes in use, and while hardly conclusive, I don't see those testers 'back at square 1' at all...
The tech has the potential to replace WACOM digitizer tables for artists.
+100000 funny. Yeah, right. It's a cutesy proof of concept, but nothing in the same league as WACOM's products.
Well, I've used a number of Wacom tablets, I haven't tried this new one yet (for obvious reasons) however I assume by your comment that you have.
Would you be able to go into a little more detail/comparison of your experience that leads you to the conclusion the products are even in different leagues?
The explicit violence just doesn't seem necessary. It detracts from the story more than anything - what's the point of it? Are the producer simply just trying to shock people? They could just cut the content by 75% and focus on the character development and the plots (i.e. The story), and they would have a way better show.
Some people like the fantasy themes, over the top violence, sex and nudity and political and literal backstabbing, etc. They like it enough to keep paying for it and watching it.
Fortunately, that's all we need, the show will continue as it has an audience.
It doesn't matter how many people dislike it or have a problem with it - they don't need to like it or watch it or pay for it or have any involvement in it, as there's enough others who do like it pay for it and watch it.
Sure if it was public access, or run by a company that would be damaged by the reputation of showing such type of shows (conversely, HBO only benefits from the controversy) or funded by taxpayer dollars or something like that, there'd be a little weight to it, however this is being produced by a private company and sold for profit, which is no different to Disney making mickey mouse shows or.. (not looking one up at work, I'll invent a title) 'back door bondage sluts IV' or whatever 'offensive' X rated (but totally legal) content there is a market for.
OTOH, I'm pretty sure if they (assuming it would be possible) managed to generate 2 versions of the show - The awesomely successful one they have now, and a PG censored one that cut all the language violence and.. well, whatever you were trying to describe above - they might find they have a big enough market of those people to make more profit with a second version. That's a pretty big risk to take, however, and probably not their most promising avenue of increased income, so I doubt it'll happen unless some fans manage to generate it.
tl;dr: cutting content by 75% and focusing on character development and plots (which, honestly, is what 75% of GoT content already is - following the story as written by GRRM) will result in losing their large (one of the largest?) happy paying consumer base.
BTW, assuming it doesn't exist, feel free to steal this idea:
YouTube channel showing PG edited version of the show - I doubt there'd be copyright infringement issues cause you'd be showing less than 10% of the show I guess - could be hilarious, and I doubt there'd be enough 'story' left to follow at that point.
The 5 pixel high people are from far further than 200 feet away.... but yeah, I should start a poll:
What is the minimum number of pixels you can fap to?
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah true, but not impossible.....
Derren Brown
The problem with only running javascript from a webpage's own site is that these days many web pages spread their 'site' over multiple URLs, using CDNs for jQuery and such (which could be handled with a whitelist, but can't cover everything), CSS, images, font's with icon sets, etc... :)
I'm sure before too long someone (let's be honest. Google.) will develop a full 'machine learning' system to learn which javascript to block, etc, automatically (and then someone will find a way to use it to end... i don't know, the world or something, I guess)
30 years ago there was no suspicion that the RC craft was recording HD video.
Just the same as if in 30 more years time (hypothetically) high quality x-ray photography is consumer available, you'll treat that guy taking pictures of your house (daughter's bedroom) from the street with a slightly different attitude too.
And yeah, next year if some guy is hovering over my back yard in a jetpack snapping pictures of my daughter sunbathing, I'm not gonna start suggesting better angles to him, or tell her to improve her posture.
(Sure I'm not gonna shoot him down either, cause a) I'm in Australia, so I don't have a gun, or much of a need to worry about them, and b) It's a person, not a machine, and shooting (or even just disabling) it will probably lead to human death or injury, which is a whole different scenario and while protecting my privacy is worth more to me than someone else's toy, it's not worth more to me necessarily than someone else's life.)
Again, I wouldn't take it as being pin-point accurate, but it read 250ft altitude. That plus the video clearly proves the drone was well above the tree line.
250ft altitude compared to what?
Where it took off from?
Sea level?
Wherever it was previously configured?
One thing I doubt is that the operator calibrated it to the ground level of the property he flew over.
That's not spy sat imagery but commercial sat imagery, I read the full article.....
I highly doubt the NSA is in the habit of sharing the cutting edge of their tech with the public, let alone other countries publics (and governments).
On the other hand, I don't care if a government can see my nude sunbathing in the backyard or my daughter. If government employees are willing to breaking regulation for titillation, then I suspect they'll satisfy themselves far better using their mobile phones to legal porn than random strangers, and even if they did, for the sake of argument, perv on my teenage daughter, so long as they keep that top secret and no one she knows sees them, it's a moot issue.
So I'll worry about my privacy being abused if and when that abuse is realised. (And some random stranger thinking 'dirty' thoughts under pretty much any stimulus isn't going to abuse me in and of itself, it'd be the sharing/publicising of that information as relates to me or mine that would be abusive)
So yeah, get that drone out of my backyard, it's going to cause damage and end up on youtube or worse probably, but the NSA/whatever government/corporations satellites isn't going to impact my personal privacy.
Doesn't mean I like or approve of government surveillance per se; however I'm not going to take it personally like I would if it was an unknown flying a camera drone around me or mine.
Let's hope that doesn't happen. Drone delivery is inefficient, expensive and dangerous.
A list of things that could be referred to loosely as "inefficient, expensive and dangerous":
Cars (well, any automated transport really, to varying degrees)
Wind Farms, Industrial Farming and scalp reduction (according to google)
Pretty much any new technology.
Sex (last but not least)
Well, this is going to be fun once delivery drones start flying.
The delivery drones are a nice idea that sounds better on paper than in real life.
The first time a medical helicopter is brought down by one and it ends up on CNN, the drone flights will have to stop. It would cost a crap ton of money to make drones able to avoid other aircraft 100% of the time.
There is no way to have flying drones land in random locations in neighborhoods, there are too many obstructions, kids on bikes, etc.
I love the idea, but the execution is miles from reality.
Why do I keep seeing people type stuff like this? The first time a drone brings down a medical helicopter (let's assume it'll happen sometime or other in the next billion years) you have no idea what the result will be. It could be anything from a footnote on a log file to a three-ring media circus.
As for your other reasons we will never have drones - obstructions and kids - well, Human's have a pretty long history of finding ways to deal with both those issues, with varying degrees of success. I hardly think I'll be reading a newspaper article in a decade or so saying "We would have had drone deliveries but for those pesky kids and the obstructions", I rather suspect I'll read something like "Remember when everyone was up in arms about how drone's would be such a big problem, was that somehow tied into that Y2k bug?"
Just noticed I'm rambling at a probable troll, no way that could be a serious thought out post. I'm gonna stop now.
OK, that is very simple. As the delivery drone gets close to the address it is supposed to deliver to, it has to descend in order to make the delivery. Entire neighborhood? No. A couple of houses / apartments? Yes, it will have to be low enough to make a safe delivery. This means it will go very low past at least a couple of residences.
How about make the drone obvious as carrier, similar to FedEx or UPS trucks? For example, COLOR it in a way that people will see the differences? You are talking as if all drones must look the same or similar, so people can't distinguish them.
Oh please do this, then all the pervs can paint their drone's yellow (or orange or whatever) and spy away without causing any concern. :)
On a more serious note, however, a set of visual alerts - flashing lights, beeping (like trucks backing up) or whatever may very well help mitigate privacy concerns as people would have some sort of warning. This might at least alleviate the problem.
A little harder for a drone to surreptitiously hover outside your bedroom window, and free reign on shooting down silent drones
A toy drone that is filming your daughters swimming is a threat and the owner of such drone needs to be thrown in jail. He is no better than people who put video cameras in dressing rooms and toilets.
Or all those nasty perverts I see taking photos at beaches ( Of all places! you know how many people's daughters are swimming at beaches?!?!? )
I think you'll find the key problem here was the invasion/expectation of privacy. There's nothing intrinsically immoral or illegal about taking pictures of people swimming.
Also, why is the UAV a toy? I mean, call it what you like, just wondering how that is relevant, and I think that's what really made me feel your whole statement was loaded.
Nah. Much easier just to use a radio jammer and let the drone land or crash on its own.
I can't speak for you, but I have a shotgun, I don't have a radio jammer. So, no, it would not be easier.
Additionally, you'd need to know what frequency to jam and using such a device would be illegal. To make matters worse, it's a federal crime.
I'm curious.... seeing as this is the way 90% of this discussion has gone, lets take it a little further... What's worse?:
"why is a fish?"
Because one of it's legs is both the same?
Oh yes, the, uh, the Norwegian Blue... What's, uh... What's wrong with it?
because I "walk" 8 miles a day when I am coding. It detects my typing style as walking.
Anyone else now picturing Lumpy typing?
Anyone else just realise they're picturing Lumpy as John Cleese?
Oh, now you are... good.
Funny, innit?
Can we get the portal writers involved please?
memories
Kind of like all those tens of millions of fake Twitter accounts that the company knows about, but doesn't mind ;)
Similar, until you get to the part where Twitter doesn't charge you to interact with the bots by pretending they're real women who want to sleep with you, though I'd love to see that.
You're right. They warn that some parts of their website are for entertainment only. Here are the terms and conditions, and the relevant portion reproduced below:
Other Aspects of the Ashley Madison Service – For Your Entertainment Our Site and our Service gives users the opportunity to explore their fantasies and to interact with others in the Site. However, there is no guarantee you will find a date or partner on our Site or using our Service. Our Site and our Service also is geared to provide you with amusement and entertainment. You agree that some of the features of our Site and our Service are intended to provide entertainment. Others Using the Site for Entertainment You also understand and agree that there are users and members on the Site that use and subscribe to our Service for purely entertainment purposes. Those users and subscribers are not seeking physical meetings with anyone they meet on the Service, but consider their communications with users and members to be for their amusement. You acknowledge and agree that any profiles of users and members, as well as, communications from such persons may not be true, accurate or authentic and may be exaggerated or fantasy. You acknowledge and understand that you may be communicating with such persons and that we are not responsible for such communications .
Of course, in another section the prohibit you from using bots, and in another section, prohibit you from using fake profile pictures. So the only ones who could be doing these things..............
Thanks for the quote, Emphasis mine.
They wrote the bots that sent the communications, which makes them responsible. The wording around that clearly insinuates that 'real other people may lie to you' not 'we will lie to you and compound it by pretending the liar is another real user' I can see that bit bringing it all crashing down on them as it is clearly deceptive.
There is/was a 'theme park' in France that does a similar thing, Futuroscope. I don't know if it's still purely visual trickery but at least ~15 years ago it was.
Yeah, and then there's this one:
https://www.zerolatencyvr.com/
I think 'first' is a stretch.
Do you deny he violated his bail conditions, fled to a foreign embassy, and refused to come out in response to the reasonable legal demands of his state?
I deny that he's a proven criminal. Innocent until proven guilty, right?
A dead-flat touchpad is no replacement for a proper keyboard. I know of no half-way decent typist that can come anywhere near their typing speed on a touch-screen. And mice have the advantage that they work in most applications requiring a pointer. I don't need an overlay to do this.
At best, this is a low-rent replacement for a Wacom, but not as precise; there's a reason Digitizers don't use simple pressure sensors. (And graphics tablets have had overlays since forever... I remember using an AutoCAD overlay a quarter-century ago.)
That is kind of the point of the overlays - to stop it being 'dead flat'.
If you read the kickstarter page - they're 3D printed to whatever you like, pretty much (although I assume that excessive thickness of small areas could/would impact the sensitivity - think more chicklet thickness of keys than old fashioned mechanicals)
And 3D printers are advancing fast, I personally assume that in a year or two (around the time I might get one of these new touchpads) I'll also have relatively easy access to a 3D printer (or my own) and at that point I can make whatever tactile surface I desire - the possibilities are uncountable.
The main possibility I think this could take off with is if someone creates an application that allows you to generate custom tactile keyboard layouts based off individual hand size and wrist angle, etc. (sure, they won't be the pleasing mechanical clicky goodness of an IBM model M, but that's a sacrifice I have to make on a daily basis - I currently use a ms surface pro plastic keyboard, a MS generic at work, logitech wireless and mac wireless, and the macbook pro keyboard - I've realised that while I would far prefer one perfect mechanical keyboard I could use for all of them that that's basically an impossibility - trade-offs and compromises are made, and this product sounds like a pretty fantastic compromise of flexibility and useability)
Why lug all those things around when the whole point of a tactile-sensitive surface is to liberate people from carrying around peripherals?!?
I already have a wireless keyboard, no thicker than their (expensive) overlay, that cost $10.
I already have a wireless mouse, so their product doesn't help me there.
I already have a WACOM tablet, so it doesn't help me there.
I already have a WACOM-type tablet with an underlying video display, so their thing doesn't help there, either.
I already have a USB piano keyboard, so how are they helping me?
It has sliders, pots, and 8 drum-pad inputs, so their product doesn't help for full audio production.
What else is there? Trackballs, game-pads, specialist tools. All of these can be had at reasonable prices.
No consumer is going to buy their (very impressive) touch-surface, and also buy a bunch of plastic clip-on things for it as well. The biggest problem is that it reduces the precision of the link between overlay and their super-sensitive surface with a mechanical-interaction layer — that's right, the overlays have to touch the surface. The consumer is back to square one, at best.
Hmm, If I were you, the possibility of having:
a wireless keyboard
a wireless mouse
a wacom tablet
usb piano keyboard
(just picking out those 4)
In any case, having one device replace those 4 sounds kind of like a step up to me.
Of course, it would primarily be of convenience to you. As you already have all the separate devices, you can easily skip this product.
But if I were similar to you, and needed all those devices, however didn't have half or more of them, I'd think this product would definitely be one of interest.
As for some of your other complaints about the product (lets take the last one in bold), I haven't used it to refute, but there's a lot of stuff on the kickstarter page, including videos of prototypes in use, and while hardly conclusive, I don't see those testers 'back at square 1' at all...
The tech has the potential to replace WACOM digitizer tables for artists.
+100000 funny. Yeah, right. It's a cutesy proof of concept, but nothing in the same league as WACOM's products.
Well, I've used a number of Wacom tablets, I haven't tried this new one yet (for obvious reasons) however I assume by your comment that you have.
Would you be able to go into a little more detail/comparison of your experience that leads you to the conclusion the products are even in different leagues?
No mod points atm, and posted all over this thread, and there's no 'touché' mod up option anyway.... but nice post :)
The explicit violence just doesn't seem necessary. It detracts from the story more than anything - what's the point of it? Are the producer simply just trying to shock people? They could just cut the content by 75% and focus on the character development and the plots (i.e. The story), and they would have a way better show.
Some people like the fantasy themes, over the top violence, sex and nudity and political and literal backstabbing, etc. They like it enough to keep paying for it and watching it.
.. (not looking one up at work, I'll invent a title) 'back door bondage sluts IV' or whatever 'offensive' X rated (but totally legal) content there is a market for.
Fortunately, that's all we need, the show will continue as it has an audience.
It doesn't matter how many people dislike it or have a problem with it - they don't need to like it or watch it or pay for it or have any involvement in it, as there's enough others who do like it pay for it and watch it.
Sure if it was public access, or run by a company that would be damaged by the reputation of showing such type of shows (conversely, HBO only benefits from the controversy) or funded by taxpayer dollars or something like that, there'd be a little weight to it, however this is being produced by a private company and sold for profit, which is no different to Disney making mickey mouse shows or
OTOH, I'm pretty sure if they (assuming it would be possible) managed to generate 2 versions of the show - The awesomely successful one they have now, and a PG censored one that cut all the language violence and.. well, whatever you were trying to describe above - they might find they have a big enough market of those people to make more profit with a second version. That's a pretty big risk to take, however, and probably not their most promising avenue of increased income, so I doubt it'll happen unless some fans manage to generate it.
tl;dr: cutting content by 75% and focusing on character development and plots (which, honestly, is what 75% of GoT content already is - following the story as written by GRRM) will result in losing their large (one of the largest?) happy paying consumer base.
BTW, assuming it doesn't exist, feel free to steal this idea: YouTube channel showing PG edited version of the show - I doubt there'd be copyright infringement issues cause you'd be showing less than 10% of the show I guess - could be hilarious, and I doubt there'd be enough 'story' left to follow at that point.
The 5 pixel high people are from far further than 200 feet away.... but yeah, I should start a poll:
What is the minimum number of pixels you can fap to?
For Science!
Show me a camera that can be carried by a drone of that size and take photos of a person 200ft below with good enough image quality to perv off.
You have no idea what the weight limitations or limitations on small size optics are for this application, do you?
Not sure what "that size" is - can't find a reference point, however:
Under US$1000 and sample pics
I'm sure someone out there could fap to that.....