That's not how moderation works. Generally they wait for comments to be reported, and then review them. Sometimes companies that engage in content moderation put in automatic filters to flag comments likely to breech the rules, but otherwise no, it is not the case that Facebook is going to, or needs to, monitor every comment with a human moderator.
If we saw a significant amount of violence from "Black separatist movements" I suspect they would ban it. There was some, albeit mostly overblown and police/FBI provoked, in the late 1960s (Saint Reagan tried to ban guns in California on the basis that some dubious acts of violence had occurred while the Black Panthers were seen carrying guns), but there's no evidence it's an ongoing thing, or even a real threat.
This is an outrageous slur. There are HUNDREDS, possibly even THOUSANDS, of Republicans who are not white nationalists or white supremacists or in any way supportive of fascist or fascism-adjacent ideologies.
They are being pressured into it under threat of government action
I'd be very surprised if this is true, because Facebook hasn't shown any sign of caring about government action before, even assuming anyone's coming up with realistic threats.
The more likely reason is that Facebook is starting to lose advertisers. I can see the same thing happening to Twitter and YouTube too in time.
Java's fairly notorious for changes that break things. PHP doesn't, and it's the general consensus it's a hot mess because PHP has too much stuff that really should have been changed more than a decade ago but wasn't because of backward compatibility.
C... eh. I don't want to dunk on C (please see previous 6,192 times I've dunked on C) but the aim right now is not to make C any better, because there'd be a risk that you'd encourage people to program in it. C++ just adds more features with every new standard, I wouldn't suggest that's a model for anything. Which leaves Ruby which is a niche language.
I do agree some level of standardization would be good. The problem is the computer industry is really good at putting out half baked half finished programming languages. Just like everything else we do. So it's unrealistic to expect Swift to be any different.
What does that have to do with livestreaming it? You surely understand that terrorism is far more effective when the terrorist himself is able to speak directly, right? You do understand that those who deliberately amplify, or ignore that they're amplifying, the words of terrorists are ultimately complicit?
I get the impression a few Hollywood people, Spielberg and Nolan being the most prominent, have a problem with Netflix rather than an issue with streaming in general. They'll word it as anti-streaming, but they don't seem to care if it's someone other than Netflix doing it.
Because I don't see it going anywhere if it does. I can put Netflix, Amazon Video, Hulu, and a dozen other paid and free streaming services on my Roku, and my understanding is that the Amazon stick and the Chromecast are mostly similar.
I'm not buying another box just to add one channel, especially not one that costs 3X the cost of my premium Roku (with non-premium Rokus costing more like a fifth of the price.)
Yeah, just for comparison the Amazon Prime credit card gives you 1-2% back for ordinary purchases, and a whopping 5% back for Amazon.com purchases. And... well, don't know what the ordinary Apple user does, but I buy a lot more stuff at Amazon.com because it sells more kinds of stuff.
My Citicard seems to vary the rewards on a regular basis but usually has a tier of 5-10% cashback offers.
The cashback doesn't seem impressive. No late fees might be. I assume they lock the card or provide some other incentive to make a payment if that happens.
The report then concludes that "the Winner Of Most Secure Programming Language is...no one and everyone...!
I don't. It's the fucking Robert Mueller answer. "Gee, after being made to write this I guess the answer is... I dunno!"
Some languages are less secure than others. Saying "Ah, but the programmer..." misses the point that the part that makes one language more secure than another is their ability to manage the programmer and ensure it's harder for them to make mistakes that would create vulnerabilities.
So on the one side we have Neo-Nazis murdering 50 or so Muslims in New Zealand, with numerous lethal terrorist incidents on US soil in the last year promoting related ideologies, and on the other we have people calling for firings because they believe a student may have been part of a pro-racist protest.
This is more like "Someone does a recreation of your school, and some actors recreate that day where you were pantsed, and given a swirlie, making you late for detention. You tell me YOU wouldn't be singing a petition to have to go through that shit again once a day."
Yeah, I seriously doubt that'll do anything. Searching "Obama parody" brought up dozens of accounts. Feel free to create the first "Obama's cow" one. Given Twitter still hasn't booted off the swastika waving self-proclaimed Nazis that are happy to use its platform I seriously doubt they're going to throw someone out for creating a parody account of a Democratic politician.
Pretty much the only account name banned right now is Elon Musk, you'll have your account suspended immediately if you put Elon Musk in the name or in any way make it look like Elon Musk's account to Twitter's filters.
The reason is fairly reasonable: there's been a bunch of cryptocurrency scams where fake Musks have responded to Elon Musk (making it look like they're Musk continuing the thread) with some scam about giving everyone X bitcoins if they send him (wallet number included) 0.01X bitcoins. Given they're focussing on Musk for this (I'm guessing nobody would believe it if they targeted Paul Krugman), the ban isn't entirely unreasonable.
Google Voice is still there, still has its own app and website, etc. Hangout provides you with access to Google Voice, but it was never a replacement for it in the same way as it replaced, say, Google Talk.
At one point Google encouraged people to use Hangouts to access Google Voice, in part because they wanted to create one app you could access everything from (SMS, Google Talk, and Google Voice), and in part because they hadn't maintained Google Voice's native app for a long time and it always was shitty.
But it's not the same thing, Google hasn't killed Google Voice.
1. Create "Never going to give you up" virus, complete with protective package and replication genes.
2. Sprinkle over Chinese restaurant buffet
3. Sit back and watch the world burn.
Yeah I always thought this was what the AppleTV already did. I thought it was just basically the same kind of device as a FireTV or Roku, both of which do the same thing.
There is no copyright protection in place for personal use of a copyrighted work
Read it again. The DMCA access control mechanism language is not about enforcing copyright, it's about preventing copying and controlling access.
And yes, copyright protection is in place for personal use of a copyrighted work, it's just normally fair use is available as legal protection for those who violate copyright in those instances. But regardless, this isn't about copyright, it's about access controls.
That law also specifically allows the parent poster. You just cut out the bit that fits. Quote mined.
Liar. Quote it. You can't.
Here, I'll help you. Show how my summary was in any way inaccurate.
You won't be able to because you're making shit up. The OP at least is merely repeating some commonly believed bullshit, but you're actually accusing me of quotemining, which is something you've not heard anywhere else.
Also have you tried watching fewer Charles Bronson movies? They weren't exactly accurate depictions of 1970s New York City, let alone modern day America you know.
The law is against creating or owning a something that bypasses encryption used to control access to content, it doesn't matter why you use it or what your relationship is to the content: 17 U.S.C. paragraph 1201(a)(1):
(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. (...)
The Library of Congress is allowed to carve out exceptions to the above rule (see (b) and (c)), but thus far "Making copies of stuff you own a physical copy of" is not one of them.
Nothing to do with GPLv3, it was GPL in general Apple and some others had an ideological aversion to. (GPLv3 fixed many of the issues Apple et al complained about, but it wasn't considered enough.)
Presumably because they're speaking relatively. 4K resolution streamed by a standard online movie store is likely to be around 15-25Mbps, while this is likely to be above that because it can't employ the same level of compression that Netflix and Amazon can.
Amazon and Netflix compress movies offline before putting them up to be downloaded. This means the codec they use is able to examine large chunks of the video and determine the best way to compress it.
This not only cannot be compressed in real time, but has to be compressed in a limited way otherwise you'll see massive latency. At 60fps, with 100ms (one tenth of a second) latency, you're talking about it only having six frames to work with before it has to output something that can be decoded into all six frames when received by the user.
And that's ignoring the time taken to travel from Google's servers to your PC via the Internet and your slow-ass Wifi (Wifi has terrible latency), and that's also ignoring the fact your joystick movements had to travel to Google using roughly the same network.
So, rather than it being 25Mbps, we could be looking at double that, or worse, for 4K video. That's what they mean by "a ton of bandwidth". Whatever you currently use for video, it'll be a ton in comparison.
Slashdot Mirror
No. When did anyone say that? Considering there was a time 8080s and their descendents were in the data center (the Chicago Stock Exchange had a room full of S-100s in racks processing most of their data at one point in the 1980s) why would anyone assume the most popular CPU line on Earth would be excluded from there?
That's not how moderation works. Generally they wait for comments to be reported, and then review them. Sometimes companies that engage in content moderation put in automatic filters to flag comments likely to breech the rules, but otherwise no, it is not the case that Facebook is going to, or needs to, monitor every comment with a human moderator.
If we saw a significant amount of violence from "Black separatist movements" I suspect they would ban it. There was some, albeit mostly overblown and police/FBI provoked, in the late 1960s (Saint Reagan tried to ban guns in California on the basis that some dubious acts of violence had occurred while the Black Panthers were seen carrying guns), but there's no evidence it's an ongoing thing, or even a real threat.
This is an outrageous slur. There are HUNDREDS, possibly even THOUSANDS, of Republicans who are not white nationalists or white supremacists or in any way supportive of fascist or fascism-adjacent ideologies.
I'd be very surprised if this is true, because Facebook hasn't shown any sign of caring about government action before, even assuming anyone's coming up with realistic threats.
The more likely reason is that Facebook is starting to lose advertisers. I can see the same thing happening to Twitter and YouTube too in time.
You didn't?
Java's fairly notorious for changes that break things. PHP doesn't, and it's the general consensus it's a hot mess because PHP has too much stuff that really should have been changed more than a decade ago but wasn't because of backward compatibility.
C... eh. I don't want to dunk on C (please see previous 6,192 times I've dunked on C) but the aim right now is not to make C any better, because there'd be a risk that you'd encourage people to program in it. C++ just adds more features with every new standard, I wouldn't suggest that's a model for anything. Which leaves Ruby which is a niche language.
I do agree some level of standardization would be good. The problem is the computer industry is really good at putting out half baked half finished programming languages. Just like everything else we do. So it's unrealistic to expect Swift to be any different.
What does that have to do with livestreaming it? You surely understand that terrorism is far more effective when the terrorist himself is able to speak directly, right? You do understand that those who deliberately amplify, or ignore that they're amplifying, the words of terrorists are ultimately complicit?
OK, went through a maze of links and was finally able to find something that confirmed what you're saying.
Money quote:
I note that, other than Samsung (for obvious reasons) the list is in alphabetical order.
Odd that they're working with their fiercest rival in the mobile space right now and giving them an exclusive. Maybe they're mellowing a little.
Chromecast is missing but I really wish Google would stop pushing it anyway. But that's another discussion.
I get the impression a few Hollywood people, Spielberg and Nolan being the most prominent, have a problem with Netflix rather than an issue with streaming in general. They'll word it as anti-streaming, but they don't seem to care if it's someone other than Netflix doing it.
And I really don't understand why.
Because I don't see it going anywhere if it does. I can put Netflix, Amazon Video, Hulu, and a dozen other paid and free streaming services on my Roku, and my understanding is that the Amazon stick and the Chromecast are mostly similar.
I'm not buying another box just to add one channel, especially not one that costs 3X the cost of my premium Roku (with non-premium Rokus costing more like a fifth of the price.)
Yeah, just for comparison the Amazon Prime credit card gives you 1-2% back for ordinary purchases, and a whopping 5% back for Amazon.com purchases. And... well, don't know what the ordinary Apple user does, but I buy a lot more stuff at Amazon.com because it sells more kinds of stuff.
My Citicard seems to vary the rewards on a regular basis but usually has a tier of 5-10% cashback offers.
The cashback doesn't seem impressive. No late fees might be. I assume they lock the card or provide some other incentive to make a payment if that happens.
I don't. It's the fucking Robert Mueller answer. "Gee, after being made to write this I guess the answer is... I dunno!"
Some languages are less secure than others. Saying "Ah, but the programmer..." misses the point that the part that makes one language more secure than another is their ability to manage the programmer and ensure it's harder for them to make mistakes that would create vulnerabilities.
C and PHP deserve to be condemned on that basis.
So on the one side we have Neo-Nazis murdering 50 or so Muslims in New Zealand, with numerous lethal terrorist incidents on US soil in the last year promoting related ideologies, and on the other we have people calling for firings because they believe a student may have been part of a pro-racist protest.
Both sides!
How is that in any way comparable?!
This is more like "Someone does a recreation of your school, and some actors recreate that day where you were pantsed, and given a swirlie, making you late for detention. You tell me YOU wouldn't be singing a petition to have to go through that shit again once a day."
Yeah, I seriously doubt that'll do anything. Searching "Obama parody" brought up dozens of accounts. Feel free to create the first "Obama's cow" one. Given Twitter still hasn't booted off the swastika waving self-proclaimed Nazis that are happy to use its platform I seriously doubt they're going to throw someone out for creating a parody account of a Democratic politician.
Pretty much the only account name banned right now is Elon Musk, you'll have your account suspended immediately if you put Elon Musk in the name or in any way make it look like Elon Musk's account to Twitter's filters.
The reason is fairly reasonable: there's been a bunch of cryptocurrency scams where fake Musks have responded to Elon Musk (making it look like they're Musk continuing the thread) with some scam about giving everyone X bitcoins if they send him (wallet number included) 0.01X bitcoins. Given they're focussing on Musk for this (I'm guessing nobody would believe it if they targeted Paul Krugman), the ban isn't entirely unreasonable.
Google Voice is still there, still has its own app and website, etc. Hangout provides you with access to Google Voice, but it was never a replacement for it in the same way as it replaced, say, Google Talk.
At one point Google encouraged people to use Hangouts to access Google Voice, in part because they wanted to create one app you could access everything from (SMS, Google Talk, and Google Voice), and in part because they hadn't maintained Google Voice's native app for a long time and it always was shitty.
But it's not the same thing, Google hasn't killed Google Voice.
1. Create "Never going to give you up" virus, complete with protective package and replication genes.
2. Sprinkle over Chinese restaurant buffet
3. Sit back and watch the world burn.
Yeah I always thought this was what the AppleTV already did. I thought it was just basically the same kind of device as a FireTV or Roku, both of which do the same thing.
What am I missing here?
Read it again. The DMCA access control mechanism language is not about enforcing copyright, it's about preventing copying and controlling access.
And yes, copyright protection is in place for personal use of a copyrighted work, it's just normally fair use is available as legal protection for those who violate copyright in those instances. But regardless, this isn't about copyright, it's about access controls.
Liar. Quote it. You can't.
Here, I'll help you. Show how my summary was in any way inaccurate.
You won't be able to because you're making shit up. The OP at least is merely repeating some commonly believed bullshit, but you're actually accusing me of quotemining, which is something you've not heard anywhere else.
Have you tried locking the doors?
Also have you tried watching fewer Charles Bronson movies? They weren't exactly accurate depictions of 1970s New York City, let alone modern day America you know.
It's 4K, that is it's exactly 4096 bytes, yes.
This is complete bollocks.
The law is against creating or owning a something that bypasses encryption used to control access to content, it doesn't matter why you use it or what your relationship is to the content: 17 U.S.C. paragraph 1201(a)(1):
The Library of Congress is allowed to carve out exceptions to the above rule (see (b) and (c)), but thus far "Making copies of stuff you own a physical copy of" is not one of them.
"Should we tell them that if the plane starts plummetting towards the ground they should turn off the engines or die?"
"No, that's just what they'd expect us to do"
Seriously though, why didn't Boeing release this somewhat important bit of information? You say it's purposely, but why?
Nothing to do with GPLv3, it was GPL in general Apple and some others had an ideological aversion to. (GPLv3 fixed many of the issues Apple et al complained about, but it wasn't considered enough.)
Presumably because they're speaking relatively. 4K resolution streamed by a standard online movie store is likely to be around 15-25Mbps, while this is likely to be above that because it can't employ the same level of compression that Netflix and Amazon can.
Amazon and Netflix compress movies offline before putting them up to be downloaded. This means the codec they use is able to examine large chunks of the video and determine the best way to compress it.
This not only cannot be compressed in real time, but has to be compressed in a limited way otherwise you'll see massive latency. At 60fps, with 100ms (one tenth of a second) latency, you're talking about it only having six frames to work with before it has to output something that can be decoded into all six frames when received by the user.
And that's ignoring the time taken to travel from Google's servers to your PC via the Internet and your slow-ass Wifi (Wifi has terrible latency), and that's also ignoring the fact your joystick movements had to travel to Google using roughly the same network.
So, rather than it being 25Mbps, we could be looking at double that, or worse, for 4K video. That's what they mean by "a ton of bandwidth". Whatever you currently use for video, it'll be a ton in comparison.