I learned that photographs weren't to be believed in back in photography class in high school. What problem do we think we are fixing when we ban discussions of image manipulation techniques? Reddit shouldn't take advice from Pornhub.
This isn't new practice on Facebook's part. They pulled a similar pattern of mails on me when I quit using it back in 2007. I'm surprised no one else has made this comment. When I complained about this to tech industry contacts back then, I was treated like I was wearing a tinfoil hat, but now some user experiences the same thing and an article gets written for a major news outlet. If you apply the rule that fear sells news, I guess this means that people are finally starting to be afraid of what they are "sharing" on voluntary surveillance media. Whoops, I mean, social media. Sorry.
Critics are too right-brain/artsy/intuitive/feeling to analyze anything.
What is criticism? What is critical thinking? What do you think is implied when an employer states that a task or position requires "critical thinking skills"?
I want a critique from someone understand concepts like plot/tempo/cinematography/sound/acting
Do you think that typical audience members have a better grasp of these elements than a critic?
How would you categorize the thought processes you're having right now? Are you functioning as a critic? If you are, should you be ashamed of that, or invalidate your own opinion simply because you are being critical, and critical = bad?
Critics analyze content and make observations. The idea that the critic is here to tell you what you're going to like is incorrect. You're confusing observations with prescriptions. If this idea seems wrong to you, you're not really a part of the critical audience in the first place. Netflix is attempting to appear populist, but all they are really doing is saying, "Don't trust the critics. Trust us. We know what you like." Although they do know what you like, they are also determined to never challenge you or upset you. They, like most content distributors, encourage you to coast through the rest of your life thinking you never need to consider any perspective on art other than the one which you already maintain. That way, they can produce automated content according to formula, and have predictable profit outcomes.
...until they offer us the solution of total account security through total surveillance. They can then assure us that no one is using our accounts besides ourselves and every single paying Google customer, any one of whom can watch our individual surveillance feeds for a fee.
...when the man wants to round up everybody who understands enough about computers to circumvent mechanisms designed to prevent all forms of social change. Good move.
That's the most concise description I've ever seen of the popular notion that science and faith are on a spectrum together. Stealing the act of stealing that. Thanks.
The only reason required to make me want to depart from YouTube is the impossibility of departing from YouTube. You like this cage? Great. It's a nice cage, I admit. I wonder what will happen if I try to use this service to criticize Google? I mean, not the chinstroking way talking head way. The effective way. What do you think will happen?
It's a free and open Internet, right? So, we should all be able to use any of our own streaming video sites that allow users to post content and share with others and put the onus for the content on the users! Right? Let's just do that. Which other platform should we use? Google doesn't have some special rights that we humans don't have, so this should be easy.
In theory, when a vendor's product or service is defective, consumers have a right to sue and recover damages. The problem still isn't the Free Market, it is the rule and regulations placed on it by Government that limits the natural options.
The problem is that you start off with "in theory", and then make conclusions in reality.
Anyone else remember when the emergence of a skills-based tech market was news? This article is hilariously out of date. When was the last time a real tech recruiter asked you about your college degree? (Hint: real tech recruiters don't ask about college degrees.)
We all know that Romero and O'Bannon created the modern notion of the zombie in "Night of the Living Dead" and failed to copyright it, which is what makes pretty much 25 percent of all fiction today legally possible. Right? RIGHT????!!!!!
Side note 2: how much innovation has been the direct result of 'piracy' over the years? How many times have we heard of some start up that started out using less than legit software, only to become billion dollar companies (and then immediately turn around join the BSA or similar?)
I disagree with the implication that Google/YouTube has become legitimate. They are simply too ubiquitous and large to sue. Besides, how would lawyers planning to sue Google communicate or make their lawsuit known without Google being able to see and subvert the effort?
The article says: "Eventually, he envisions a deep, multilayered network of underground tunnels spanning the city." I can't believe we call someone who takes this long to envision something an innovator! Why can't he have envisioned this already? It seems like the CNBC reporter beat him to it. Or, perhaps, the CNBC reporter doesn't worry about grammar.
This just in - UNIX terminology promotes black magic. Windows daemons are called TSRs, which clearly is a Dungeons and Dragons plug, and therefore also black magic. Insidious! Let's pilot a turtle through the maze of kids programming languages, see if maybe we can find a cure for lisp. Seriously, was this post a Scratch plug or some kind of trojan designed to scare middle class conservative parents (or excite their children) and deepen alignment between makers and the left? Did BASIC teach me the morality and values of being a nerd? I'm pretty sure it was reading books that did that thing. It seems to me that articles like this are trying to align hacktivism, minorities, Scratch, "collaboration" (read: use Facebook), and most importantly, the benevolent appearance of friendly and benign Uncle Zuckerberg, who we can expect to see on the ballot in 2020.
Slashdot Mirror
I learned that photographs weren't to be believed in back in photography class in high school. What problem do we think we are fixing when we ban discussions of image manipulation techniques? Reddit shouldn't take advice from Pornhub.
Not being on Facebook is in itself evidence that you may be a space alien or a conspiracy theorist.
Can't I be both?
If you still have one of these mails, paste the link into a browser in "private" or "incognito" mode to validate what you are saying. Seems unlikely.
This isn't new practice on Facebook's part. They pulled a similar pattern of mails on me when I quit using it back in 2007. I'm surprised no one else has made this comment. When I complained about this to tech industry contacts back then, I was treated like I was wearing a tinfoil hat, but now some user experiences the same thing and an article gets written for a major news outlet. If you apply the rule that fear sells news, I guess this means that people are finally starting to be afraid of what they are "sharing" on voluntary surveillance media. Whoops, I mean, social media. Sorry.
It'd be sad if it wasn't so predictable.
Incorrect. It is still sad.
Critics are too right-brain/artsy/intuitive/feeling to analyze anything.
What is criticism? What is critical thinking? What do you think is implied when an employer states that a task or position requires "critical thinking skills"?
I want a critique from someone understand concepts like plot/tempo/cinematography/sound/acting
Do you think that typical audience members have a better grasp of these elements than a critic?
How would you categorize the thought processes you're having right now? Are you functioning as a critic? If you are, should you be ashamed of that, or invalidate your own opinion simply because you are being critical, and critical = bad?
Critics analyze content and make observations. The idea that the critic is here to tell you what you're going to like is incorrect. You're confusing observations with prescriptions. If this idea seems wrong to you, you're not really a part of the critical audience in the first place. Netflix is attempting to appear populist, but all they are really doing is saying, "Don't trust the critics. Trust us. We know what you like." Although they do know what you like, they are also determined to never challenge you or upset you. They, like most content distributors, encourage you to coast through the rest of your life thinking you never need to consider any perspective on art other than the one which you already maintain. That way, they can produce automated content according to formula, and have predictable profit outcomes.
...until they offer us the solution of total account security through total surveillance. They can then assure us that no one is using our accounts besides ourselves and every single paying Google customer, any one of whom can watch our individual surveillance feeds for a fee.
...when the man wants to round up everybody who understands enough about computers to circumvent mechanisms designed to prevent all forms of social change. Good move.
That's the most concise description I've ever seen of the popular notion that science and faith are on a spectrum together. Stealing the act of stealing that. Thanks.
...they have Google Fiber there.
Soon it will be all you can do anyway.
Where's that anonymous coward who calls posts critical of Google "word salad"? I miss that shill.
How did you check to see if postings threatening (not merely critical) to Google don't get removed, genius?
The only reason required to make me want to depart from YouTube is the impossibility of departing from YouTube. You like this cage? Great. It's a nice cage, I admit. I wonder what will happen if I try to use this service to criticize Google? I mean, not the chinstroking way talking head way. The effective way. What do you think will happen?
It's a free and open Internet, right? So, we should all be able to use any of our own streaming video sites that allow users to post content and share with others and put the onus for the content on the users! Right? Let's just do that. Which other platform should we use? Google doesn't have some special rights that we humans don't have, so this should be easy.
In theory, when a vendor's product or service is defective, consumers have a right to sue and recover damages. The problem still isn't the Free Market, it is the rule and regulations placed on it by Government that limits the natural options.
The problem is that you start off with "in theory", and then make conclusions in reality.
Anyone else remember when the emergence of a skills-based tech market was news? This article is hilariously out of date. When was the last time a real tech recruiter asked you about your college degree? (Hint: real tech recruiters don't ask about college degrees.)
We all know that Romero and O'Bannon created the modern notion of the zombie in "Night of the Living Dead" and failed to copyright it, which is what makes pretty much 25 percent of all fiction today legally possible. Right? RIGHT????!!!!!
They would communicate through email, phone, and fax, same as they do now.
Or do you think Google has some magical ability to spy on a law firm?
It's not magic, but yes. Can you figure out how? Try not to get their attention as you figure it out. Good luck!
Side note 2: how much innovation has been the direct result of 'piracy' over the years? How many times have we heard of some start up that started out using less than legit software, only to become billion dollar companies (and then immediately turn around join the BSA or similar?)
I disagree with the implication that Google/YouTube has become legitimate. They are simply too ubiquitous and large to sue. Besides, how would lawyers planning to sue Google communicate or make their lawsuit known without Google being able to see and subvert the effort?
Fixed that for you.
The article says: "Eventually, he envisions a deep, multilayered network of underground tunnels spanning the city." I can't believe we call someone who takes this long to envision something an innovator! Why can't he have envisioned this already? It seems like the CNBC reporter beat him to it. Or, perhaps, the CNBC reporter doesn't worry about grammar.
This just in - UNIX terminology promotes black magic. Windows daemons are called TSRs, which clearly is a Dungeons and Dragons plug, and therefore also black magic. Insidious! Let's pilot a turtle through the maze of kids programming languages, see if maybe we can find a cure for lisp. Seriously, was this post a Scratch plug or some kind of trojan designed to scare middle class conservative parents (or excite their children) and deepen alignment between makers and the left? Did BASIC teach me the morality and values of being a nerd? I'm pretty sure it was reading books that did that thing. It seems to me that articles like this are trying to align hacktivism, minorities, Scratch, "collaboration" (read: use Facebook), and most importantly, the benevolent appearance of friendly and benign Uncle Zuckerberg, who we can expect to see on the ballot in 2020.
Pigs still not flying, hell still warm. Carry on.