With that in hand, it should be a pretty easy time for the states to argue that the FCC can't limit their ability to give the ISPs additional rules to go by within the state's borders. In fact that was the regulatory scheme for years and why the credit card companies fought to get themselves declared to be regulated by the federal government only.
No. I'm being serious. Having a deep understanding of yourself, having an identity that goes beyond "I am for X" & "I am against Y" provides an bulwark against propaganda and conspiracies. Watch kids. They start out believing everything parents tell them. Once they take on traits that their parents don't have, you can see them begin the first phases of critical self-assessment.
All of this can be achieved in many ways. The best comes in the form of exposure. Exposure to philosophy. Exposure to culture. Exposure to other people and their lives.
You want to stop conspiracies and propaganda dead in its tracks? Get your kids out of your comfort zones and into the real world.
That was something Apple said to justify its prices and for people to use as a means to cover their purchase. Whatever advantage Apple had in terms of software packages has been frittered away. It was marketing, pure marketing, and very little else.
Apple has always had bugs and now that more and more people use their products, these bugs have been uncovered and experienced. Nothing has really changed except for the speed at which this information gets passed around.
Apple didn't have some sort of magical wunderkind at work making its software somehow better than anyone else. There was no secret process that let them ferret out more use cases than Microsoft or IBM. There wasn't some super-intuitive language they used to build thing that was kept in house. This idea that Apple was somehow better at software design is a myth. They've made plenty of UI blunders over the years. Plenty of mistakes in design. But these are ignored and outright tossed aside when pointed out.
That was my thought entirely. Given that Level 3 was just acquired by CenturyLink it wouldn't surprise me in the least that this was them turning some new "traffic shaping experience" software on.
Alternatively, you could just wait a bit, and there will be posts on fan sites and eventually Wikipedia that explore all the nuances of the plot twists. You read those, and you are up to date. It's a more efficient use of your time and economic resources.
Did you go to school to become that much of a buzzkill? Do you derive pleasure from it? Are you simply looking for a fight?
It wants to be the everything to online video. It is a destination for the casual viewer because anyone can upload anything and is therefore useful of viral stuff or breaking news. It's a destination for the new media crowd because it allow them a place to create and grow an audience. It mostly missed the boat on game voyeurism but is trying to catch up there.
It's also important for music because MTV et al shit the bed and moved into more profitable arena of reality television. It's a place for new musicians to debut and a place for existing musicians to expand their audience and to interact with their current one.
However, and this is the tricky part, it requires YouTube to be really good at getting those videos in front of people. This is where having all of those directives comes to mess things up. You have advertisers who have ideas of who they want to be put in front of. You have the aforementioned audience who want more of the same sorts of things they're already watching. And you have the new people wanting an audience. What Alphabet/Google/YouTube has learned in the past few years is that you can't please everyone at the same time and please anyone in the process.
Discovery is a mess and hasn't got any better that it was five years ago when the algorithm took over their front page. It's arguably worse.
So moving music away from YouTube prime might be a good answer for the record labels, but that pretty much guarantees it's not good for anyone else.
People have been known to do all sorts of things to impress others. This seems just like another in a long line of ill-advised attempts to make themselves part of an in-group or the like.
Not exactly shortsighted as all sorts of people have different means of being validated, but certainly it is not taking into account a myriad of situations that are likely to come to pass during one's life.
Lots of time in lots of places. What kind of example do you want? Do you want real world? Do you want experimental? Do you macro or micro examples? Seriously there are thousands of results a google search away. Why are you even suggesting that it be done this way? It's not a good way to govern a nation, let alone a nation such as the US. It's bad policy on a number of levels.
But I don't think you want good, relevant policy. I think you don't want anything of the sort. I think you want governmental failure. Because your suggestion is how you get governmental failure. Lurching, suddenly from one idea to another disrupts personal and business planning. It hurts everyone but those making the changes. Save for those who already know what changes are going to be made. Like the ones backing Pai.
So tell me, if you're so smart and know so much as to what the right policy is, what is it? If it's not incremental, predictable movement towards a common carrier status that can be planned and readied for, I'm all ears. What magic formula do you have to solve everything once and for all?
ps. Be ready to cite peer-reviewed, publicly published articles and/or long term real world examples where your ideas have succeeded. Not just proposals from Tom, Dick, & Harry's Policy Page that's been hosted anonymously.
One major component to the faked moon landings conspiracy is that they were shot on Hollywood or other sets still on Earth. The idea now being is, sure, let's take them to space to the actual moon and let them find out the hard way that it wasn't faked. If they were faked, they could walk out of the lander and into an oxygen environment because they didn't leave the Earth.
Wonder what would be the work around for the trackers and advertisers. I've already done a lot to keep my footprint as small as possible but I know I'm still getting tracked in some ways I can't stop if I want to be able to do useful things online. Like paying my bills. And I personally question the usefulness of things outside of the plain browser identifier. I don't get why any site I visit would need to probe what addons or if javascript has been executed. Maybe I don't do enough site programming to "get it". But something like this, as much as I think it's nice is just going to escalate the battle against advertisers more.
Like forcing more websites to have signins to be useful. Or greater sharing of metacookies or whatever it's call when the server sending out the ads does the tracking itself.
Indeed, my suggest relies heavily on some assumptions that may not bear out after further examination. Such as the spam isn't being conducted by a state actor for propaganda or other nefarious reasons. Which certainly exists and presents an entire different category of problems to handle.
It seems like the first step to any solution would be to see who exactly is doing it.
The only thing that works is to approach spam as the economic problem that it is. We need to stop pretending that spammers send out spam to piss people off; that is one of the dumbest lies on the internet. Spammers send out spam to make money. If you don't want spam, you need to do something to prevent spammers from getting paid. Cut off their cash flow and they go on to doing other things with their botnets instead.
Or find way to employ the people who create spam such that the creation of said spam is less economically tenable. The idea of targeting them economically is a great idea but instead of doing so in a way which will leave them poorer why not try to employ their creativity in ways which benefit everyone?
It might be harder but it would seem like a better choice for long term stability. Set a trend which demonstrates how spam creation doesn't lead to the fulfillment desired and you've now cut off air to the next generation that would be going into that business.
And almost no corporation puts effort into training for it. Every place I have ever worked never once made teaching how to manage people a priority for those they put into management roles. In retail it's doubly fucked because they expect management to do the same jobs as those on the floor on top of everything needed to manage the store.
I don't know if that's the way it's always been or not. Although I do kinda feel like it has been.
If managers were actually allowed and taught how to manage, I'd think they'd be able to tell the good workers from the poor ones. From there it would be reasonable to either manage people into working better or into leaving. But because managers aren't often left to manage their people they don't get to be reasonable about it. It's done by intuition and appearance more than results and effort.
It's certainly not the advertisers because they're getting screwed every which way possible as well. It wasn't that long ago that several companies showed that the effectiveness of online advertising just isn't there. So what did Alphabet do? It must be those pesky content generating people who make their platform worthwhile in going to in the first place. We must crack down on them!
Let's not talk about how ineffective certain targeted ads are. Let's not talk about how the system was abused for propaganda purposes.
No. Instead let's work on cutting into people's livelihoods and make everyone nervous that instead. That's the distracting ticket!
Someone skipped the day(s) they were teaching about how to do significant digits in Numerical Methods.
Like they had to skip a lot of days because that was the follow up conversation we had after each major section. As in how to tell what is and what isn't a good answer to the math we were just given to do.
Chasing the dragon's tail of profits makes companies do funny things. Saturating a market for one. Make sure everyone who wants one has one and then what? You release a new version. Fine but what features are you going to sell it on? And what happens when you run out of new features? From what we've seen so far, you start removing things from the base product and hope no one remembers it in a year or two when you reintroduce it.
Or you jump ships and find a market that's not saturated to the same extent and do the whole thing over there. Never stopping once to think the consequences of your actions through. Why? Because profits.
No, it would not have stopped things because it would have already been used. Seriously. Go read about the man. He and Trump would have been on the same wavelength. And if you ain't shitting bricks about Trump being in charge of our nuclear arsenal, then I'm guessing you're one of those white-supremacists who want him to have them.
Go read about the thirty years of war between Iraq and Iran. About the thousands of young men who died in that. And tell me that's what you want in the rest of the world. Because that gives me a great idea about how you think.
Also think about how we're transitioning away from petroleum. How the world, yes the whole world is in on this (save Russia but again, that tells me everything I need to know about you) . The world isn't simply weaning off it, but are actively distancing economies away from anything resembling a reliance on it. Even the Saudis are on board.
Nuclear weapons won't protect resources ever again because renewable have changed the energy game. It's well past time to rethink global defense centered around them. The only thing this does is create tensions and the threat of escalation.
If you can find and publish a text or song where the providence of such is in question, you can then claim for yourself the copyright.
That's a problem in these cases. No one has actually said to have given up their rights to them. We don't know with whom the copyright resides. So if Google were to go in and being publishing these "abandoned" books Google could then claim them for themselves without having secured the necessity transfer of the claim.
This has precedent in history. It's how the US dealt with foreign copyright for the longest time. Since no US citizen claimed it, people would import books from England and turn around and file for it. This went on for decades.
So yeah, I'm kinda in the author's camp on this one. No one gave up their rights to the books. Google shouldn't get to publish a damn thing without paying for them.
I have to disagree. You have to move with the technology, if you don't then you'll be caught when support ends.
Support always ends.
Products change. Companies change focus. Executives decide to leave markets that aren't profitable anymore.
Any one of those and you're SOL if all you care about is "ain't broke".
What needs to change? That attitude. The world is always coming up with new fools and new ways to break things. If you aren't on the lookout for ways to keep protected and to keep pace with how and why things have changed then you're fucked. All the way fucked.
Learn. Unlearn. Relearn.
Learn what's out there. See what it can do that yours already doesn't. See if you need that or if it's a nice-to-have.
Unlearn the old ways of doing things. Mainframes were good for their day but their day has passed. Keep your people in training. Keep them vital with new things to learn.
Which is what relearning is all about. Never let yourself stagnate. Get tired of doing one thing, learn how to do another. Refresh your knowledge.
And fuck that nonsense about "Ain't broke". It'll be broke soon enough. Better to know what to replace it rather than sitting around with your hands open.
I think it's safe to be against the pro-gambling this time around. Not only because it's gambling we're talking about and we all know how bad humans are at figuring odds, but they're also hinting in the blurb that it involves further exploiting the already exploited.
It's the weaponization of something considered a base necessity to the functioning of computers. It's the equivalent of poisoning a city's primary water supply. Yes there are others but this one is well known and been used for so long that many are dependent on it for what it provides.
This is abuse of dominance in a market. That's as plain as it gets. You and I may know of DDG, et al, but when it comes to the general public, there's nothing else but google.
Slashdot Mirror
This is, or was, being sorted out in a lawsuit between AT&T and the FCC over the FCC's overriding the anti-muni broadband laws in Tennessee. The FCC lost the first round in federal court, with the court saying the FCC's regulations didn't carry the same precedence as federal laws do. See Ars' coverage: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/08/in-blow-to-muni-broadband-fcc-loses-bid-to-overturn-state-laws/
With that in hand, it should be a pretty easy time for the states to argue that the FCC can't limit their ability to give the ISPs additional rules to go by within the state's borders. In fact that was the regulatory scheme for years and why the credit card companies fought to get themselves declared to be regulated by the federal government only.
so what is being flown as the common replacement to this industry stalwart?
No. I'm being serious. Having a deep understanding of yourself, having an identity that goes beyond "I am for X" & "I am against Y" provides an bulwark against propaganda and conspiracies. Watch kids. They start out believing everything parents tell them. Once they take on traits that their parents don't have, you can see them begin the first phases of critical self-assessment.
All of this can be achieved in many ways. The best comes in the form of exposure. Exposure to philosophy. Exposure to culture. Exposure to other people and their lives.
You want to stop conspiracies and propaganda dead in its tracks? Get your kids out of your comfort zones and into the real world.
That was something Apple said to justify its prices and for people to use as a means to cover their purchase. Whatever advantage Apple had in terms of software packages has been frittered away. It was marketing, pure marketing, and very little else.
Apple has always had bugs and now that more and more people use their products, these bugs have been uncovered and experienced. Nothing has really changed except for the speed at which this information gets passed around.
Apple didn't have some sort of magical wunderkind at work making its software somehow better than anyone else. There was no secret process that let them ferret out more use cases than Microsoft or IBM. There wasn't some super-intuitive language they used to build thing that was kept in house. This idea that Apple was somehow better at software design is a myth. They've made plenty of UI blunders over the years. Plenty of mistakes in design. But these are ignored and outright tossed aside when pointed out.
That was my thought entirely. Given that Level 3 was just acquired by CenturyLink it wouldn't surprise me in the least that this was them turning some new "traffic shaping experience" software on.
Alternatively, you could just wait a bit, and there will be posts on fan sites and eventually Wikipedia that explore all the nuances of the plot twists. You read those, and you are up to date. It's a more efficient use of your time and economic resources.
Did you go to school to become that much of a buzzkill? Do you derive pleasure from it? Are you simply looking for a fight?
It wants to be the everything to online video. It is a destination for the casual viewer because anyone can upload anything and is therefore useful of viral stuff or breaking news. It's a destination for the new media crowd because it allow them a place to create and grow an audience. It mostly missed the boat on game voyeurism but is trying to catch up there.
It's also important for music because MTV et al shit the bed and moved into more profitable arena of reality television. It's a place for new musicians to debut and a place for existing musicians to expand their audience and to interact with their current one.
However, and this is the tricky part, it requires YouTube to be really good at getting those videos in front of people. This is where having all of those directives comes to mess things up. You have advertisers who have ideas of who they want to be put in front of. You have the aforementioned audience who want more of the same sorts of things they're already watching. And you have the new people wanting an audience. What Alphabet/Google/YouTube has learned in the past few years is that you can't please everyone at the same time and please anyone in the process.
Discovery is a mess and hasn't got any better that it was five years ago when the algorithm took over their front page. It's arguably worse.
So moving music away from YouTube prime might be a good answer for the record labels, but that pretty much guarantees it's not good for anyone else.
People have been known to do all sorts of things to impress others. This seems just like another in a long line of ill-advised attempts to make themselves part of an in-group or the like.
Not exactly shortsighted as all sorts of people have different means of being validated, but certainly it is not taking into account a myriad of situations that are likely to come to pass during one's life.
Lots of time in lots of places. What kind of example do you want? Do you want real world? Do you want experimental? Do you macro or micro examples? Seriously there are thousands of results a google search away. Why are you even suggesting that it be done this way? It's not a good way to govern a nation, let alone a nation such as the US. It's bad policy on a number of levels.
But I don't think you want good, relevant policy. I think you don't want anything of the sort. I think you want governmental failure. Because your suggestion is how you get governmental failure. Lurching, suddenly from one idea to another disrupts personal and business planning. It hurts everyone but those making the changes. Save for those who already know what changes are going to be made. Like the ones backing Pai.
So tell me, if you're so smart and know so much as to what the right policy is, what is it? If it's not incremental, predictable movement towards a common carrier status that can be planned and readied for, I'm all ears. What magic formula do you have to solve everything once and for all?
ps. Be ready to cite peer-reviewed, publicly published articles and/or long term real world examples where your ideas have succeeded. Not just proposals from Tom, Dick, & Harry's Policy Page that's been hosted anonymously.
One major component to the faked moon landings conspiracy is that they were shot on Hollywood or other sets still on Earth. The idea now being is, sure, let's take them to space to the actual moon and let them find out the hard way that it wasn't faked. If they were faked, they could walk out of the lander and into an oxygen environment because they didn't leave the Earth.
Wonder what would be the work around for the trackers and advertisers. I've already done a lot to keep my footprint as small as possible but I know I'm still getting tracked in some ways I can't stop if I want to be able to do useful things online. Like paying my bills. And I personally question the usefulness of things outside of the plain browser identifier. I don't get why any site I visit would need to probe what addons or if javascript has been executed. Maybe I don't do enough site programming to "get it". But something like this, as much as I think it's nice is just going to escalate the battle against advertisers more.
Like forcing more websites to have signins to be useful. Or greater sharing of metacookies or whatever it's call when the server sending out the ads does the tracking itself.
Indeed, my suggest relies heavily on some assumptions that may not bear out after further examination. Such as the spam isn't being conducted by a state actor for propaganda or other nefarious reasons. Which certainly exists and presents an entire different category of problems to handle.
It seems like the first step to any solution would be to see who exactly is doing it.
The only thing that works is to approach spam as the economic problem that it is. We need to stop pretending that spammers send out spam to piss people off; that is one of the dumbest lies on the internet. Spammers send out spam to make money. If you don't want spam, you need to do something to prevent spammers from getting paid. Cut off their cash flow and they go on to doing other things with their botnets instead.
Or find way to employ the people who create spam such that the creation of said spam is less economically tenable. The idea of targeting them economically is a great idea but instead of doing so in a way which will leave them poorer why not try to employ their creativity in ways which benefit everyone?
It might be harder but it would seem like a better choice for long term stability. Set a trend which demonstrates how spam creation doesn't lead to the fulfillment desired and you've now cut off air to the next generation that would be going into that business.
It is smaller. But so are your steps. Now get to walking. Unless you want to pay for bigger shoes. We can give them to you. For a price.
And almost no corporation puts effort into training for it. Every place I have ever worked never once made teaching how to manage people a priority for those they put into management roles. In retail it's doubly fucked because they expect management to do the same jobs as those on the floor on top of everything needed to manage the store.
I don't know if that's the way it's always been or not. Although I do kinda feel like it has been.
If managers were actually allowed and taught how to manage, I'd think they'd be able to tell the good workers from the poor ones. From there it would be reasonable to either manage people into working better or into leaving. But because managers aren't often left to manage their people they don't get to be reasonable about it. It's done by intuition and appearance more than results and effort.
Maybe it's only the Wall Street crowd?
It's certainly not the advertisers because they're getting screwed every which way possible as well. It wasn't that long ago that several companies showed that the effectiveness of online advertising just isn't there. So what did Alphabet do? It must be those pesky content generating people who make their platform worthwhile in going to in the first place. We must crack down on them!
Let's not talk about how ineffective certain targeted ads are. Let's not talk about how the system was abused for propaganda purposes.
No. Instead let's work on cutting into people's livelihoods and make everyone nervous that instead. That's the distracting ticket!
Someone skipped the day(s) they were teaching about how to do significant digits in Numerical Methods.
Like they had to skip a lot of days because that was the follow up conversation we had after each major section. As in how to tell what is and what isn't a good answer to the math we were just given to do.
Chasing the dragon's tail of profits makes companies do funny things. Saturating a market for one. Make sure everyone who wants one has one and then what? You release a new version. Fine but what features are you going to sell it on? And what happens when you run out of new features? From what we've seen so far, you start removing things from the base product and hope no one remembers it in a year or two when you reintroduce it.
Or you jump ships and find a market that's not saturated to the same extent and do the whole thing over there. Never stopping once to think the consequences of your actions through. Why? Because profits.
How many times do we have to go over this?
No, it would not have stopped things because it would have already been used. Seriously. Go read about the man. He and Trump would have been on the same wavelength. And if you ain't shitting bricks about Trump being in charge of our nuclear arsenal, then I'm guessing you're one of those white-supremacists who want him to have them.
Go read about the thirty years of war between Iraq and Iran. About the thousands of young men who died in that. And tell me that's what you want in the rest of the world. Because that gives me a great idea about how you think.
Also think about how we're transitioning away from petroleum. How the world, yes the whole world is in on this (save Russia but again, that tells me everything I need to know about you) . The world isn't simply weaning off it, but are actively distancing economies away from anything resembling a reliance on it. Even the Saudis are on board.
Nuclear weapons won't protect resources ever again because renewable have changed the energy game. It's well past time to rethink global defense centered around them. The only thing this does is create tensions and the threat of escalation.
You missed another part of copyright law.
If you can find and publish a text or song where the providence of such is in question, you can then claim for yourself the copyright.
That's a problem in these cases. No one has actually said to have given up their rights to them. We don't know with whom the copyright resides. So if Google were to go in and being publishing these "abandoned" books Google could then claim them for themselves without having secured the necessity transfer of the claim.
This has precedent in history. It's how the US dealt with foreign copyright for the longest time. Since no US citizen claimed it, people would import books from England and turn around and file for it. This went on for decades.
So yeah, I'm kinda in the author's camp on this one. No one gave up their rights to the books. Google shouldn't get to publish a damn thing without paying for them.
Everything which is not forbidden is compulsory.
If a company isn't forbidden from selling it to make money they will find a way to do so.
I have to disagree. You have to move with the technology, if you don't then you'll be caught when support ends.
Support always ends.
Products change. Companies change focus. Executives decide to leave markets that aren't profitable anymore.
Any one of those and you're SOL if all you care about is "ain't broke".
What needs to change? That attitude. The world is always coming up with new fools and new ways to break things. If you aren't on the lookout for ways to keep protected and to keep pace with how and why things have changed then you're fucked. All the way fucked.
Learn. Unlearn. Relearn.
Learn what's out there. See what it can do that yours already doesn't. See if you need that or if it's a nice-to-have.
Unlearn the old ways of doing things. Mainframes were good for their day but their day has passed. Keep your people in training. Keep them vital with new things to learn.
Which is what relearning is all about. Never let yourself stagnate. Get tired of doing one thing, learn how to do another. Refresh your knowledge.
And fuck that nonsense about "Ain't broke". It'll be broke soon enough. Better to know what to replace it rather than sitting around with your hands open.
I think it's safe to be against the pro-gambling this time around. Not only because it's gambling we're talking about and we all know how bad humans are at figuring odds, but they're also hinting in the blurb that it involves further exploiting the already exploited.
It's the weaponization of something considered a base necessity to the functioning of computers. It's the equivalent of poisoning a city's primary water supply. Yes there are others but this one is well known and been used for so long that many are dependent on it for what it provides.
here you go.
This is abuse of dominance in a market. That's as plain as it gets. You and I may know of DDG, et al, but when it comes to the general public, there's nothing else but google.