OK, We'll do this: Razer don't care about Linux because their target demographic also don't care about Linux. Only hardcore Linux geeks obsessed with getting everything to run on Linux because it's "better/purer/freer" etc care, but they care to a passionate, frankly evangelical degree. Linux to them is scripture. They are so all-consumingly obsessed with it's superiority that to not support it must either be an error to be corrected, or ideological impurity to be attacked.
Either way, in the venn diagram of hardcore gamers and Linux evangelists, the number of people in the intersection is statistically irrelevant to Razer.
All who shun the Glory of Linux are heretics and will be burned away when the time of judgement comes!
In other news, gaming gear company reliant for profits on people not circumventing it's proprietary registration tools, makes machines that work with the sorts of OS that the vast vast majority of Gamers actually use, and doesn't see advantage in making it easy to circumvent it's proprietary tools.
Weren't they explicitly told to do more to address Fake news and propaganda from foreign state actors? How is Facebook in trouble for complying with what the left, the right, and the Trumpians all claim they wanted and reducing fake news?
I mean, there are real reasons to be angry at Facebook available.
That may well be a successful evolutionary path. But, let's face it, 'Hive' societies...that's socialism. The people in their mother's basements will never go for it.
No solar radiation in their normal habitat is the biggest environmental factor.
A bugger to properly design a human trial for without significant ethical issues, particularly as you'd want to eliminate screens, Wi-Fi etc as well.
That might do it. It's surprising how effective a simple, polite, explanation can be, even better if it gives time for thought, especially in a tense situation.
I'm sure I remember that, I think Hebrew, actually has a word that if it appears, means essentially: "now stop reading/doing and actually think about this for a minute before continuing", or something similar. Presumably designed for scripture purposes or similar, but the principle is still valid.
I think it'd be interesting to see how it affected human behavior, one way or the other.
I'll be corrected if I'm wrong but I think something similar was played around with before, certainly a similar psychology is in place when varying the "tick to agree/tick to disagree" sets. Too frustrating for use (or at least sufficiently damaging to comfort and therefore profitability to be ignored by most software providers). However I think it might have a use in the specific circumstances you suggest.
I think you are making assumptions about the quality of the emergency messaging system that may not be as accurate as we might hope. I fear it's entirely possible that there is a simple "click and confirm" and loads of people click to confirm out of habit.
In general, I find that, if the choice is between incompetence and conspiracy, incompetence is the answer. One requires a small number of people to be off their game, lazy, stupid, hungover, high, drunk or a combination of same. The other requires a much larger group of people to keep a secret of massive proportions, where failure to keep it (by bringing the conspiracy to light) would bring celebrity, quasi-hero status and the money and benefits that come with those.
I'd agree, with the caveat that they should get their pension, regardless of age, if injured on incapacitated in the line, or otherwise medically unfit to work (ether through work related issues like PTSD, or from just plain nasty life shit like cancer).
And the Finnish govt's hypothesis was that if people got the social security money, regardless, would they be more inclined to take the risk on that low income, short term, job. I'm really interested to see the results because, assuming there is a meaningful trend, it will punch a big hole in certain ideologies.
If the trend is that everyone sits at home and plays call of duty all day; then certain ideological arguments are smashed, and people are proven not to be risk averse, but to be essentially as lazy as they can get away with being.
If the trend is that people become less risk averse, and get any old odd job they can now that the risk/reward is more balanced in their favor, or start their own micro business, or even write that novel, then certain other arguments are smashed. People are proven to be inherently positive contributors provided socioeconomic factors are more neutrally balanced, or balanced in their favor.
It's not as simple as left/right of course, a lot of people on the right hold to the view that when you have more advantages you contribute more to the world, and a lot on the right disagree, and the same on the left.
What will also be interesting is, even if ideology is proven wrong, will it still hold. I mean, if this ends up being cheaper than the cost of running a bureaucracy to monitor, means test and enforce social security AND it also puts more people in to work or otherwise meaningful contribution, will the policies opponents there and around the world continue with ideological opposition? That's the more interesting question to me. On current evidence, my hypothesis is that the results, whatever they are, will change very few minds on this issue. I hope I'm wrong though.
I did query your first language, however that was not an insult, merely an attempt at clarification of a possible miscommunication, if it came across otherwise I apologize. In terms of insults, looking back, I insulted hypothetical Nazis. But the only way you could have been insulted by that, is if you self-identify as a Nazi. Which seems unlikely. But if you do. Well, then...yeah...I have no regrets.
Well, given the phrasing "or I missed something" the question mark is implied, and given your non-standard English structuring, was reasonably assumed to be absent in error. And given that my answer clearly referenced this question, and answered this question, you would have to actively be trying to misunderstand to think that I was answering a question on a methodology I would only have access to if I were involved in the creation of the bot.
It would have been a lot cheaper to do what they probably wanted Apple to do, and just buy the brand off them. "the company plans to produce electronic devices under the Steve Jobs brand" I'll bet they do, it's a really good way of incentivizing a high number purchase offer.
Actually, your questions was: They also need to make sure that these "sock-puppet" accounts copy pictures / symbology from the attacked community e.g. Jews - because this is one of the main accusations in TFA about them. TFA should have explained much more, or I missed something.
Actually, you specifically commented on how it is done, incorrectly. I simply corrected you. As for the rest, I have specifically pointed out that I have no more information about their methodology than is presented in the article.
and "I think you're trying to "steer people towards certain views", but it is not working for me." Tu Quoque attacks? Really?
On a side note: "giving exactly the information that is useless", "Try on sheep", "it is not working for me". Are you deliberately missing the point of what I am saying, or is English not your first language and just a translation thing?
"This has always intrigued me. How do bots accomplish this ? They also need to make sure that these "sock-puppet" accounts copy pictures / symbology from the attacked community e.g. Jews - because this is one of the main accusations in TFA about them. TFA should have explained much more, or I missed something."
You have missed something. The point is that the sock puppet accounts are initially more innocuous, and express less strong views (e.g. the actual main account holder may be a full on seig heil, swastika wearing rabid Nazi, but the sock puppet account will present as a more reasonable, strong Trump supporter, and attempt to steer people towards certain views, or attack opponents of Nazis). The point is that they do not cross pollinate pictures or symbols. they hide what they are, and attempt to draw people in to connecting with far right accounts, sharing far right memes, bosting the profile of far right accounts etc. It's a technique pioneered by ultra right scumbags Britain First in the UK, who encouraged sock puppets to share innocuous memes about supporting the troops, or ending animal cruelty. Every share boosted the rankings of the Britain First account and exposed more people to their more hideous ideas, and gave the appearance of a strong base, when in reality, their base was very small, but utilizing the power of the vast majority of unwitting people, who all agreed that supporting the troops was good, and animal abuse was bad.
I'm not sure how the bots identified them, shared emails possibly.
"What is really amusing is when you can feel the smell in your eyes"
I'd refer you to my previous comments regarding hyperbole...but you go on, keep cherry picking. In the meantime: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The designers evaluated known Nazi users based on specific criteria, symbology, stated beliefs etc, and then designed a bot to identify duplicate accounts held by those who fulfilled those criteria.
As for "Smell", well, that's just plain hyperbole, an exaggeration for comic effect. Because it amuses me to say that Nazis smell.
I'm not sure what Nazis smell like to be honest; failure, disappointment, self loathing, urine, Axe body spray and the musty odor and their mothers basements. Possibly with a hint of Meth. That's my hypothesis anyway.
Why don't we test this?
We can crowdsource this experiment: anyone here who is currently a Nazi, ask at least three random strangers (not other Nazis, obviously, if my hypothesis is correct and they share a similar scent, then yours will not be noticeable to them) to smell you, and then report your findings;)
Quoting a source which says that the majority of Americans favored the specific content of the ACA when asked about the content alone, but the majority did not favor it under the name Obamacare rather proves my point.
Slashdot Mirror
2. Your declaration of victory based on entirely missing the point is entertainingly trumpian.
3. You make (incorrect) assumptions as to my neurodiversity status.
4....everyone knows, when you make an assumption, you make an ass out of "u" and "umption". - Samuel L. Jackson.
OK, We'll do this: Razer don't care about Linux because their target demographic also don't care about Linux. Only hardcore Linux geeks obsessed with getting everything to run on Linux because it's "better/purer/freer" etc care, but they care to a passionate, frankly evangelical degree. Linux to them is scripture. They are so all-consumingly obsessed with it's superiority that to not support it must either be an error to be corrected, or ideological impurity to be attacked.
Either way, in the venn diagram of hardcore gamers and Linux evangelists, the number of people in the intersection is statistically irrelevant to Razer.
In other news, gaming gear company reliant for profits on people not circumventing it's proprietary registration tools, makes machines that work with the sorts of OS that the vast vast majority of Gamers actually use, and doesn't see advantage in making it easy to circumvent it's proprietary tools.
I mean, there are real reasons to be angry at Facebook available.
But maybe I'm wrong.
If I am, it's the Eloi I feel sorry for.
indeed they do.
'life' Doh!
for the individual perhaps, but like extending strategies which reduce chances for procreation tend to be selected against...naturally.
No solar radiation in their normal habitat is the biggest environmental factor. A bugger to properly design a human trial for without significant ethical issues, particularly as you'd want to eliminate screens, Wi-Fi etc as well.
I didn't, but my external memory backup did: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I'm sure I remember that, I think Hebrew, actually has a word that if it appears, means essentially: "now stop reading/doing and actually think about this for a minute before continuing", or something similar. Presumably designed for scripture purposes or similar, but the principle is still valid.
I'll be corrected if I'm wrong but I think something similar was played around with before, certainly a similar psychology is in place when varying the "tick to agree/tick to disagree" sets. Too frustrating for use (or at least sufficiently damaging to comfort and therefore profitability to be ignored by most software providers). However I think it might have a use in the specific circumstances you suggest.
In general, I find that, if the choice is between incompetence and conspiracy, incompetence is the answer. One requires a small number of people to be off their game, lazy, stupid, hungover, high, drunk or a combination of same. The other requires a much larger group of people to keep a secret of massive proportions, where failure to keep it (by bringing the conspiracy to light) would bring celebrity, quasi-hero status and the money and benefits that come with those.
I'd agree, with the caveat that they should get their pension, regardless of age, if injured on incapacitated in the line, or otherwise medically unfit to work (ether through work related issues like PTSD, or from just plain nasty life shit like cancer).
If the trend is that everyone sits at home and plays call of duty all day; then certain ideological arguments are smashed, and people are proven not to be risk averse, but to be essentially as lazy as they can get away with being.
If the trend is that people become less risk averse, and get any old odd job they can now that the risk/reward is more balanced in their favor, or start their own micro business, or even write that novel, then certain other arguments are smashed. People are proven to be inherently positive contributors provided socioeconomic factors are more neutrally balanced, or balanced in their favor.
It's not as simple as left/right of course, a lot of people on the right hold to the view that when you have more advantages you contribute more to the world, and a lot on the right disagree, and the same on the left.
What will also be interesting is, even if ideology is proven wrong, will it still hold. I mean, if this ends up being cheaper than the cost of running a bureaucracy to monitor, means test and enforce social security AND it also puts more people in to work or otherwise meaningful contribution, will the policies opponents there and around the world continue with ideological opposition? That's the more interesting question to me. On current evidence, my hypothesis is that the results, whatever they are, will change very few minds on this issue. I hope I'm wrong though.
I did query your first language, however that was not an insult, merely an attempt at clarification of a possible miscommunication, if it came across otherwise I apologize. In terms of insults, looking back, I insulted hypothetical Nazis. But the only way you could have been insulted by that, is if you self-identify as a Nazi. Which seems unlikely. But if you do. Well, then...yeah...I have no regrets.
...how...Amazon...works!!!
Bless.
Well, given the phrasing "or I missed something" the question mark is implied, and given your non-standard English structuring, was reasonably assumed to be absent in error. And given that my answer clearly referenced this question, and answered this question, you would have to actively be trying to misunderstand to think that I was answering a question on a methodology I would only have access to if I were involved in the creation of the bot.
It would have been a lot cheaper to do what they probably wanted Apple to do, and just buy the brand off them. "the company plans to produce electronic devices under the Steve Jobs brand" I'll bet they do, it's a really good way of incentivizing a high number purchase offer.
Actually, your questions was: They also need to make sure that these "sock-puppet" accounts copy pictures / symbology from the attacked community e.g. Jews - because this is one of the main accusations in TFA about them. TFA should have explained much more, or I missed something.
and "I think you're trying to "steer people towards certain views", but it is not working for me." Tu Quoque attacks? Really?
On a side note: "giving exactly the information that is useless", "Try on sheep", "it is not working for me". Are you deliberately missing the point of what I am saying, or is English not your first language and just a translation thing?
I have a much data as you do, the article.
"This has always intrigued me. How do bots accomplish this ? They also need to make sure that these "sock-puppet" accounts copy pictures / symbology from the attacked community e.g. Jews - because this is one of the main accusations in TFA about them. TFA should have explained much more, or I missed something."
You have missed something. The point is that the sock puppet accounts are initially more innocuous, and express less strong views (e.g. the actual main account holder may be a full on seig heil, swastika wearing rabid Nazi, but the sock puppet account will present as a more reasonable, strong Trump supporter, and attempt to steer people towards certain views, or attack opponents of Nazis). The point is that they do not cross pollinate pictures or symbols. they hide what they are, and attempt to draw people in to connecting with far right accounts, sharing far right memes, bosting the profile of far right accounts etc. It's a technique pioneered by ultra right scumbags Britain First in the UK, who encouraged sock puppets to share innocuous memes about supporting the troops, or ending animal cruelty. Every share boosted the rankings of the Britain First account and exposed more people to their more hideous ideas, and gave the appearance of a strong base, when in reality, their base was very small, but utilizing the power of the vast majority of unwitting people, who all agreed that supporting the troops was good, and animal abuse was bad.
I'm not sure how the bots identified them, shared emails possibly.
"What is really amusing is when you can feel the smell in your eyes"
I'd refer you to my previous comments regarding hyperbole...but you go on, keep cherry picking. In the meantime: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
As for "Smell", well, that's just plain hyperbole, an exaggeration for comic effect. Because it amuses me to say that Nazis smell.
I'm not sure what Nazis smell like to be honest; failure, disappointment, self loathing, urine, Axe body spray and the musty odor and their mothers basements. Possibly with a hint of Meth. That's my hypothesis anyway.
Why don't we test this?
We can crowdsource this experiment: anyone here who is currently a Nazi, ask at least three random strangers (not other Nazis, obviously, if my hypothesis is correct and they share a similar scent, then yours will not be noticeable to them) to smell you, and then report your findings ;)
Quoting a source which says that the majority of Americans favored the specific content of the ACA when asked about the content alone, but the majority did not favor it under the name Obamacare rather proves my point.