When my kids got onto my computer and watched some things from channels I don't want, those recommendations kept popping up, even specific ones I'd already "downvoted". That's what left me wanting a more absolute and easy way of setting profiles, and highlighted that it doesn't exist.
Nope. To try it, I logged in a different account, so not skew results, checked PDP, and then noted the suggestions (Dan TDM and others), then went back to my "ban PDP account" and opened up Dan TDM. I got more PDP suggestions. "not interested" those as well, then continued looking at the similar gamer videos, still got an endless number of PDP, which is why I installed the extension that re-writes the page to eliminate all of a single banned channel.
I don't want a secret downvote with nearly no effect. I want a 2-click ban.
There is no mechanism in YourTube to block a channel. If I want to ensure I don't see any Pew Die Pie, I can do so only with extensions that take the PDP recommendations and re-write the page shown to exclude the unwanted suggestions. That's a silly work around to block known unwanted channels. YT should have a right-click -> Hide selection. Two clicks to forever exclude a channel. Better yet, some classifications. Block all gaming videos. I do look up some things occasionally, like a level play through, or something. But, in doing so, I get "related" results, which always has hich click-count channels like PDP. But I want to be able to look up a play through for a game level without opening myself to unwanted content.
Google doesn't understand filters, or being user friendly.
The problem is many try to hide it until it's t late. And preventable problems occur that wouldn't have if people could get quality help without prejudice or injury.
In the US, the right to own a gun is considered one of the most important rights. If you have depression and seek help, you may be banned for life from owning one.
The system is designed to encourage people to not seek help. Even attempts to violate doctor/client privacy to make judgements on suitability for firearm ownership.
Help isn't available. Sure, there are some "hotlines" designed to help with teen issues, but the hotlines are not designed for mature people with real medical issues.
So long as suicides happen in "clusters" is proof that suicides are, in part, caused by anti-suicide sentiments. If those with urges were able to get real help without prejudice or penalty, they wouldn't be as enticed by the thoughts as they are publicized after incidents.
The Suicide rate in an average American High School is worse than a Chinese Foxconn factory, yet Americans complain about the Chinese and never look to their own house.
I also went with a credit union, but I don't trust the "online only" banks. Sometimes I need a branch. Given the number of issues I've had with banks (BofA before Alaska, and a local bank in Alaska, which is why I ended up going back to the national bank), I like being able to sit in a branch until someone fixes the problem.
I was with them through all this. I'm not with them now. They didn't attempt to sign me up to anything. They even sold off some of my Wells Fargo Investments accounts, but not all.
Why Wells Fargo? They are the only national bank with a solid presence in Alaska. There is no other national choice.
So do you or do you not know anything about an injured ALS model? I use milk, but I know nothing about the industry. I made no claims of chastity, just lack of knowledge of the industry.
How do we know? Why is there such a strong assumption that the same person did both? The planning and execution suggest more than one person. That would explain how "he" eluded capture for so long.
That should have been a consideration. One of the control groups should have been warmed with the same energy in IR. Maybe it was the heating, not the radiation that caused issues.
A seatbelt is proven to save lives. And, as a benefit to "the people", seatbelts are proven to reduce ER bills, including unpaid ER bills.
Helmets are not proven to save lives. They are strongly suspected to do so, but motorcycles are rare enough, compared to cars, that the numbers aren't there. And helmets are proven to increase hospital bills. People without helmets die quicker, and those with helmets rack up larger bills.
For every one of your cousin, there are 10 who lived your cousin's life because of a helmet.
I've never seen loans hard to get. When was that? When the rates are super-low, the banks stop lending, but brokers do 100x the business. When rates are low, brokers prey on the low interest making a 30 year loan half the payment of regular rates, pushing people into super-high cost houses, then using fraudulent or near fraudulent actions to classify the loans to AAA and sell them off to banks. But even in the '80s, loans weren't hard to get. You just had to pay 10% (or more) for a "low interest" home loan. 2010, when loans were "hard" to get, the issue was the massive investigation into the "subprime" crisis (named to blame poor Blacks, and caused by rich old white men). Loans were restricted by everyone while the mess was cleaned up. Not a full shutdown, but great restrictions on brokers, and limits on new loans as the risk pools we reset from the fraudulent levels.
Given the complaints you have about your system, mine can't be worse than yours. Do you know of a ranking of countries by government healthcare? Where I am has had universal healthcare longer than Finland.
"Cows are cats. If you disagree, that's you building a strawman."
That's a joke. Reality isn't a strawman. I don't have to win any hearts or minds. I have better universal care than you do.
I was just correcting your outright lie that ER is a form of universal healthcare, and throwing in some other corrections. You are just being an arrogant prick. And you are factually wrong on almost every point. Anyone can look back on your words and see that clearly.
I went in explaining to him why this is not feasible and would in fact do a lot of damage to the environment and that we should favor a mix of renewables and nuclear as that's the best combo to go with if we want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions quickly and effectively.
You are wrong. We could go 100% renewable across the globe in a year. That you don't want or don't understand it, doesn't make it impossible.
More sunlight lands on the roofs of houses than we use. If the US replaced all roofs with PV solar, we'd take care of 100% of needs, then there's only a question of storage and distribution. And if storage is hard, then add in some wind and hydro to get through the dark times. There are an infinite number of mixes that work, that's just one example, but since you have a strong personal need to shout down every renewable advocate, I'm sure you'l tell me I'm wrong.
I have nothing against nuclear, it's simply not needed.
People by and large don't discuss issues and facts,
Facts are belief. You belive one fact. I may believe a different one. Your longer list of facts doesn't invalidate mine, but you sound like the type of person to copy-paste large amounts trying to get others to give up on their facts.
Go on, prove me wrong. What's the total sunlight power that lands on roofs? What's the power usage of the US? Are my facts right? OR are you going to ignore my facts, and start talking about storage, costs, materials, and other things irrelevant to my facts?
IF you stick to the facts at hand, and don't change the discussion to facts that better support your opinion, then you might get somewhere. But you indicated that your facts weren't targeted against his comments.
That is why you'll never convince anyone. You are arguing something different than they are.
The "press" didn't shame Trump supporters. The media investigated the past of the candidates in an unbiased manner. That 20 years of extreme scrutiny has been given to Hillary and family just meant that deep probes into past were trivial, as all has been covered. Reviewing Trump's life in regards to a presidential run had never been done. So past statements were published to compare against current positions. That made the investigations equal, but the revelations quite unequal.
The Dirty Don supporters saw factual publication of pussy grabbing to be an attack. If your own words are an attack against yourself, you shouldn't have said them. The press covering the attacks on Hillary's character and supporters for years was no more or less than the attacks on Trump and his supporters, just timed differently.
Trump voters were ashamed of him, and still are. So they lied. Voting for the lesser evil is still evil.
The joy of social media is you don't need to believe or trust Facebook. Trust the sources of your friends. If it's "promoted content" it's a lie. If it's sponsored, it's a lie. If Bob posts a link to something, Bob is real, the link is real, and the sources of the link are (probably) real.
Fake news is real, but it's easy to spot. The "suggestions" and the like.
Slashdot Mirror
When my kids got onto my computer and watched some things from channels I don't want, those recommendations kept popping up, even specific ones I'd already "downvoted". That's what left me wanting a more absolute and easy way of setting profiles, and highlighted that it doesn't exist.
LIAR. Autoplay is off. Unwanted channels are still displayed in the suggestions.
Nope. To try it, I logged in a different account, so not skew results, checked PDP, and then noted the suggestions (Dan TDM and others), then went back to my "ban PDP account" and opened up Dan TDM. I got more PDP suggestions. "not interested" those as well, then continued looking at the similar gamer videos, still got an endless number of PDP, which is why I installed the extension that re-writes the page to eliminate all of a single banned channel.
I don't want a secret downvote with nearly no effect. I want a 2-click ban.
There is no mechanism in YourTube to block a channel. If I want to ensure I don't see any Pew Die Pie, I can do so only with extensions that take the PDP recommendations and re-write the page shown to exclude the unwanted suggestions. That's a silly work around to block known unwanted channels. YT should have a right-click -> Hide selection. Two clicks to forever exclude a channel. Better yet, some classifications. Block all gaming videos. I do look up some things occasionally, like a level play through, or something. But, in doing so, I get "related" results, which always has hich click-count channels like PDP. But I want to be able to look up a play through for a game level without opening myself to unwanted content.
Google doesn't understand filters, or being user friendly.
Where did all the zombies go?
I liked zombies.
Before that was monsters. Disease, meteors, and others. Someone should chart the fear by year. How well do disaster movies align?
The problem is many try to hide it until it's t late. And preventable problems occur that wouldn't have if people could get quality help without prejudice or injury.
In the US, the right to own a gun is considered one of the most important rights. If you have depression and seek help, you may be banned for life from owning one.
The system is designed to encourage people to not seek help. Even attempts to violate doctor/client privacy to make judgements on suitability for firearm ownership.
Help isn't available. Sure, there are some "hotlines" designed to help with teen issues, but the hotlines are not designed for mature people with real medical issues.
So long as suicides happen in "clusters" is proof that suicides are, in part, caused by anti-suicide sentiments. If those with urges were able to get real help without prejudice or penalty, they wouldn't be as enticed by the thoughts as they are publicized after incidents.
The Suicide rate in an average American High School is worse than a Chinese Foxconn factory, yet Americans complain about the Chinese and never look to their own house.
Does everyone win when a Darwin Award winner ends up taking someone else's life?
If he kills his neighbor, it's a tragedy. If he kills all the people who came to reward his attention whoring, then it's a comedy.
I also went with a credit union, but I don't trust the "online only" banks. Sometimes I need a branch. Given the number of issues I've had with banks (BofA before Alaska, and a local bank in Alaska, which is why I ended up going back to the national bank), I like being able to sit in a branch until someone fixes the problem.
I was with them through all this. I'm not with them now. They didn't attempt to sign me up to anything. They even sold off some of my Wells Fargo Investments accounts, but not all.
Why Wells Fargo? They are the only national bank with a solid presence in Alaska. There is no other national choice.
So do you or do you not know anything about an injured ALS model? I use milk, but I know nothing about the industry. I made no claims of chastity, just lack of knowledge of the industry.
How do we know? Why is there such a strong assumption that the same person did both? The planning and execution suggest more than one person. That would explain how "he" eluded capture for so long.
I never heard about that. But then, I'm not the expert on the industry you are...
Actually, he never said that, on of his competitors said it about him.
That should have been a consideration. One of the control groups should have been warmed with the same energy in IR. Maybe it was the heating, not the radiation that caused issues.
Paid porn sites are still around?
I've lived in lots of non-shitty houses. Get out of the trailer park sometime.
A seatbelt is proven to save lives. And, as a benefit to "the people", seatbelts are proven to reduce ER bills, including unpaid ER bills.
Helmets are not proven to save lives. They are strongly suspected to do so, but motorcycles are rare enough, compared to cars, that the numbers aren't there. And helmets are proven to increase hospital bills. People without helmets die quicker, and those with helmets rack up larger bills.
For every one of your cousin, there are 10 who lived your cousin's life because of a helmet.
I've never seen loans hard to get. When was that? When the rates are super-low, the banks stop lending, but brokers do 100x the business. When rates are low, brokers prey on the low interest making a 30 year loan half the payment of regular rates, pushing people into super-high cost houses, then using fraudulent or near fraudulent actions to classify the loans to AAA and sell them off to banks. But even in the '80s, loans weren't hard to get. You just had to pay 10% (or more) for a "low interest" home loan. 2010, when loans were "hard" to get, the issue was the massive investigation into the "subprime" crisis (named to blame poor Blacks, and caused by rich old white men). Loans were restricted by everyone while the mess was cleaned up. Not a full shutdown, but great restrictions on brokers, and limits on new loans as the risk pools we reset from the fraudulent levels.
Given the complaints you have about your system, mine can't be worse than yours. Do you know of a ranking of countries by government healthcare? Where I am has had universal healthcare longer than Finland.
"Cows are cats. If you disagree, that's you building a strawman."
That's a joke. Reality isn't a strawman. I don't have to win any hearts or minds. I have better universal care than you do.
I was just correcting your outright lie that ER is a form of universal healthcare, and throwing in some other corrections. You are just being an arrogant prick. And you are factually wrong on almost every point. Anyone can look back on your words and see that clearly.
I went in explaining to him why this is not feasible and would in fact do a lot of damage to the environment and that we should favor a mix of renewables and nuclear as that's the best combo to go with if we want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions quickly and effectively.
You are wrong. We could go 100% renewable across the globe in a year. That you don't want or don't understand it, doesn't make it impossible.
More sunlight lands on the roofs of houses than we use. If the US replaced all roofs with PV solar, we'd take care of 100% of needs, then there's only a question of storage and distribution. And if storage is hard, then add in some wind and hydro to get through the dark times. There are an infinite number of mixes that work, that's just one example, but since you have a strong personal need to shout down every renewable advocate, I'm sure you'l tell me I'm wrong.
I have nothing against nuclear, it's simply not needed.
People by and large don't discuss issues and facts,
Facts are belief. You belive one fact. I may believe a different one. Your longer list of facts doesn't invalidate mine, but you sound like the type of person to copy-paste large amounts trying to get others to give up on their facts.
Go on, prove me wrong. What's the total sunlight power that lands on roofs? What's the power usage of the US? Are my facts right? OR are you going to ignore my facts, and start talking about storage, costs, materials, and other things irrelevant to my facts?
IF you stick to the facts at hand, and don't change the discussion to facts that better support your opinion, then you might get somewhere. But you indicated that your facts weren't targeted against his comments.
That is why you'll never convince anyone. You are arguing something different than they are.
The "press" didn't shame Trump supporters. The media investigated the past of the candidates in an unbiased manner. That 20 years of extreme scrutiny has been given to Hillary and family just meant that deep probes into past were trivial, as all has been covered. Reviewing Trump's life in regards to a presidential run had never been done. So past statements were published to compare against current positions. That made the investigations equal, but the revelations quite unequal.
The Dirty Don supporters saw factual publication of pussy grabbing to be an attack. If your own words are an attack against yourself, you shouldn't have said them. The press covering the attacks on Hillary's character and supporters for years was no more or less than the attacks on Trump and his supporters, just timed differently.
Trump voters were ashamed of him, and still are. So they lied. Voting for the lesser evil is still evil.
The joy of social media is you don't need to believe or trust Facebook. Trust the sources of your friends. If it's "promoted content" it's a lie. If it's sponsored, it's a lie. If Bob posts a link to something, Bob is real, the link is real, and the sources of the link are (probably) real.
Fake news is real, but it's easy to spot. The "suggestions" and the like.