The ad agency will have a contract that transfers all legal liability to the defunct production company. And I can't think of when a TV channel that showed a commercial was sued for false advertising when the first complaint was received after the advertising campaign ended. They couldn't have known, so they should be blameless (both morally and legally).
"but this article is about Twitter" and twitter hasn't solved it. In context, "nobody" was "none of Twitter, YouTube, Facebook". That you ignore context and restate words doesn't make them inaccurate. "Nobody" (from the sample group) has solved this problem. And they won't, because the trolls will leave, taking their entertainment value, if trolls are stopped. And users will leave if the service doesn't improve. IM is making a big comeback, where you can group IM, in place of social media updates, and use blog-like sites, rather than social sites, to post updates with limited feedback. "Social media" as currently defined is declining, and users are already moving to other means. Unless the big social media platforms can solve that problem, they will decline, severely over the next 5-10 years. Nobody among that group has solved the issue, and I see no reason to think they will.
Stretching the work to fit the time is lazy as well.
So everyone is lazy. Either they are too dumb to be fast enough, or don't work hard enough to meet your standard. The dumb stretch the work, not deliberately, but from inefficiency. The smart are penalized for being efficient. And the anti-intellectual slant in the US blames the smart for not doing more for less.
If you have more work to do than the number of people can do (assuming average capabilities), then you need more people, or less work. Relying on the efficient to do more work than everyone else for no more compensation is what's lazy, not the efficient workers.
I've not flown out to WA. Only to the major cities on the other side. QLD, VIC, NSW. Frequent flier qualifiers fill the lounge. The days of the lounges golding only 1st class ticket holders is long since over. Or I'd never see the inside of them.
If you want to see me working all the time, I can do that, but it's slower work to look busy than to be busy. Do you want the work done, and done fast, or do you want us to find busy work to look busy all the time?
So I'd have to subscribe to a 3rd party service, indicating it's impossible in the "default" application. Glad you are agreeing with me, but you should find a way to do so less disagreeably.
Are you in the habit of retroactively claiming things once they suit you?
You are the one claiming to know what a speaker meant, better than they do. That you don't like my clarification doesn't mean it isn't a valid clarification. I'm not retroactively claiming anything. You are claiming omniscience in knowing what someone meant better than they do.
The ones with the cheat codes are worse performing. They perform good for the tests, but not in the real world. You get a worse-performing fuel guzzler if you get the gamed models. But, like everything else, if you want something better performing, with poor economy, you can just chip it. Diesels are quite commonly chipped. Duramaximizer makes a mint making chips for Chevys. I've seen lots for the 1.8/1.9/2.0 VW, but I haven't looked for the 3.0.
I had a classic car, and it was exempt from everything. No seatbelts, no emissions controls. And it was my daily driver for years. Exempting "classic" cars will cause more of them to get higher use. The proposed "base it on distance" plan seems to be the most fair.
It means the government provides corporate welfare to you. Note the "too big to fail" banks in Iceland were allowed to fail, and they have recovered faster than places that prevented the "too big to fail" failures.
He was taken away in handcuffs, fingerprinted, and put in a cell. He was never charged, but he was arrested.
he refused to answer questions at school.
He asked for his parents to be present, and didn't sign the confession to a crime he was given to sign. That's being uncooperative. Even though the school and police were violating his rights.
Would it surprise you to learn that Ahmed was in a program at MacArthur High School
I know two ex-principals of that school and am much more familiar with it than you are. The background of this has nothing to do with how poorly the school and police handled it.
Are you in the habit of repeating someone and pretending you are saying something new or interesting?
I said you could choose to not listen. But that, for things with so much effort in feeding you what you want to hear, it's almost impossible to filter what you don't. I don't care who you are voting for. I don't want to hear about Trump or Clinton. There's nothing that can be said to convince people in either's camps to switch sides. It's a complete subject. So I don't want to hear it. With social media, the two choices are to turn it all off, or block any individual that mentions them. For applications so focused on the content people get, you'd think they'd have figured out that sometimes, people don't want to hear something. Yes, we all know how to not hear something. It's not about not hearing something, but how to allow the listener to have some control over what they hear.
Nope. It's a story about the conflicting freedoms of speech and privacy. If I want to be left alone on my property, I can setup "no trespassing" borders, and allow in only what I want. That's the level of control people are used to. The "social media" is inclusive. If you join, you lose filters. There is no mechanism in YouTube to block a specific channel or person from showing up on your "recommended" list. In Facebook, it used to be that to block someone, you had to friend them first, then block them, or "trick" them into posting something that showed up on your own wall. If it was shared by a friend, it was un-blockable and un-filterable. It's still almost impossible to filter what's shared by friends. The only way to avoid the political posts by the one crazy aunt you don't want to cut off completely, is to cut her off completely, and try to remember to unblock her when the election cycle is over.
There is no mechanism in *any* of the social media to link to a person, but filter their content. And that's the problem nobody has solved.
Your right to speak doesn't mean You have the right to force me to listen. Sometimes people want social media to follow the activities of friends and family, and not get bombarded with everything any of them have ever liked. Social media is going to die if nobody can solve the signal to noise problem.
So, if the school only called the cops to make it seem like an important matter, why did the police arrest him? If it was so obviously a hoax designed to gain attention, why did the authorities indulge him?
When you are looking for a bomb timer, everything looks like one. Even if deliberately designed to look like a bomb timer, when the police got there and determined that it wasn't, they should have left and told the school it was an administrative matter, not a criminal one. Then this whole thing would never have happened.
The police seem to only ever escalate a situation to an absurd level, and don't strive to diffuse the situation. That's the problem. Not the child that is implied here, was manipulated by his father into taking a "bomb" to school.
Funny you should say "a country", then give exactly one example. You can't give another.
Since you obviously can't pay any attention to the facts, why should I bother? You didn't address the facts, just play a Trump-ian distraction game. I must be wrong because Chewbacca lives on Endor.
That's more of a respect and following the rules of the range issue than anything else.
So I'm 100% right, but you'll argue unrelated minutiae about "respect". "Respect" the gun, because they are deadly boomsticks. But they aren't deadly, just treat them like they are.
9/10 (it is the olymipcs, and those are some impressive mental gymnastics) to explain how the "experts" treat "safe" guns as dangerous, while they are 100% safe. Just treat them as dangerous, when they aren't. For no good reason.
You see, spoons are commonly involved in the killing of innocent animals for consumption by humans.
No, they are not.
If you're okay with that, what's your problem with hunting?
Oh, I get it, you are just a lying sack of shit. I never said anything negative about hunting. Just that the person I'm responding to lumped hunting in with "non fatal" uses of guns. If guns are not fatal in hunting, why are so many hunters using them?
What was the stunt? Taking a non-bomb to school and waiting for the over-reaction from ignorant police? Seems the fix should be applied to the ignorant cops, not the child that taunted them. If the cops were competent, this would never have made the news. It would have been handled in a manner that didn't make a national event out of a clock.
Slashdot Mirror
that person who gets their work done 40% earlier and then goofs off is just as valuble to me as some one who takes the full amount of time alloted
So you are agreeing, in a very disagreeable manner. I must be on the Internet.
It got you to post, so it succeeded in its goal.
The ad agency will have a contract that transfers all legal liability to the defunct production company. And I can't think of when a TV channel that showed a commercial was sued for false advertising when the first complaint was received after the advertising campaign ended. They couldn't have known, so they should be blameless (both morally and legally).
it's not a problem nobody has solved.
"but this article is about Twitter" and twitter hasn't solved it. In context, "nobody" was "none of Twitter, YouTube, Facebook". That you ignore context and restate words doesn't make them inaccurate. "Nobody" (from the sample group) has solved this problem. And they won't, because the trolls will leave, taking their entertainment value, if trolls are stopped. And users will leave if the service doesn't improve. IM is making a big comeback, where you can group IM, in place of social media updates, and use blog-like sites, rather than social sites, to post updates with limited feedback. "Social media" as currently defined is declining, and users are already moving to other means. Unless the big social media platforms can solve that problem, they will decline, severely over the next 5-10 years. Nobody among that group has solved the issue, and I see no reason to think they will.
Stretching the work to fit the time is lazy as well.
So everyone is lazy. Either they are too dumb to be fast enough, or don't work hard enough to meet your standard. The dumb stretch the work, not deliberately, but from inefficiency. The smart are penalized for being efficient. And the anti-intellectual slant in the US blames the smart for not doing more for less.
If you have more work to do than the number of people can do (assuming average capabilities), then you need more people, or less work. Relying on the efficient to do more work than everyone else for no more compensation is what's lazy, not the efficient workers.
I've not flown out to WA. Only to the major cities on the other side. QLD, VIC, NSW. Frequent flier qualifiers fill the lounge. The days of the lounges golding only 1st class ticket holders is long since over. Or I'd never see the inside of them.
If you want to see me working all the time, I can do that, but it's slower work to look busy than to be busy. Do you want the work done, and done fast, or do you want us to find busy work to look busy all the time?
So I'd have to subscribe to a 3rd party service, indicating it's impossible in the "default" application. Glad you are agreeing with me, but you should find a way to do so less disagreeably.
I'm not lazy, I'm efficient. That it takes me less time to do the job, so I have more time to goof off doesn't mean I'm lazy. I'm just more efficient.
Are you in the habit of retroactively claiming things once they suit you?
You are the one claiming to know what a speaker meant, better than they do. That you don't like my clarification doesn't mean it isn't a valid clarification. I'm not retroactively claiming anything. You are claiming omniscience in knowing what someone meant better than they do.
He posted it as "unlisted" in an attempt to reduce legal liability. It won't help, if he gets in legal trouble, but it makes him feel better.
I've been in the "1st class" lounges in the US and Australia, and they lump in all the eligible people into a single lounge.
There are some concierge services that require showing higher permissions, but those are few, and inconsistent.
The ones with the cheat codes are worse performing. They perform good for the tests, but not in the real world. You get a worse-performing fuel guzzler if you get the gamed models. But, like everything else, if you want something better performing, with poor economy, you can just chip it. Diesels are quite commonly chipped. Duramaximizer makes a mint making chips for Chevys. I've seen lots for the 1.8/1.9/2.0 VW, but I haven't looked for the 3.0.
Even Airbuses sometimes have Rolls Royce engines.
I had a classic car, and it was exempt from everything. No seatbelts, no emissions controls. And it was my daily driver for years. Exempting "classic" cars will cause more of them to get higher use. The proposed "base it on distance" plan seems to be the most fair.
It means the government provides corporate welfare to you. Note the "too big to fail" banks in Iceland were allowed to fail, and they have recovered faster than places that prevented the "too big to fail" failures.
He wasn't arrested'
He was taken away in handcuffs, fingerprinted, and put in a cell. He was never charged, but he was arrested.
he refused to answer questions at school.
He asked for his parents to be present, and didn't sign the confession to a crime he was given to sign. That's being uncooperative. Even though the school and police were violating his rights.
Would it surprise you to learn that Ahmed was in a program at MacArthur High School
I know two ex-principals of that school and am much more familiar with it than you are. The background of this has nothing to do with how poorly the school and police handled it.
Well, don't listen?
Are you in the habit of repeating someone and pretending you are saying something new or interesting?
I said you could choose to not listen. But that, for things with so much effort in feeding you what you want to hear, it's almost impossible to filter what you don't. I don't care who you are voting for. I don't want to hear about Trump or Clinton. There's nothing that can be said to convince people in either's camps to switch sides. It's a complete subject. So I don't want to hear it. With social media, the two choices are to turn it all off, or block any individual that mentions them. For applications so focused on the content people get, you'd think they'd have figured out that sometimes, people don't want to hear something. Yes, we all know how to not hear something. It's not about not hearing something, but how to allow the listener to have some control over what they hear.
Nope. It's a story about the conflicting freedoms of speech and privacy. If I want to be left alone on my property, I can setup "no trespassing" borders, and allow in only what I want. That's the level of control people are used to. The "social media" is inclusive. If you join, you lose filters. There is no mechanism in YouTube to block a specific channel or person from showing up on your "recommended" list. In Facebook, it used to be that to block someone, you had to friend them first, then block them, or "trick" them into posting something that showed up on your own wall. If it was shared by a friend, it was un-blockable and un-filterable. It's still almost impossible to filter what's shared by friends. The only way to avoid the political posts by the one crazy aunt you don't want to cut off completely, is to cut her off completely, and try to remember to unblock her when the election cycle is over.
There is no mechanism in *any* of the social media to link to a person, but filter their content. And that's the problem nobody has solved.
Your right to speak doesn't mean You have the right to force me to listen. Sometimes people want social media to follow the activities of friends and family, and not get bombarded with everything any of them have ever liked. Social media is going to die if nobody can solve the signal to noise problem.
So, if the school only called the cops to make it seem like an important matter, why did the police arrest him? If it was so obviously a hoax designed to gain attention, why did the authorities indulge him?
When you are looking for a bomb timer, everything looks like one. Even if deliberately designed to look like a bomb timer, when the police got there and determined that it wasn't, they should have left and told the school it was an administrative matter, not a criminal one. Then this whole thing would never have happened.
The police seem to only ever escalate a situation to an absurd level, and don't strive to diffuse the situation. That's the problem. Not the child that is implied here, was manipulated by his father into taking a "bomb" to school.
You must pay attention to different media than I do.
Funny you should say "a country", then give exactly one example. You can't give another.
Since you obviously can't pay any attention to the facts, why should I bother? You didn't address the facts, just play a Trump-ian distraction game. I must be wrong because Chewbacca lives on Endor.
That's more of a respect and following the rules of the range issue than anything else.
So I'm 100% right, but you'll argue unrelated minutiae about "respect". "Respect" the gun, because they are deadly boomsticks. But they aren't deadly, just treat them like they are.
9/10 (it is the olymipcs, and those are some impressive mental gymnastics) to explain how the "experts" treat "safe" guns as dangerous, while they are 100% safe. Just treat them as dangerous, when they aren't. For no good reason.
You see, spoons are commonly involved in the killing of innocent animals for consumption by humans.
No, they are not.
If you're okay with that, what's your problem with hunting?
Oh, I get it, you are just a lying sack of shit. I never said anything negative about hunting. Just that the person I'm responding to lumped hunting in with "non fatal" uses of guns. If guns are not fatal in hunting, why are so many hunters using them?
What was the stunt? Taking a non-bomb to school and waiting for the over-reaction from ignorant police? Seems the fix should be applied to the ignorant cops, not the child that taunted them. If the cops were competent, this would never have made the news. It would have been handled in a manner that didn't make a national event out of a clock.