Okay, so why did you respond and say I was "insane" for suggesting that? Sheesh what a waste of time.
when what you mean is "Failed to denounce Nazi's and say it was OK for Antifa to engage in violent acts because Nazis."
No, I don't mean that. Are you telling me it would have been hard to say something like: "I vehemently disagree with the values and actions of the pro-white power (neo-Nazi) protesters but support they right to organize and march. The violent actions taken by Antifa are never appropriate."
Wow, that was hard. I didn't even have 20 speech writers to assist me.
your ability to produce the stream of drive-by one-liners littering your comment history.
You do realize, your post consists of exactly one line of original text, right? Otherwise you just lazily pasted an excerpt of the law and hoped people would be outraged because it's more than one line and contains legalese.
Not one Trump voter in the country is now thinking to themselves "wow, Facebook tricked me into voting for Trump!". All of these BS excuses are nothing but delusions to avoid facing the reality of being rejected.
You should read up on how advertising works. You might find it enlightening.
And they were cool with it when it was the Obama campaign scraping the data.
Hi Troll. I see you've reached line item #347 on your list of "Liberal Triggers". This one is pretty weak though. I'd suggest you follow up with #544, which is "Hilary responsible for Benghazi". Good luck!
In Silicon Valley, being the most SJW-infested place on Eath, anything that touches Trump is toxic. When FB is now seen as being directly responsible for the election of Trump, these people found themselves in danger of "never work in this town" by association. They are probably better off putting prison time on their resume that admitting they worked on FB.
False. Money drives SV. If you can code (or whatever), no one gives a crap you are hired. Nobody cares about your politics.
When are you going to accept that YOU and YOUR toxic politics are responsible for Trump being elected? We weren't voting for Trump, we were voting to reject YOU.
Great. You elected a toxic 'tard that's doing irreparable harm to our nation to counter the vast, VAST minority of liberals that fall into the SJW category? You sir have been fooled by something that's well known to most people. It's called a vocal minority.
This seems to be an investigation into trump's personal attorney giving $130K to a stripper to keep quiet - you know, kinda like how Terry McCaullif gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Andrew McCabe's wife's campaign when she ran for office while McCabe was investigating HRC's private email server - pure coincidence, nothing more.
Hello Russian troll, we aren't listening anymore. These "what about... !!!" posts are so tired and pointless. I know, your point is to goad people into some pointless discussion where you throw trigger words at them, with the end goal of upsetting people and sowing division. It's not working anymore. Come up with some new tactics.
They don't "sell or give away" your information, they merely "share it [sic]" ( with companies that pay them ) . See, that's clearly different./s
Who do you think you are quoting? Hint: it's not Sandberg. Here's what she actually said (I had to click through one more link):
Sandberg said Facebook doesn't sell or give away its users' information to advertisers, even though "our service depends on your data." She said some businesses want to do "targeted ads" and have them shown to certain users, so Facebook does allow that — but she insisted no individual information is passed onto advertisers.
And by "data" they mean "information" and by "share" they mean "sell" -- if that wasn't actually clear. So, that settles that. Thanks Sheryl.
And you are quoting the article that's summarizing the interview (rather poorly), not anything from the interview itself. Here's the quote where that came from:
Sandberg said Facebook doesn't sell or give away its users' information to advertisers, even though "our service depends on your data." She said some businesses want to do "targeted ads" and have them shown to certain users, so Facebook does allow that — but she insisted no individual information is passed onto advertisers.
"Mr. Zuckerberg, would you sell private data from your own grandmother . . . "
Whether it fits your narrative or not, they don't sell your data. This is stated by them, but it's also common sense. Your data is their pile of gold. If they sell it it lessens their ability to profit from it.
That's one of the reason you'll see them crack down on things like Cambridge Analytica: they don't want someone other than Facebook profiting from your user data.
Sanctimonious hyperbole only goes so far when tinged with hypocrisy.
Nah, it's really quite simple. Hold everyone accountable fairly and evenly. If the admin of Obama's era failed to hold him accountable, they either didn't have a reason or otherwise chose not to for some reason I don't know. That doesn't change our current situation.
Why should anyone be held accountable besides Facebook?
I agree for the most part. I don't think there's any crime. Even by Facebook. This is more about opening peoples' eyes. People want to know how they were manipulated and to what ends.
Just make the HL3 release SteamOS exclusive for early release, 3 months later release it for Windows and Xbox One.
Why? Why does Valve even care where their games are played, let alone why would a publisher sacrifice the majority of the sales that happen before or on release day. I'm asking a serious question.
For eight years following Obama's election, a Democrat was the head of the executive branch of the US government, within which is the Department of Justice.
And during that same period, a certain democratic senator was raked over the coals for Benghazi (and many other things). It's weird isn't it? They were able to persecute H but you heard nothing about Obama's apparent harvesting and use of private citizen's data against their will?
Oh, and remember Mr. Clinton's transgressions with a Ms. Lewinsky? Somehow we had public hearings on that in spite of he himself being the head of the executive branch! How did that happen?
Actually at this point there's lots of what I'd class as AA and AAA titles that are on Linux. It sometimes takes a bit to get them ported but a surprising percentage of my Steam library works under Linux. Borderlands series, Bioshock series, Metro series, XCOM and XCOM2, Rocket League (maybe not AAA, but it's the best value I've ever gotten for $20 - 400+ hours in so far...), etc.
And that's not good enough for a gamer. They want AAA titles, when they are released. They want them as good or better of an FPS as windows. They want them to run w/ the same stability as windows.
Windows gaming PCs are a thing. They are well understood and documented. There's just no incentive to try something else that is known to not work as well. Gamers don't care about FOSS they just want Overwatch not to crash out in the middle of a rated match.
What if I told you that you can condemn Facebook and call Obama's campaign and Cambridge Analytica symptoms of the disease...
1. Two wrongs don't make a right. We don't ignore a crime just because someone else committed the same crime.
2. Please hold your elected officials accountable for not prosecuting Obama et al. next time. It was (and is) a republican controlled fed. I'd look long and hard at who you vote for if you think they are letting such heinous crimes go unpunished.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure he failed to denounce Nazi's
Okay, so why did you respond and say I was "insane" for suggesting that? Sheesh what a waste of time.
when what you mean is "Failed to denounce Nazi's and say it was OK for Antifa to engage in violent acts because Nazis."
No, I don't mean that. Are you telling me it would have been hard to say something like: "I vehemently disagree with the values and actions of the pro-white power (neo-Nazi) protesters but support they right to organize and march. The violent actions taken by Antifa are never appropriate."
Wow, that was hard. I didn't even have 20 speech writers to assist me.
We don't have to guess.
https://projects.fivethirtyeig...
your ability to produce the stream of drive-by one-liners littering your comment history.
You do realize, your post consists of exactly one line of original text, right? Otherwise you just lazily pasted an excerpt of the law and hoped people would be outraged because it's more than one line and contains legalese.
One of my local ISPs blocks email that is not spam.
Interesting business model, but okay.
It is in violation of this law.
Welcome to the US of A, where we have judges, and juries presiding over trials. That is where your silly hypotheticals get thrown out.
Who do the schools start paying for internet when they can't get it for free from Comcast?
Won't someone think of the children?
Their deplorables though so must not register in your worldview.
And people change their minds, and they have.
PS, "their" != "they are". Who am I to judge though? I'm sure your English is much better than my Russian.
Failed to denounce Nazis? Are you insane?
Not insane, just not in a coma like you must have been.
https://www.theguardian.com/us...
Yes, laws are complex. Who knew?
You're right. None of what he's done is probably irreparable.
But anyway, back to your plan. So you'd elect Trump so he'd do things like fail to denounce Nazis, which would really trigger those SJWs, haha?
Not one Trump voter in the country is now thinking to themselves "wow, Facebook tricked me into voting for Trump!". All of these BS excuses are nothing but delusions to avoid facing the reality of being rejected.
You should read up on how advertising works. You might find it enlightening.
And they were cool with it when it was the Obama campaign scraping the data.
Hi Troll. I see you've reached line item #347 on your list of "Liberal Triggers". This one is pretty weak though. I'd suggest you follow up with #544, which is "Hilary responsible for Benghazi". Good luck!
The only reason anyone cares about this is now because the data helped Trump. It's laughable when you think about it.
You're right, people hate Trump and the thought of helping him turns their stomachs.
In Silicon Valley, being the most SJW-infested place on Eath, anything that touches Trump is toxic. When FB is now seen as being directly responsible for the election of Trump, these people found themselves in danger of "never work in this town" by association. They are probably better off putting prison time on their resume that admitting they worked on FB.
False. Money drives SV. If you can code (or whatever), no one gives a crap you are hired. Nobody cares about your politics.
When are you going to accept that YOU and YOUR toxic politics are responsible for Trump being elected? We weren't voting for Trump, we were voting to reject YOU.
Great. You elected a toxic 'tard that's doing irreparable harm to our nation to counter the vast, VAST minority of liberals that fall into the SJW category? You sir have been fooled by something that's well known to most people. It's called a vocal minority.
Unless the answer is zero, this is just feel-good nonsense.
Reality takes place in the gray area between your black and white. Feel free to join us when you are ready.
This seems to be an investigation into trump's personal attorney giving $130K to a stripper to keep quiet - you know, kinda like how Terry McCaullif gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Andrew McCabe's wife's campaign when she ran for office while McCabe was investigating HRC's private email server - pure coincidence, nothing more.
Hello Russian troll, we aren't listening anymore. These "what about ... !!!" posts are so tired and pointless. I know, your point is to goad people into some pointless discussion where you throw trigger words at them, with the end goal of upsetting people and sowing division. It's not working anymore. Come up with some new tactics.
They don't "sell or give away" your information, they merely "share it [sic]" ( with companies that pay them ) . See, that's clearly different. /s
Who do you think you are quoting? Hint: it's not Sandberg. Here's what she actually said (I had to click through one more link):
Sandberg said Facebook doesn't sell or give away its users' information to advertisers, even though "our service depends on your data." She said some businesses want to do "targeted ads" and have them shown to certain users, so Facebook does allow that — but she insisted no individual information is passed onto advertisers.
And by "data" they mean "information" and by "share" they mean "sell" -- if that wasn't actually clear. So, that settles that. Thanks Sheryl.
And you are quoting the article that's summarizing the interview (rather poorly), not anything from the interview itself. Here's the quote where that came from:
Sandberg said Facebook doesn't sell or give away its users' information to advertisers, even though "our service depends on your data." She said some businesses want to do "targeted ads" and have them shown to certain users, so Facebook does allow that — but she insisted no individual information is passed onto advertisers.
"Mr. Zuckerberg, would you sell private data from your own grandmother . . . "
Whether it fits your narrative or not, they don't sell your data. This is stated by them, but it's also common sense. Your data is their pile of gold. If they sell it it lessens their ability to profit from it.
That's one of the reason you'll see them crack down on things like Cambridge Analytica: they don't want someone other than Facebook profiting from your user data.
Sanctimonious hyperbole only goes so far when tinged with hypocrisy.
Nah, it's really quite simple. Hold everyone accountable fairly and evenly. If the admin of Obama's era failed to hold him accountable, they either didn't have a reason or otherwise chose not to for some reason I don't know. That doesn't change our current situation.
Why should anyone be held accountable besides Facebook?
I agree for the most part. I don't think there's any crime. Even by Facebook. This is more about opening peoples' eyes. People want to know how they were manipulated and to what ends.
Just make the HL3 release SteamOS exclusive for early release, 3 months later release it for Windows and Xbox One.
Why? Why does Valve even care where their games are played, let alone why would a publisher sacrifice the majority of the sales that happen before or on release day. I'm asking a serious question.
For eight years following Obama's election, a Democrat was the head of the executive branch of the US government, within which is the Department of Justice.
And during that same period, a certain democratic senator was raked over the coals for Benghazi (and many other things). It's weird isn't it? They were able to persecute H but you heard nothing about Obama's apparent harvesting and use of private citizen's data against their will?
Oh, and remember Mr. Clinton's transgressions with a Ms. Lewinsky? Somehow we had public hearings on that in spite of he himself being the head of the executive branch! How did that happen?
Sheesh.
Actually at this point there's lots of what I'd class as AA and AAA titles that are on Linux. It sometimes takes a bit to get them ported but a surprising percentage of my Steam library works under Linux. Borderlands series, Bioshock series, Metro series, XCOM and XCOM2, Rocket League (maybe not AAA, but it's the best value I've ever gotten for $20 - 400+ hours in so far...), etc.
And that's not good enough for a gamer. They want AAA titles, when they are released. They want them as good or better of an FPS as windows. They want them to run w/ the same stability as windows.
Windows gaming PCs are a thing. They are well understood and documented. There's just no incentive to try something else that is known to not work as well. Gamers don't care about FOSS they just want Overwatch not to crash out in the middle of a rated match.
What if I told you that you can condemn Facebook and call Obama's campaign and Cambridge Analytica symptoms of the disease...
1. Two wrongs don't make a right. We don't ignore a crime just because someone else committed the same crime.
2. Please hold your elected officials accountable for not prosecuting Obama et al. next time. It was (and is) a republican controlled fed. I'd look long and hard at who you vote for if you think they are letting such heinous crimes go unpunished.
YES. Yes, you dummy. Duh.
uses artificial intelligence to interpret video imagery and could be used to improve the targeting of drone strikes
Isn't improved targeting a good thing? Like, kill the bad guys not civilians?