Sure, you can sue. You just won't get anywhere-- except maybe something like Second Life, where you actually own the intellectual property you've developed or purchased, and aren't just making a one-time payment for an added benefit to the service they're providing. It's been tried several times in the past.
It's been said before, but it should be repeated again and again: marketing. Not to you, the end user, but to Google's real clients who will fork out good money for fine-grain demographic information. This is Google's means of guaranteeing that the data they're selling is good. Someone who fills out a Facebook account as 'Dik Hz' is giong to know damn well what their ultimate source of spam and bulk mail addressed to Mr. Hertz is, and will be inclined to just toss it at first glance. Mail and e-mail that are properly addressed, but from unknown agencies, are still enough to get past people's bullshit filters. Throw in an algorithm that sorts out what you're likely to buy into, and you've got a marketing pot of gold.
Being fuckheads over real names and account deletions are Google's way of rapping on your door and saying, 'Those services of ours you've been using for so long? Yeah. We just need a tiny favor from youse in order to keep this business relationship running smoothly. Capisce?
If people were known by their real identity then suddenly one part of the greater internet fuckwad theory falls away. Suddenly everyone can see just what a pimple on the ass of humanity you really are when you troll a forum.
A part that shows that the 'theory' is bunk. It's not anonymity that allows and encourages people to be assholes on-line. People are assholes to each other on the highway, on the sidewalk, in the schoolyard and in the home. The only difference that the Internet makes is that it's harder to get back at them. You can't take a swing at someone over TCP/IP. If they're being an asshole from across state lines, or even from across the city, are you really likely to track them down and confront them about what they said about your daughter?
As for being banned from services, forums and the like-- come on. Most of the time it's not a matter of repeat offenders sneaking back in, it's the insane ratio of users to admins, complicated by huge numbers of users and the often spurious complaints they generate per day. Look at Facebook: the amount of TOS-violating shit (including illegalities, sexism, racism and other things we pretend don't happen in polite society) that slurps through their pipes on a daily basis is virtually incalculable. Does Jimmy Crackerfuck really care that somebody is offended by how much he hates Latinos and East Indians? No. Hell, he may even get off on the attention.
The article identifies ONE well-selling book. Amazon has been doing print-on-demand and e-publishing for thousands of hacks already, and even for some algorithms that do nothing but mash Wikipedia pages together. I really wouldn't be surprised if this ends up working more as leverage for those services than to pounce on the next big authors.
Yes, you're being ridiculous. Your finances, your shopping habits, and your unfortunate timing are not Sony's problem. Nor is your decision to spend several hundred dollars on an entertainment console when most of your 'rebuttal' revolves around your cash flow problems.
You want money back? Pack the thing up and try to get a refund from wherever you got it from. Don't expect the retailer to have much sympathy either.
Pretty much. Nintendo jumped on the 3D bandwagon and, like the rest of the entertainment industry is realizing, it isn't a gimmick that people are interested in paying a premium for.
Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. It's an intimidation tactic, threatening to bury the target under an insurmountable mass of legal fees even before the suit can go ahead.
Honestly, I think the term's fallen out of use because so goddamn many suits are the result of this tactic now.
Usually when someone has their head shoved that far up their own ass, the most you can hear is a bit of muffled shouting.
This is even sillier than chasing after Chrome's UI and release naming structure. As someone else pointed out, it really is much like what happened to Netscape at the end: browser development became second to running a web portal (which this buzzword layer cake sounds like) and they became also-rans almost overnight.
Missing a critical point is a common theme in Haselton's opinion dumps. I used to have a lot of support for him when he was raising the alarm on Cybersitter and the specter of censorware with very strong political leanings, but he went out to lunch years ago and hasn't come back.
As long as I can still get my tabs and shit below the even-more-goddamn-awesomebar, and put a status bar addon in, I'm not going to complain. Default layouts are fine-- it's when you suddenly can't modify them any more that I start to get tetchy.
Seriously, this is 'Will Wave Eat E-Mail' all over again. No. It has long strings attached. It has plenty of bells and whistles, but this is comparing apples and fruit baskets, or a can opener with a Swiss army knife. Sometimes all you want is an apple for your teacher, and sure you can cut meat, whittle wood, read fine print, tweeze splinters and even open cans with your knife, but it'll be faster and cheaper if you just go out to the kitchen and use the tool that was designed for that and nothing else.
He writes tortured metaphors about katana-wielding Mafia pizza delivery men, and pulls endings out of his ass. Referencing mathematicians and writing novels that appeal to backpatting nerds doesn't make him a genius, it just makes him aware of his audience.
I really wasn't impressed with having my circle suggestions pre-populated with people I've exchanged messages with through gmail. I was even less impressed when I tried to change some settings to 'only me' and they consistently reset to the 'circle' and 'global' level.
Then I remembered that I prefer to make people work for this sort of data, so I killed my Google+ account and public profile.
Then the next morning I was still getting e-mail from the service because someone had added me to their circle.
Nah. They made a play for people's souls, but millions Liked the 'plz dont take my soul FB' group page and they backed off. Everyone expects them to try it again sometime soon, though.
I said the same thing months ago, but I don't have anywhere near the developer cred that Bartle does. These games are 'social' in the same way that leaving a post-it note on the fridge, asking your roommate to take the trash out, is social. Contact is brief and through a silent third party, with no opportunity for extended communication (negotiation, clarification, etc.) without going through a totally different third party such as e-mail, telephone, or Facebook messaging.
The platform may be social, but the games in practice quite often are not. Players perform an end run on the 'beg other players for X of Y material' mechanic by registering shill accounts to work for themselves, or applying themselves to vast lists of other players that they don't know, who end up merely pressing the occasional button for one another without pursuing contact beyond those mechanical benefits.
Re:Is this why I am getting worse results
on
Google's New Design
·
· Score: 1
Swear to god, I just plugged 'shit' into Google to see if they got rid of cache links (like the last experiment they foisted off on a number of users).
Safe Search was off. Totally, 100% off. The results I received were for shih tsu dogs, and the search bar had the temerity to suggest that 'shit' was misspelled.
Christ almighty. When I turn safe-search off and enter a query like that, I know what I'm getting into! What's next, showing me pictures of nannies, billies and kids when I search for goatse?
Slashdot Mirror
It's four words. Jesus, get a grip on yourself.
Sure, you can sue. You just won't get anywhere-- except maybe something like Second Life, where you actually own the intellectual property you've developed or purchased, and aren't just making a one-time payment for an added benefit to the service they're providing. It's been tried several times in the past.
Being fuckheads over real names and account deletions are Google's way of rapping on your door and saying, 'Those services of ours you've been using for so long? Yeah. We just need a tiny favor from youse in order to keep this business relationship running smoothly. Capisce?
They really should. 'Yo' and 'Dawg' are clearly gang-related language.
If people were known by their real identity then suddenly one part of the greater internet fuckwad theory falls away. Suddenly everyone can see just what a pimple on the ass of humanity you really are when you troll a forum.
A part that shows that the 'theory' is bunk. It's not anonymity that allows and encourages people to be assholes on-line. People are assholes to each other on the highway, on the sidewalk, in the schoolyard and in the home. The only difference that the Internet makes is that it's harder to get back at them. You can't take a swing at someone over TCP/IP. If they're being an asshole from across state lines, or even from across the city, are you really likely to track them down and confront them about what they said about your daughter?
As for being banned from services, forums and the like-- come on. Most of the time it's not a matter of repeat offenders sneaking back in, it's the insane ratio of users to admins, complicated by huge numbers of users and the often spurious complaints they generate per day. Look at Facebook: the amount of TOS-violating shit (including illegalities, sexism, racism and other things we pretend don't happen in polite society) that slurps through their pipes on a daily basis is virtually incalculable. Does Jimmy Crackerfuck really care that somebody is offended by how much he hates Latinos and East Indians? No. Hell, he may even get off on the attention.
The article identifies ONE well-selling book. Amazon has been doing print-on-demand and e-publishing for thousands of hacks already, and even for some algorithms that do nothing but mash Wikipedia pages together. I really wouldn't be surprised if this ends up working more as leverage for those services than to pounce on the next big authors.
You want money back? Pack the thing up and try to get a refund from wherever you got it from. Don't expect the retailer to have much sympathy either.
Pretty much. Nintendo jumped on the 3D bandwagon and, like the rest of the entertainment industry is realizing, it isn't a gimmick that people are interested in paying a premium for.
I'm sorry, I couldn't understand you with Kurzweil's dick in your mouth.
Honestly, I think the term's fallen out of use because so goddamn many suits are the result of this tactic now.
This is even sillier than chasing after Chrome's UI and release naming structure. As someone else pointed out, it really is much like what happened to Netscape at the end: browser development became second to running a web portal (which this buzzword layer cake sounds like) and they became also-rans almost overnight.
Missing a critical point is a common theme in Haselton's opinion dumps. I used to have a lot of support for him when he was raising the alarm on Cybersitter and the specter of censorware with very strong political leanings, but he went out to lunch years ago and hasn't come back.
As long as I can still get my tabs and shit below the even-more-goddamn-awesomebar, and put a status bar addon in, I'm not going to complain. Default layouts are fine-- it's when you suddenly can't modify them any more that I start to get tetchy.
Seriously, this is 'Will Wave Eat E-Mail' all over again. No. It has long strings attached. It has plenty of bells and whistles, but this is comparing apples and fruit baskets, or a can opener with a Swiss army knife. Sometimes all you want is an apple for your teacher, and sure you can cut meat, whittle wood, read fine print, tweeze splinters and even open cans with your knife, but it'll be faster and cheaper if you just go out to the kitchen and use the tool that was designed for that and nothing else.
He writes tortured metaphors about katana-wielding Mafia pizza delivery men, and pulls endings out of his ass. Referencing mathematicians and writing novels that appeal to backpatting nerds doesn't make him a genius, it just makes him aware of his audience.
C'mon. Do you really expect the straight shit from John 'the players know too much, ban them!' Working-As-Intended-Smedley?
Then I remembered that I prefer to make people work for this sort of data, so I killed my Google+ account and public profile.
Then the next morning I was still getting e-mail from the service because someone had added me to their circle.
"I am Guybrush Threepwood, mighty hacker!"
Insert joke about bitcoins here.
Nah. They made a play for people's souls, but millions Liked the 'plz dont take my soul FB' group page and they backed off. Everyone expects them to try it again sometime soon, though.
"You didn't think I asked for a twelve inch pianist, did you?"
Given the proportion of prong to bug, that noise you're hearing is sheer pride.
The platform may be social, but the games in practice quite often are not. Players perform an end run on the 'beg other players for X of Y material' mechanic by registering shill accounts to work for themselves, or applying themselves to vast lists of other players that they don't know, who end up merely pressing the occasional button for one another without pursuing contact beyond those mechanical benefits.
Safe Search was off. Totally, 100% off. The results I received were for shih tsu dogs, and the search bar had the temerity to suggest that 'shit' was misspelled.
Christ almighty. When I turn safe-search off and enter a query like that, I know what I'm getting into! What's next, showing me pictures of nannies, billies and kids when I search for goatse?
Wanna know what's worse? The guy probably just had a reversion script running.