2804t3qwp

4 ms·

1.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
If it's a great value then why isn't that effort being directed entirely towards google products? I get the argument you're making I think, that it's free valuable labor. But if that's true then what explanation is
2.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
I'd need to know what you mean by manipulative and why it seems negative in this context, I apologize because I feel like that might seem sort of pedantic but education as a field has a very large collection of practices that could eas
3.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
I agree that none of the examples I gave would lose much of their impact, but I'd argue that's also not directly tied in to the ovarching point I was trying to express (though obviously I expressed it badly or else that's whe
4.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
>What is material that is supposed to capitalize on surprise? It's a hard one to answer but I'll give the answers I can from my time in university. It's hard mostly because each instructor handles the material differently
5.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
Why is this a consent issue? Lots of intro to sociology classes do a lesson on the Nacirema, race and violence are massive components of studying mid 20th century literature, and plenty of other fields of study have lessons that are meant t
6.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
It feels like wasted effort in this context then. The article talks a lot about the university setting specifically, you can't just not engage with your course material and expect to have the same educational outcomes as someone who di
7.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
If you're not interested in debating their intentions then why frame it as a donation? That by itself is a normative judgement in this context, and the reason I brought up framing, since normally two primary characteristics of a donati
8.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
I'm curious to know why you feel like regulation and standards are the solution here. It seems fairly clear that the propaganda metagame heavily favors disinformation and is only getting better at creating disinformation products. If w
9.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
It sounds like the idea that it's a donation is the part where we fundamentally disagree then. If you expose an unpatched exploit and the number of people using that exploit goes up because of your publication then you've contribu
10.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
I think this really comes down to expectations. Imo, Tesla is a luxury brand. I get that some people feel like the Model 3 is a Tesla for the common man but the common man is either buying used or they're buying something that can be r
11.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
This is a fair criticism, and in line with the comment I replied to, but I still don't know if I agree with the overall sentiment of cynacism. While I'll give you the leaks about Prism/Five Eyes/Mail Espionage (the origi
12.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
From what you've said it seems like the difference is more an issue of framing. You're focused on the effects for the end user, which are the same no matter what in my opinion and I agree on that. At the same time, if you're
13.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
I'd like to hear more about this if you don't mind expounding on it some. I realize that in a certain light that's how it looks (I'm no stranger to a lot of what used to be called conspiracy theories, including the long
14.
by 2804t3qwp 7y ago
It's only a donation if you assume the vulnerability is not cutting edge, otherwise it doesn't seem unfair to label the disclosure as corrosive to the current zeitgeist in terms of user safety. Just because you've managed to