GHFigs

11 ms·

61.
by GHFigs 12y ago
It seems that people don't want a factual news source. Ding ding ding! What we call news is mostly consumed for entertainment and identity-reenforcement/social currency, so that's what the news business serves up. It's
62.
by GHFigs 12y ago
Based on this: ...it's really painful on times when I have a lack of self-confidence. I think it may even become dangerous later. I suggest reading these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_anxiety_disorder ht
63.
by GHFigs 12y ago
<fanboy>With MuPDF it peaks at 15MiB. http://www.mupdf.com/ </fanboy>
64.
by GHFigs 12y ago
Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly != freedom to be completely ignored until you do something wrong. I'll inline my other comment: Mass gatherings of any kind are a public safety issue, and an organized nation-wide protest wit
65.
by GHFigs 12y ago
That's bullshit, though. Mass gatherings of any kind are a public safety issue, and an organized nation-wide protest with anarchist overtones is hardly the least likely to result in violence and property damage. For police to not g
66.
by GHFigs 12y ago
youtube-dl also has a --recode-video option that takes ogg or webm.
67.
by GHFigs 12y ago
"Cracking down" is a gross exaggeration of what the documents actually describe. Naomi Wolf's column is essentially blogspam of a press release by the "Partnership for Civil Justice Fund", which cherry-picks and sex
68.
by GHFigs 12y ago
You can't not-fight in here! This is the Internet!
69.
by GHFigs 12y ago
But I do think that occasional undeserved distractions because of the name are inevitable, and I could imagine them being a real problem. Have you considered the possibility that you're being that distraction and creating that pr
70.
by GHFigs 12y ago
They're okay with it because the competition (e.g. Huffington Post, Business Insider, BuzzFeed) built their brands on aggregating terrible content. It works.
71.
by GHFigs 12y ago
What are you trying to say, exactly? If you're trying to say I'm unfamiliar with feminism, you're wrong. If you're trying to say that feminism isn't an ideology, you've made the poor choice of suggesting an art
72.
.su(en.wikipedia.org)
5 points by GHFigs 12y ago|0 comments
73.
by GHFigs 12y ago
Article conflates feminism with women. Not all women are Feminist or seek to be. Women are human beings and should be treated as such. Feminism is an ideology and should be treated as such. Why confuse people by taking about them like they&
74.
by GHFigs 12y ago
Getting into Harvard.
75.
by GHFigs 12y ago
usually isn't this to counter an argument like "poor people think/act/do certain ways" No. Privilege is by definition[1] not something you can control, ergo not something you say or do. It doesn't have to be
76.
by GHFigs 12y ago
Even if he wasn't actually facing it - he was still being pressured with it
77.
by GHFigs 13y ago
Especially when the story broke there was a lot of outrage about (accidentally) spying at US citizens, but spying at non-US citizens and breaking foreign law in peacetime is deemed acceptable. What did you used to think foreign intelligen
78.
by GHFigs 13y ago
Sure, who knows what the BND is up to. Just a reminder: "In an interview with Der Spiegel , Snowden claimed that the NSA provided German intelligence, with analysis tools to help the organisation monitor data flowing through Germany.
79.
by GHFigs 13y ago
Hundreds of dollars on licensing?
80.
by GHFigs 13y ago
The issue here is that only a tiny percentage of the information transmitted is of interest to someone doing surveilance. Yes, exactly! And the document in question even states what that percentage is .
81.
by GHFigs 13y ago
nobody has data accurate enough to determine them with any real certainty You mean, other than, y'know...a classified document by the NSA describing what proportion of estimated total internet traffic they look at?
82.
by GHFigs 13y ago
I read the article and rejected its assertions as speculative horseshit, yes. What of it? The original document cites a figure (1862 petabytes) and two percentages (1.6% and 0.00004%) of that figure. The math is not hard.
83.
by GHFigs 13y ago
"The net effect is that NSA analysts look at 0.00004% of the world's traffic in conducting their mission – that's less than one part in a million." Weird how direct quotes from leaked documents sound less bad than the
84.
by GHFigs 13y ago
Can nobody see the cause and effect here? Danger! Danger! Narrative fallacy ahead! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrative_fallacy#The_narrative... None of their infrastructure would be getting forced exposure from t
85.
by GHFigs 13y ago
21,000 Users Impacted in the US The report does not tell you the country of the user accounts impacted, only the origin of the request.
86.
by GHFigs 13y ago
Per capita is misleading, as the report does not tell you the country of the user for which data was requested. If, for instance, Facebook were providing data on a non-US user, that would be counted as a US request.
87.
by GHFigs 13y ago
Note that this includes all requests from local, state, and any federal agency, for any data. It also only tells you the country of origin for the request, not the country of the user for which data was requested.
88.
by GHFigs 13y ago
I've got a better argument: Go back to Reddit, because things are better there now than they are here.
89.
by GHFigs 13y ago
The slug says "us-blocks-espionage-talks...", while the actual title is: "UK blocks crucial espionage talks between US and Europe."
90.
by GHFigs 13y ago
obviously a political manhunt Are you suggesting that Snowden was charged with a crime for his politics and not his actions?

More ›