GVIrish

52 ms·

451.
by GVIrish 9y ago
> The only thing that censorship brings in this particular case is a safe space for advertisers. What??? There are people out there getting death threats, getting doxxed, being attacked with all manner of epithets on Twitter. It stands
452.
by GVIrish 9y ago
It depends on what you mean by 'personal agenda'. If someone is directing hate speech at other users, would it be pursuing a personal agenda to ban or otherwise sanction that user? It's not always easy to draw a line on cond
453.
by GVIrish 9y ago
People are getting all caught up on the idea of censorship here but it is really about what Twitter is, and what does it want to be. Does Twitter want to be a dumb pipe where it doesn't do anything at all about what people post? If th
454.
by GVIrish 9y ago
No it is not a universally Good Thing, that is an extremely facile reading of free speech. Is it a good thing if someone at your job shouts racial epithets at you all day? Should woman have to tolerate being jeered and catcalled at every p
455.
by GVIrish 9y ago
If Twitter went full 4chan it would implode. There's no way Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, or even Reddit would have gotten to the size they have if they were curated in favor of trolls. When subgroups of trolls have gotten booted from
456.
by GVIrish 9y ago
The US election system not geared towards accommodating 3rd (or more) parties in Congress in any kind of numbers that would make a difference. First-past-the-post voting basically ensures a two party result. Might not be the same two parti
457.
by GVIrish 9y ago
The reason people were/are a bit more anxious about the NSA is because the government has the ability to put you in jail. And indeed we've seen some cases of evidence collected through mass surveillance being used in criminal cas
458.
by GVIrish 9y ago
That doesn't really make any sense. Destiny is a AAA console game franchise. Some people love it, some people like it, some people hated it. But with both Destiny 1 and 2, the problem was not that it was beta quality and riddled with
459.
by GVIrish 9y ago
> Why am I paying for a game if it doesn’t have dedicated servers? Uhh, because paying several hundred people for the 2-3 years to make a AAA game costs money. Warframe is free-to-play and survives off microtransactions. Cool, that&#x27
460.
by GVIrish 9y ago
Linus is brilliant for sure, but bottom line is that you're very unlikely to run into a Linus when you're allowing a brilliant jerk into your organization. It's like yeah, a basketball team can deal with an abrasive, competi
461.
by GVIrish 9y ago
Let's say the core business is to put customer designs on various products and sell them in a marketplace. So like Etsy, but instead of the artists making everything, the artist makes the design and the marketplace business produces i
462.
by GVIrish 9y ago
You say that as if there's a guarantee that the upstarts will find a way to be profitable once they've spent several years losing money. The barriers to entry are pretty low in the t-shirt business so it's not like there&#x2
463.
by GVIrish 9y ago
I fear that what will happen is that the unemployed/underemployed masses will be manipulated into focusing their frustrations on culture wars, kinda like what is happening now and has happened in the past. 'Those people are takin
464.
by GVIrish 9y ago
The difference between jailing people and massacring people is HUGE though. I do think it's very difficult to get around the problem of people not wanting to give up private property when a society shifts into Communism. But in the fu
465.
by GVIrish 9y ago
> Elimination of exploiting classes and abolition of family are two things that certainly require massacring people. If you see any other realistic means of achieving these two points of Communist Manifesto, am all ears. I mean if you wa
466.
by GVIrish 9y ago
You're conflating communism and authoritarianism. Nothing about Communism as a concept requires massacring people. It's just that in the 20th century those who were murderous autocrats used Communism to convince their (often poo
467.
by GVIrish 9y ago
I don't think it's even that. It's just that companies don't feel like they have much to gain from taking the time to explain rejections to candidates. Same reason that often times you don't even hear back that a
468.
by GVIrish 9y ago
>> I've also got news for you: most conservatives had strong aversions to Hillary Clinton to begin with. Absolutely. >> As far as I can tell, most of the surprise in the vote turnouts came from senior citizens who were hard
469.
by GVIrish 9y ago
Except there's this little problem of federal election law that prohibits foreign nationals from buying political ads. If Twitter, Facebook, or Google knowingly accepted political ad buys from the media propaganda arm of the Russian g
470.
by GVIrish 9y ago
> The article references the number of active users as a critical piece of Twitter's valuation, but Wall Street can't be dumb enough to completely ignore the quality of those users. Someone on Wall Street is. And as long as th
471.
by GVIrish 9y ago
A significant portion of the American public would be outraged and would be screaming about censorship. Others would be elated. It would be pretty interesting to see what the response would be, because Trump would no longer have an easy, l
472.
by GVIrish 9y ago
Most of the reporting I've read on that particular point state that most of the ads were aimed at divisive social issues rather than promoting a particular candidate, not that all of them were. Maybe the fact that the majority of the
473.
by GVIrish 9y ago
> I'm no fan of Facebook, but I don't get why they're to blame for Russia's meddling in the election. Allowing a foreign national to purchase political ads is a crime. If Facebook knew the buyer for these political a
474.
by GVIrish 9y ago
Well the first problem is that is a crime to allow a foreign national (which includes companies) to purchase political ads in US campaigns (Federal Election Campaign Act). If Russia efforts to buy ads on Facebook were sufficiently masked m
475.
by GVIrish 9y ago
I'm saying most companies that think they're doing something groundbreaking that requires one-of-a-kind talent are wrong. These are the companies that put out silly job ads about how they're looking for ninjas/rockstars&
476.
by GVIrish 9y ago
> It depends so much on what you're building. If you're doing _groundbreaking_ research in, say, AI or facial recognition or whatever, you may need people who are technical superstars. I think this is true for high risk, cuttin
477.
by GVIrish 9y ago
> I think the question then becomes, how much are you willing to pay vs how much does such a service cost. Does the economy of scale factor in here? Right now most of those services ask for ~$10 a month. Expecting all of it for $10/
478.
by GVIrish 9y ago
I think the problem is deeper than 'is Autopilot better than no-Autopilot'. Is Autopilot better than no Autopilot under what conditions? Is Autopilot being marketed to customers in a way that encourages them to use it in the wro
479.
by GVIrish 9y ago
Not saying we should ignore the environmental impact, that's what I was getting at in my first sentence when I said falling off a roof and a nuclear meltdown clearly aren't the same level of event. I'm simply saying that peo
480.
by GVIrish 9y ago
Why not? The point is not that a Fukushima or Chernobyl should be considered to have the same impact as falling off roofs, clearly that's not true. The point is that the risk of death with nuclear plants isn't nearly as high as p

More ›