ar-jan

12 ms·

1. 61.▲
   by ar-jan 7y ago

   I just said I'd prefer less partisan stuff, and you accuse me of wanting more? Does not follow.
2. 62.▲
   by ar-jan 7y ago

   Thanks for the link. Unfortunately I didn't save the article I was referencing, but if I recall correctly it talked about obtaining data without the users being aware of it.
3. 63.▲
   by ar-jan 7y ago

   You're not wrong, but I think it's a missed opportunity. At least for this article, which does discuss other things beyond just the documentary.
4. 64.▲
   by ar-jan 7y ago

   For one, it's common to discuss closely related topics in threads like these. I also believe that the topic of surveillance capitalism would get a better reception if it was less partisan. There's a lot of talk about Trump in ther
5. 65.▲
   by ar-jan 7y ago

   I remember that a little while after it first came out that Cambridge Analytica had abused Facebook data, an insider (from Facebook?) wrote a piece about how it was even worse before. That companies used to be able to siphon off much larger
6. 66.▲
   by ar-jan 7y ago

   I can believe Google is attempting to de-emphasize scandals on both sides. As an aside, I do get "russia investigation" as autosuggestion for trump. I think the bigger problem is that these adjustment appear to be done manually. W
7. 67.▲
   by ar-jan 7y ago

   For me "donald trump ru" autosuggests "russia investigation" (4th place). Compared with absence of "email" even for "hillary clinton emai".
8. 68.▲
   by ar-jan 7y ago

   You're misrepresenting my claim. 1. I said "only for Clinton" in the contect of Trump vs Clinton. Then I compared to other U.S. politicians, where the example still holds. The intended meaning is perfectly clear. 2. Obviously
9. 69.▲
   by ar-jan 7y ago

   That's the point: this is not research, but whatever is going on at Google, the explanation has to account for examples like these. It's simply one observation that you cannot discount. I just tried searching again a few times wit
10. 70.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    Well, that's kind of the point: it's not scientific, but it's relevant. I believe this was also the example that was recently used in a Project Veritas video, with the same results. I searched from a Firefox private window ov
11. 71.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    Google's claim that the algorithm is generic is demonstrably false. Type in "hillary clinton e" and there is no suggestion for "email", type "donald trump e" and email is the first suggestion. Given the ne
12. 72.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    I live in the Netherlands, where a significant area is below sea level. While the safety of your house is relevant, I think the bigger question is what would happen to the economy and infrastructure. That said, I think current alarmist pred
13. 73.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    > Large debris are just the tip of the iceberg. One reason for The Ocean Cleanup's current work is to get the larger parts now, before they degrade to microplastics.
14. 74.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    > LDL-c is bad. Is it really? For example: Ravnskov, Uffe, Michel de Lorgeril, David M. Diamond, Rokuro Hama, Tomohito Hamazaki, Björn Hammarskjöld, Niamh Hynes, et al. 2018. “LDL-C Does Not Cause Cardiovascular Disease: A Comprehensive
15. 75.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    My my Hacker News! How dare I link to an actual C-SPAN video, huh? Downvote away! Ignorance is bliss!
16. 76.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    Interesting how they're sidestepping the actually rather disfluent speech from Pelosi that prompted questions. Compare https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/1131242531503534080 with the C-SPAN video: http
17. 77.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    It does matter, because it makes sense to focus on the biggest contributors to emissions, where the most gains could be made. The current thinking goes we should eat "less or no meat", when the effort could be put towards not usin
18. 78.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    I suggest you also read Steinfeld's own correction regarding the 2006 claim that livestock accounts for 18% of GHG emissions: "The comparison measures direct emissions from transport against both direct and indirect emissions from
19. 79.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    Let's also look at greenhouse gases in general: "According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the largest sources of U.S. GHG emissions in 2016 were electricity production (28 percent of total emissions), transportation
20. 80.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    I'm keeping an eye on https://github.com/aquametalabs/aquameta "Web development platform built entirely in PostgreSQL"
21. 81.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    I wonder if they're also removing the apps used to control women's lives in Saudi Arabia.
22. 82.▲
    by ar-jan 7y ago

    It's interesting that you present Butina's case as having been a fair trial. Her "crime" was basically naive, opportunistic networking with influential people (all of which was done publicly and even documented publicly
23. 83.▲
    by ar-jan 8y ago

    I've used OVH for several years (a few small Cloud VPSes). Never had any outages, but their web interface is very complex and unintuitive. I left because they messed up billing, then immediately threatened to delete my servers within h
24. 84.▲
    by ar-jan 8y ago

    Suggestion: also add a link to the original research article (not just the newspaper article or press release etc. that's being summarized). This would be very helpful.
25. 85.▲
    by ar-jan 8y ago

    The issue is that even a huge ecosystem like the Amazon, which we tend to consider "natural", has in fact been heavily shaped by humans.
26. 86.▲
    by ar-jan 8y ago

    That's a fair point, but then the question is what should the question be? There are many subfields and disciplines of linguistics all of which are imo fascinating. In theoretical/generative linguistics the distinction between acc
27. 87.▲
    by ar-jan 8y ago

    Those example sentences linguists come up with are actually very reliable. Here's Sprouse & Almeida. 2012. Assessing the reliability of textbook data in syntax: Adger's Core Syntax. https://doi.org/10.1017&#x2F
28. 88.▲
    by ar-jan 8y ago

    Any comments on the durability and robustness of different lifting mechanisms? Somehow having the functionality of a piece of furniture depend on electricity feels wrong to me, plus there's the chance of the motor breaking.
29. 89.▲
    by ar-jan 8y ago

    But they at least have to make the effort to break into those systems. Presumably this takes more time/money than an NSL, and it possibly leads to detection of the vulnerabilities used in the hack.
30. 90.▲
    by ar-jan 8y ago

    I did, but it gave garbled content.