harry8

38 ms·

541.
by harry8 3y ago
should have been "new" seems to have been typoed or autocorrected in error to "be." Meh. Maybe the word with the mistake and possible correction are not as obvious as they appear to their author, hope that helps.
542.
by harry8 3y ago
I'm saying that if you want to make 3D soundscapes, we've had that tech for many decades. Headphones work for this. But I'll continue and say headphones /will/ also be superior for that purpose to anything using spe
543.
by harry8 3y ago
Can't find it now but recall an Eno quote about loathing audiophiles because they use your music to listen to their system. 3D sound with be tech? Like really? I don't remember Eno being an idiot. He's aware of the existence
544.
by harry8 3y ago
Because hotels really are as bad for purpose as they are expensive?
545.
by harry8 3y ago
so I tried a url that works on my local network and is in my history, bookmarks etc. Every single one of those modifiers sent that hostname with the modifier to my default search engine. Maybe it doesn't play nicely, or at all with pri
546.
by harry8 3y ago
It's not "there are" it's "how many" How many before you start to get uncomfortable? Nominate your number. Then look. edit for obvious explanation: The military links would be of more concern if these co.s were
547.
by harry8 3y ago
In a separate but related news item, how many "former" CIA, FBI & NSA operatives are now employed at Twitter, Google & Facebook? Check it out, it's /nuts/.
548.
by harry8 3y ago
>Why is this data even available? Why is it legal to collect any of it, at all, ever? Why is their zero liability associated with collecting it?
549.
by harry8 3y ago
>How often does this actually happen? Did you hear about Aaron Schwartz?
550.
by harry8 3y ago
I'll bet you a signed dollar it is not being run as a multi-server, microkernel based OS. I'd go further and say L4 being designed as microkernel is nothing more than an amusing piece of trivia in it's use by Apple and that t
551.
by harry8 3y ago
They don't care about impersonation at all but yes it happens as is evidenced in this very thread. What they want is for the majority of punters using google to search for the url for xyz corp to click the ad for that url rather than t
552.
by harry8 3y ago
So there'd be no issue in google getting ads well away and separate from search results in an obvious way like they use to. Wouldn't hurt their revenue in that case. Top result is actually the result you were looking for. Ads to t
553.
by harry8 3y ago
Best of luck to you in your quest for understanding.
554.
by harry8 3y ago
I could literally not care less about google's policy, as enforced by google. It is of zero relevance nor significance to anything at all. Google have deliberately made ads much harder to distinguish from results. They have done so for
555.
by harry8 3y ago
> What zealotry? The headline has been silently edited, hence the confusion. I don't much care for silent editing for just this reason.
556.
by harry8 3y ago
Way to bury the lede. Like gitbook but Free. The rust zealotry put me right off fwiw. As it does my interest in the language itself. I wish those guys would calm down they're totally detracting from whatever the strengths of rust are w
557.
by harry8 3y ago
Ever tried to put in an ad for your competitor with your phone number? Its telecoms, it's regulated.
558.
by harry8 3y ago
Not my claim. Why would you say it was? Strange. I'm looking for data as evidence of the claim made by google that paying them is worthwhile which I don't see much of. So yeah you can update your prior with "people pay for it
559.
by harry8 3y ago
Yellow pages is regulated and static - the same for everyone. Perhaps this is the answer for how to treat google? Regulate them heavily and ensure they show the same thing to everyone? Interesting suggestion you're making.
560.
by harry8 3y ago
The condescension is unnecessary and against the guidelines around here. Did the phone company put your calls through to your competitor if you paid them to do that or would they be in big trouble for doing so. It's not "advertisi
561.
by harry8 3y ago
so why do you think companies buy their own trade marked brands as keywords so that they can pay google for their organic traffic? Because they're idiots? Why do you think google moved the ads from the side where they were clearly mark
562.
by harry8 3y ago
Your client data? No never asked for it. Any data, from anywhere relating to this, ie showing google ads success. Google publishing success stories maybe? Anything. Conversation works better if you don't claim people said things they d
563.
by harry8 3y ago
There are examples given in this very thread of people being conned by clicking the top link which was an ad interposed by google when someone was trying to get the website of their bank.
564.
by harry8 3y ago
when you rang the shop to buy, did the phone company make them pay to direct the call the way you wanted? You want your traffic? Pay /us/ for the privilege.
565.
by harry8 3y ago
But 99.999% of the time someone searching for jkl corp, gets and ad for jkl corp that jkl corp paid for and clicks it because it's at the top of the results. It's PURE google protection racket money paid by jkl corp so it gets the
566.
by harry8 3y ago
Nothing there anyone can check which makes it indistinguishable from "I know more than you and I can tell you you're wrong." That may even be correct for all I know, it's just not at all useful. Which non-internet compan
567.
by harry8 3y ago
If it was a marketing person with serious stats chops using the data to make the case I'd absolutely listen to their case. Yeah marketing serious stats chops, never seen it yet. Show us the flipping data if you want to make the case fo
568.
by harry8 3y ago
Remember when google was good and gave you "search results" as best it could instead of suggestions of things it thinks you might want? In those days the search results had a white background and appeared directly below the query
569.
by harry8 3y ago
>It's always worth a try to encourage someone to take that first step. Sure, absolutely. While keeping in mind it may not even be possible today. If it is the obvious way may be counter-productive. And the road to hell being paved t
570.
by harry8 3y ago
Someone tells you about something that absolutely commands their total attention. It's of very little consequence to you. You suggest they try something /obvious/. It's reasonable to assume they might have considered it.

More ›