wu-ikkyu

9 ms·

1.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
Because sometimes you only have seconds or milliseconds to decide how best to potentially save your own life and/or the lives of your family. Sometimes "safely escaping" is not something you have the time or option to even co
2.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
How is that comparable? Seems like a non sequitur
3.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
The violated policies were in regards to hate speech and bullying, no? How is this not a far worse case of hateful bullying?
4.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
Are you claiming only math majors are capable of understanding statistics and therefore should be the only people legally entitled to make decisions?
5.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
>the empty buildings and districts, and that mall in Beijing that is never going to attract any stores, or why the apartment buildings we live in is half empty but has a thriving ant tribe in the basement. >would never believe it was
6.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
>she will make system more human centered, more friendly to humans. I can understand her, but I cannot understand you. Any marginal increase in human friendliness this may cause is negligible because advertising in general is a inherentl
7.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
They did end up showing her an ad for adoption
8.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
We cannot have open/honest discussion or make progress if we are too concerned with making sure no one gets their feelings hurt. There has never been a successful human rights movement that was polite and didn't offend. The truth
9.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
They won't admit it but internet mobs, viral click bait, and bots are all good for FB's stock price. They all increase engagement and active user counts. Saying they should fix their "problems" by doing more policing is
10.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
Nah, money is a strong motivator, and the sale of private information on the dark net is a lucrative world wide enterprise. How could you possibly know if one anonymous party has less of an interest to make money than another, simply becaus
11.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
You're falsely presenting theory as fact, as is quite common in psychological/psychiatric discussions; social and environmental factors seem to have very strong effects/influences as well.
12.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
>It's very easy to demonise Google and think they stand to benefit from this all, but in reality they are hurt by it as much as anyone else False if bot traffic > estimated bot traffic For others like FB and Twitter, it's a
13.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
Why are you so surprised?
14.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
Why did you put tracking in quotations? >Am I the only one who doesn't worry too much about all this "tracking"? Trying to avoid tracking is like some weird obsession/hobby. A cursory glance at recent human history[1]
15.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
While that may be true in many cases the example of Iraq and WMDs is more nuanced than most realize. The CIA was not reaching the conclusions that the Bush administration wanted and so Bush and co. created the Office of Special plans in ord
16.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
I can't tell if this is a satirical post or not? >I'd rather have my data safe with the Chinese government What makes you think (y)our data wouldn't be sold to the highest global bidder or hacked? >a country that is on
17.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
In terms of end result for the individual , what difference does it make if an internet mob blacklists you from employment for thoughtcrime or if a government bureaucracy does it?
18.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
>I think this is because most people that are against it only talk about turn key tyranny Why would people discount this?
19.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
Of course. Sorting by most recent, you can only blame your friends for promoting extremism -- FB remains neutral. But when FB promotes extremist/click bait content in your feed in order to maximize engagement and profit, they're o
20.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
Despite your argument being a false analogy, a bit of a strawman, and a non sequitur -- many historians have indeed chronicled the violent societal effects of the invention of the printing press: "The effect of the discovery of printin
21.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
Scale matters . That's why mass murderers are considered worse than someone who murders just one person.
22.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
Fair enough. How do you think we should regulate these tools? Im worried that lawmakers cannot/will not truly appreciate the imminent danger of having billions of the most detailed psychological profiles in history stored in a hackable
23.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
>Well I personally owe an entire career to the fact I could learn to code for free thanks to add supported services. In my experience the sites which you pay a small monthly fee ($5-10) to are far superior
24.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
That wouldn't be so much a problem if there wasn't already such an extreme level of advertising of shitty products to begin with. It's like how advertisers often claim "the internet wouldn't exist without advertisin
25.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
>Like all powerful technology, I don't think trying to ban it is the answer. Rather, stronger regulation over how it's allowed to be used. So you don't think weapons of mass destruction should be banned?
26.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
Well for starters it's home to the greatest mass surveillance apparatuses in history. Their big data sets coupled with their algorithms used for sorting and targeting people based on race, religion, ethnicity, gender, political beliefs
27.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
>I also interested to know how much relationship there is between the accumulation of wealth in a few and war It's obvious from history that war is a way for powerful people to accumulate/consolidate power and money
28.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
I wonder how much more money/assets/favors are exchanged under the radar through offshore/shell companies
29.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
I've turned off all push notifications except calls and texts as well. It seems the internet has become way too much "push" and not enough "pull"
30.
by wu-ikkyu 8y ago
>I don't see how "the whole [assembling] to make laws" is any more possible now than in the 1700s They didn't have instanteous global omnipresence that we have today. We didn't have to travel vast physical distan

More ›