Reply With Quote
the ostensible point of having to zoom in to see street names is to reveal advertised locations. it's not a super big deal all by itself, but it is part of an electronic sensorium will a million finicky details like this.
I don't follow the theory here.
the ostensible point of having to zoom in to see street names is to reveal advertised locations. it's not a super big deal all by itself, but it is part of an electronic sensorium will a million finicky details like this.
Feels like a byproduct of the design rather than a goal. Not sure having every street name on a 5 square mile view of your smartphone map is a very good user experience.
The street names are all there, but don't fit, aren't readable, fittable when zoomed out.
All exposed when zooming in.
"@Aanand", hilariously stupid head.
OP is right, but not in the way he thinks
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...erberg/620478/
Google might hide the names of streets but anyone can still pick out a flag lot by the shadows produced during the solstice and a 3mph breeze across the Mojave.
Gov't making yet another. fresh, their mightiest attempt to get a piece of that Internet boodle. Google told 'em to go their mother some more, so, they're going after FB and will get the Goog's in the end if they can get FB.
Passing the same tired old bag of money back & forth, R to D, D to R, back & forth ain't . Christ-a-might, MF Biden is finding that out as he's knelt and given back 1/2 of $3.5 trillion of that old, used $.
FB/Internet is new money, money from home, untouched and right- ing-there. Cold-hard-cash. Gov't has MSM firmly on their side in this latest attempt to take a healthy share of that pie.
Buit Zuck ain't gonna give it up so easy, bless-his-heart.
one of the funniest moments in ST history
We need a Wild Cobra's greatest hits thread.
50% of them can be found in that thread alone
FTC Study Highlights How 'Big Telecom' Privacy Practices Are Even Worse Than 'Big Tech'
telecom and cable companies collect an absolute ocean of data on U.S. consumers,
then "sell" access to that data to third parties (they usually just call it something else) without being clear about it.
They then provide users with opt out and transparency tools that are intentionally bersome, if they work at all.
This data then bounces around the internet creating potential harm and abuse among countless parties,
whether stalkers, law enforcement, people pretending to be law enforcement, or other corporations.
The FTC found that many ISP and cable companies "privacy policies" are utterly theatrical in nature.
As in they're designed to be so bersome as to deter people from using them (which companies then use as evidence that consumers "don't care about privacy").
Other times the "opt out" tools don't work at all,
and in some cases they result in even more user data being collected.
None of this is made particularly clear to the end user:https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...big-tech.shtml
"...rapid consolidation has allowed ISPs to access and control a much larger and broader cache of consumer data than ever before, without having to explain fully their purposes for such collection and use, much less whether such collection and use is good for consumers."
that's still not censorship, but you sure seem to like it when it happens to someone you don't like.
Pots jeering at kettles, tbh
A piece of by any other name still smells the same.
Facebook changes its company name to Meta.
Facebook is changing its company name as it shifts its focus to the "metaverse" and confronts wide-ranging scrutiny of the real-world harms from its various platforms after a whistleblower leaked hundreds of internal do ents.
Founder Mark Zuckerberg said Thursday that Facebook will change its corporate name to Meta, effectively demoting Facebook's namesake service to being just one of the company's subsidiaries, alongside Instagram and WhatsApp, rather than the overarching brand.
The company formerly known as Facebook also said in a press release that it plans to begin trading under the stock ticker "MVRS" on December 1.
Facebook to Rebrand as Meta
Should be called Beta for that ass Zuckerberg.
Mark Zuckerberg Changes Name to Mother Teresa
“The name ‘Mark Zuckerberg’ did not accurately describe my function:
to be a force for good,
spreading love and kindness throughout the metaverse,” he said.
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/mark-zuckerberg-changes-name-to-mother-teresa
Last edited by boutons_deux; 10-29-2021 at 01:03 PM.
Is Facebook Doing US Government’s Censorship Work in Nicaraguan Elections?
A few days before the Nicaraguan presidential elections on November 7,
Facebook and other social media companies began closing down many of the pages used by Sandinista supporters
in their campaign to re-elect President Daniel Ortega.
This blatant censorship move was said to be because they had discovered “troll farms” operated by government agencies.
But many of the 1,500 accounts closed appear simply to belong to pro-Sandinista journalists or young commentators.
TikTok, Twitter and Instagram took similar action, and Google said that it has closed 82 YouTube channels and three blogs in a related operation.
The fact that there are five opponents of Daniel Ortega standing might be an inconvenient truth, of course,
given that many of the reports of
Facebook’s censorship repeated the US government’s contention that the Nicaraguan elections are a “sham”
with no real opponents (despite the fact that two of the parties standing were in government between 1990 and 2007).
Facebook’s head of security, ... failed to respond to accusations that huge numbers of genuine accounts had been disabled.
https://www.laprogressive.com/censor...guan-elections
After 100+ years, CIA STILL ing over, subverting all countries South of the Border.
Still not an answer:
Is slavery evil? simple yes or no.
Partial solution: interoperability
https://pluralistic.net/2021/11/22/a...es/#jam-to-day
The go-to tactic for increasing switching costs is blocking interoperability. If Facebook had to federate with smaller services – including ones that you could run yourself for you and your family or friends – then you could quit Facebook and still stay connected to the people you love.
Which means that if governments moved to increase interop, they'd offer immediate relief to the hostages in Big Tech's walled gardens – by letting you move your media, conversations, address books, apps and other valuable digital assets to new services.
One way to do this is through legislation. The ACCESS Act is an excellent bill and it deserves your support:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/0...perable-future
Censorship!
What's the contradiction between censorship claims and having top performing posts? Do you understand how censorship works?
Sure.
Feel free to provide some relevant examples and we can discuss em.
You shouldn't need examples to understand that en ies with top performing comments can still experience censorship. If you understand that and admit it, why are you pretending to show a contradiction?
lol "censorship"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
