Phanyxx

And even if every person did live in a detached home where they could hypothetically throw a party, there are smartphone connected Ring cameras everywhere. Parents always know what's going on now.

Yes, but primarily because people are clicking through from recommendation widgets in their Instagram feed.

Data privacy is an instructive example of what happens in a more free-for-all situation. If there were stringent protections in place, the data broker industry wouldn't exist.

I just took my car in and there were 4 active recalls to address (Hyundai). This is hardly unique to Tesla.

Tough, but fair

I'm reminded of Balk's Law (Everything you hate about The Internet is actually everything you hate about people.)

There was a brief window when Pandora was available in Canada (long ago now), but I still remember how good their recommendations were. Nothing matches it even today

My view on it: 1. Paywall 2. Algorithm rewarded hyperbolic / echo chamber posts 3. Changing content consumption tastes

"The market for stock photography and grunt level copy writing collapses entirely."

The only thing stopping this from happening is that AI still hasn't figured out how to render hands very well.

I guess it's a "fun" story to post about. Extremely cringe though.

There needs to be some sort of trigger for the media and/or a critical mass of people to care. Tiktok has the China and data harvesting angle. Facebook has an unlikable founder (sorry, Zuck), and slew of headline generating scandals with user data.

Snapchat just isn't on the radar of people who care about content moderation… yet.

In what way do you feel it's flawed? Based on what you know of the methodology, what would you change?

Slowly killing off organic reach on business pages was a dirty move, but still, Facebook's not "forcing" them to do anything.

I'm not saying your example is wrong, but the fact that it's from nearly 20 years ago is very telling. Even the most credible of sources will get something very wrong on occasion.

Very good point. Social media platforms were held up a shining example because Obama's message was largely positive, but few stopped to think about the flip side of the scenario... until 2016.

Vancouverite here. When major tech companies started setting up satellite offices here, I assumed it'd be a temporary situation, and that we'd be at the mercy of any change in the U.S. immigration process. The longer there's an immigration bottleneck though, the more entrenched these companies become here. There are more senior roles opening up here all the time, and salaries are increasing in this competitive market.

From my experience on the media / marketing side of things, a lot of people moving here that didn't consider the U.S. as an option. For some roles, our entire crop of interviewees have moved to Canada from other countries.

Yes, the U.S. immigration situation is helping the Canadian tech scene, but cities like Vancouver and Toronto are more than a mere crashpad for people waiting to move to SV. There's real momentum here as well.

That's basically where we're headed. Financial Times vs Business Insider.

Honestly, I'm not sure this micropayments for articles will ever take off. I tried a service recently that is trying to make that monetisation method a reality, and every time I clicked on an article, I'd have to do that mental calculation – "Hmm, is this going to be worth that 10-25¢?" Even though they allow you to get an instantanous refund if the article didn't bring you value, you're still thinking about your media consumption from a much more cold and calculated angle. I'm not saying a model like Spotify or Netflix is better for the media industry, but it's a model people prefer for a reason. You set up that recurring payment once, and just go forth and enjoy content.

I knew Quora’s time was up when they sent me a partner program email. It devolved into “yahoo answers” very quickly after that.

It's a dumb question, but you can just say "I can be too detail oriented sometimes!" and move on to more interesting points of conversation.

Yup. For many companies with a large audience or usebase that are already doing everything else, a conference/event is a natural evolution to keep growing their brand.

Of course, when you increase the number of speaking spots over many conferences, a) the act of speaking becomes more commoditised (so speakers just re-use the same material over and over), and b) the quality level starts to drop.

It's super common for conference organisers to try to lock down people with impressive sounding titles from noteworthy companies just to sell tickets (SoAndSo from Google!). Just because those folks have great jobs at great companies doesn't necessarily translate into a useful or inspiring talk.

IMO, when speakers get into storytelling mode or get really specific, that's when it gets interesting. Would love to see more speakers move beyond that "blogspot" mindset as well.

"I want the best advice, from the best doctors — not the doctor, not the clinic who can spend the most on advertising" says the politician, with no sense of irony.

Bingo! This cuts right to the heart of the issue.

That's a pet peeve of mine as well. If you see something as you're clicking away from your timeline, good luck ever finding it again. Would it kill them to let you toggle between chonological and "curated"?

The balance between inflation and dropping turbine prices. I'm sure there are trend lines somewhere...

Here in Vancouver the safe injection sites have saved countless lives and drastically lowered needle sharing. There's a big misconception that safe injection sites somehow promote drug use. They save lives and give people a legitimate pathway to get clean if they choose to. Do the right thing, SF!

"The large plot of land is about 45 minutes west of downtown Phoenix off I-10 near Tonopah."

More like Smart Exurb?

Good information, but those are definitely not infographics. They're images jammed full of text.

I 10/10 thought this was going to be about doing squats at my desk. Sigh.

^Agreed, and agreed.