onewhonknocks

Now this post is on page 2 as well.

Now at #93.

I also thought this was about Microsoft Teams TBH.

I believe that they already had MFA turned on.

The liability should reside solely with the person making the death threats, not with the communication tool they use to make the threats IMHO.

Free speech as it is enshrined in the Constitution only applies to censorship by the government.

We do not know each other, but I just wanted you to know that I support you!

I find the timing of this 'apology' to be somewhat analogous to that of 'Friday news dumps'.

I'm very glad that you are doing well!

I think that if you own a store, you should be able to make the decision regarding which products you want to stock on your shelves.

Yes, that is exactly what I meant. Thank you for this very thorough response!

IMHO they're not a monopoly, at least not in the traditional sense of the word.

Traditional monopolies "control supply of a good or service, and where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted."

In this case, the supply of a good or service (social networking, webpage indexing and searching) are not controlled by Facebook and Google because they aren't finite resources. Anyone can index the web and anyone can build a social network and Google/Facebook aren't going to crush you with lawsuits or some other nefarious tactic to maintain their position (AFAIK).

Entry of new producers of these services is not prevented or highly restricted. New social networks and search engines pop up all the time.

What Facebook and Google have is massive, large scale user loyalty. Despite alternatives existing (Bing, Mastadon, DuckDuckGo, Myspace, etc.), users are voluntarily choosing to use Google and Facebook. This is not a monopoly.

I think we need a new term for this situation.

Yeah tbh it kinda has Xbox aesthetics IMHO.

Interesting! It still hasn't been fixed.

This makes me wonder, are Vulcans basically Space Elves?

non-paywall source: https://cosmosmagazine.com/biology/honeybees-can-surf-to-saf...

It's used as a metric for the probably that someone will repay their debts; a metric used by those who are making financial decisions based on whether or not someone will do that.

That person doesn't look fat at all to me.

I concur.

I'm getting a 404 when I visit that link.

> or literally imprisoning you in the House basement, which will never happen but it's amusing to note that they technically have that authority.

I believe that is not true.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/05/14/capi...

> I have _never_ received one

That you know of.

If.

No, they are not monopolies.

Traditional monopolies "control supply of a good or service, and where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted."

In this case, the supply of a good or service (social networking, webpage indexing and searching) are not controlled by Facebook and Google because they aren't finite resources. Anyone can index the web and anyone can build a social network and Google/Facebook aren't going to crush you with lawsuits or some other nefarious tactic to maintain their position (AFAIK).

Entry of new producers of these services is not prevented or highly restricted. New social networks and search engines pop up all the time.

What Facebook and Google have is massive, large scale user loyalty. Despite alternatives existing (Bing, Mastadon, DuckDuckGo, Myspace, etc.), users are voluntarily choosing to use Google and Facebook. This is not a monopoly.

I think we may need a new term for this situation.

Shouldn't a merchant be able to decide for themselves which products they want to carry or not carry on their shelves (both physical and digital)?

Is the alternative that a merchant should be forced to carry a product against their will?

This reminds me of an interesting Harvard study I read a few years ago titled 'Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal'.

It can be found here: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/sendhil/files/are_emily_an...

Counterpoint: Not tipping IS voting (with your pocketbook).

Meditations, by Marcus Aurelius.

It's heartening to see that Apple isn't afraid to rap their knuckles when they misbehave, despite their being such a force in the tech space.

I'm not sure this is a bug. It sounds like pilot-error to me (I am not a pilot):

"In the bulletin, Boeing said that selecting full reverse too quickly upon landing before the aircraft has fully transitioned to ground mode could cause the system to activate."