philippejara

a...brianna wu tweet? are we in 2015 again?

How is she being quoted talking about stock prices

>And when you consider that hard drives have stagnated in price over the past few years, YouTube is doomed if it does not delete unprofitable videos

Not necessarily, is storage(and not retrieval) that much of a cost? and if so is youtube's revenue/storage cost actually decreasing? and if it is would the backlash for deleting people's videos worth the reputational cost? especially when you have an entire industry around small people trying to get big, the majority of which will never get there.

Youtube even tried putting a limitation on non-premium users watching 4k video and pulled back on it, can't imagine something as drastic as deleting videos would be worth it.

longer than 4 years is normal, expected even, but when you start going into >7 years it gets...weird.

could you give me an example of him "taking the side" of trump? all I remember is him trying to not be fast and loose with the facts to beat the dead horse the entire media was already doing, themselves unconcerned with the truth and more concerned with their soapbox to repeat what the previous 20 journalists already said. Unless bringing up pretty valid skepticism is now being a hipster journalist.

What was the second outlet he was ousted from? I know of the intercept sure, and he was ousted because he wanted to cover the biden laptop, they kept claiming he couldn't(not only in the intercept itself but anywhere else) because it wasn't really true and now...well we all know how that turned out.

Calling him a hipster journalist unconcerned with the truth is just a flat out lie, especially if you conveniently ignore all his ongoing work in brazil. He was one of the main reasons the current president is not in jail and defeated bolsonaro in the elections, something which bolsonaro attempted to prosecute him for, and now with lula in power he an extreme critic of the censorship the supreme court is using to silence people, the same people that absolutely hate him for getting lula out and ousting bolsonaro.

He is an example of being steadfast in his beliefs against censorship and surveillance state, just because the vast majority of journalists are actually reporters parroting whatever party line the newsroom toes at the time doesn't mean someone who actually sticks to his ideals is a hipster.

I still stand confused as to what relation it has to the topic

are there no maximum time for a course in the US? where i'm from if you take more than 50% of the time the course would normally take you just lose it

Tech journalism most often then not doesn't know tech in the first place.Safe from a very small number, often in specialized outlets like techdirt, they're effectively "culture" journalists in regards to social media, so it isn't at all surprising that something more complex than just another twitter drama or nebulous AI VC project #234 goes way over their head.

I fail to see how having a law against incitement in germany - that doesn't even sound like would apply to jan 6th if it was done there- makes the article of merkel and several other EU leaders condemning twitter's action not make any sense.

and hopefully he'll get prosecuted for it if it is really the case, but that didn't stop even european leaders from saying the ban was a mistake and concerning[0].

[0]:https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2021/01/11/problemat...

is it a conspiracy theory because they said it was? you don't know and neither do I, it does sound like he thought that asking the NSA for what he has a right to ask for, a warrant to give up data, wouldn't impact his chances of renewing government contracts, but it seems it did and they were dropped and the stock plummeted. Could be the other way around and he expected it and did commit fraud, I don't know and won't pretend to not be biased against the NSA, but the retaliation from them is pretty convenient in either case. The concept of being able to exclude evidence just because "natsec might be at risk" is also absurd to me, instead of taking the trial to a judge with clearance or something.

The uncertainty of the sentence aside we can zoom out and see that asking to follow legal processes that every single one of those companies should be following in the first place can very well cause retaliation from the NSA, so all else aside invoking legal protections sure does seem to be bad for companies.

I'm not going to claim to be an american law expert, but when the agencies can just say "nope" to evidence against them in said court of law, it becomes hard to claim strong legal protections. I may be wrong and misunderstanding the law, but it does seem like that. And as a shot in the dark here I doubt it got any better after the patriot act.

"Joseph P. Nacchio (born June 22, 1949 in Brooklyn, New York) is an American executive... Nacchio was convicted of insider trading during his time heading Qwest. He claimed in court, with documentation, that his was the only company to demand legal authority for surreptitious mass surveillance demanded by the NSA which began prior to the 11 September 2001 attacks.[1]

He was convicted of 19 counts of insider trading in Qwest stock on April 19, 2007[2] – charges his defense team claimed were U.S. government retaliation for his refusal to give customer data to the National Security Agency in February, 2001.[3] This defense was not admissible in court because the U.S. Department of Justice filed an in limine motion,[4] which is often used in national security cases, to exclude information which may reveal state secrets. Information from the Classified Information Procedures Act hearings in Nacchio's case was likewise ruled inadmissible.[5] " [0]

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio

Greenwald stuck to his guns as he always did when his audience decided that they'd rather embrace the overbearing/surveillance state as long as the court jester didn't win the election again, that's how I see it at least. I'd like to give a less flippant answer but I honestly can't see any difference in his views now and back then, both in US coverage and Brazil's coverage.

>In short, the collective well-being of humanity should always be a top priority, and this includes moderating harmful or extremist content on the internet.

Who defines what is harmful or extremist in the government? Sounds like you either get in the good graces of the "intelligence community" or you are now harmful, as shown pretty clearly with the hordes of "intelligence community" people calling the biden laptop(whatever it had, its content is irrelevant) russian propaganda[0], while even the DOJ and FBI says it isn't[1]. And of course those officials making the stink are contracted by the news agencies to talk about it where journalists will just blindly accept whatever they're given.

The "intelligence community" isn't your friend(neither are the proper agencies but I digress), it never was if you're not an us citizen and it probably stopped being if you are after the patriot act.

[0]:https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-...

[1]: https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-doj-fbi-confirm-hunt...

One would hope that after the patriot act, the bush jr wars, cablegate, the nsa leaks and so on just in the last 20 years people would desire to not keep the old habits, but I suppose all it took was one buffoon to take presidency and all that rolls back.

Truly a sad sight from those looking hopeful after the occupy movement and all the anti surveillance sentiment post-leaks.

It's a huge case being watched by the entire world, even if there is a minuscule chance of it causing an actual issue, or there is the possible bad optics, I fail to see why the judge wouldn't do it. Nobody is going to excuse themselves on these terms for regular cases where the entire world isn't watching, but why risk anything in this case?

The law might be blind -or at least should-, but the audience isn't and that audience might very well include federal agencies and nutjobs.

"oh I need to structurally modify these 20 lines, might as well craft a regex to do it"

30 minutes later... well got to keep my regex skills up to date else i'll lose them

why do you want bigger productions? especially now where we have the new lord of the rings, the MCU, the DCU and a new avatar that will most likely be forgotten just as quickly as the previous one to show for bigger budget productions.

There comes a point where having more money adds nothing, and in a lot of genres that point is quite low. I'd imagine CGI/SFX/animation is the biggest scaling cost, very few genres use it that much to justify it.

Like elon or not it makes absolutely no sense to compare social media with effectively newspapers, they're completely different things. The only comparison I guess you could realistically have is zuckerberg, but even then it wouldn't work very well.

I can guarantee you there are plenty of people who do, you really don't need an ex-social media CEO or whatever to do it. Would be absolutely hilarious if he somehow managed to get moot to be the CEO.

I don't disagree that dedicated servers only would be better, much to the contrary, but sadly matchmaking is here to stay and there's nothing we can do about it. You can have parallel dedicated servers that have no impact at all on the matchmaking experience, that's my point, not that matchmaking would put you into community servers, seamlessly was probably the wrong word for it. I wouldn't dislike official dedicated servers being accessible by both the browser and matchmaking however.

I can play the game in the hardware that it was advertised to work at the time, 32bit(?) macs, the same way I can play a ps2 game on a ps2 but not a ps5.

Removing official servers when there is no alternative means I can't use the product on the platform it was listed to work at.

you can just disable cosmetic drops/leveling/whatever else on private servers since it's sadly such a massive part of multiplayer games nowadays, problem solved.

Honestly the saddest part is how you could have both the private servers and matchmaking almost seamlessly, have official servers flagged for matchmaking and allow for a server browser like csgo, team fortress 2, etc, and yet so many act as if it was exclusively one or the other. As a big titanfall2 fan this is just infuriating since the game has been unplayable pretty much due to years long dos attacks on the servers that the company doesn't give a shit to fix, nor releases some form of dedicated servers for players to host themselves. The game is even in a modified source engine iirc.

let's not turn this into a chain of saying obvious things that everyone involved already knows about, it's not going to add to the conversation and -hopefully- nor will it give you internet points in this website.

everyone knows that public transport is the solution to it but I can't buy a railroad track and a train to take to work so people are going to do what they can do

the account that hosted his clip wasn't suspended, it was deleted, doesn't seem like anyone banned it.

for example here's a banned account: https://twitter.com/h3h3productions/ here's the account that posted the video: https://twitter.com/CleoPat48937885

well seems like he reactivated his account(pretty sure you got like 30 days or something to reactivate it after deleting or something like that), here's an archive of how it looked: https://archive.ph/W0d0v

The elonjet account however is a pretty bad one gotta agree, wonder if there will be any kind of explanation or attempt at one.

I don't get your point, I want to be anonymous generally and am all for it, but the risks being cited for half the article have been known for a decade already and it's pointless wasting this much time on it as if it were news.

he already specified it in is his comment: > In the case of USDC it allows USD to exist on the blockchain so that it can interact with smart contracts.

if you wanna question whether smart contracts are useful or not feel free, I sure do, but drop the smarminess when the answer to your question lies within the first paragraph.

I'm not sure why they ham up the risk of privacy loss regarding unmasking anon players, the only "risk" I can think of would be someone developing and testing new strategies but then I'd assume the fingerprinting would be far less accurate, testing if you can effectively hide your own quirks while deviating from them would be far more interesting. As it stands this is nothing new and the concerns seem weirdly pointed, everyone(?) already knows the risks of fingerprinting and pattern recognition in more general applications. It was a fun paper to read, shame half the article promoting it was cautioning.

Indeed false advertising is a thing and it's not legal(depending on where you live ? it is in most of the world that has teslas at least). The government reaching further than going for false advertising is where the slope gp mentioned would come in I assume, and on that I fully agree.