175 karma · joined June 16, 2012
I suppose this might work for some, but it comes off as excessively performative and not actually practical.
Embracing AI writing would absolutely be a disruption of the bad kind.
He also explicitly buys all products with his own money (some by way of viewers contributing, of course) and products are sourced from what folks in the comments are asking for.
The author is arguing that the “udp approach” to these conversations is less intrusive, and also alleviates doubt/anxiety about the nature of the conversation.
Companies already have to do this and they have done this for a long time. There are undoubtedly offensive words, phrases, and actions which a company actively discourages or will not tolerate.
The problem is that society progresses in disjointed ways, and common vernacular often lags far behind that as well. Instead of waiting for the overwhelming majority of people to understand that some words which once were perceived as neutral actually carry a darker, less-desirable connotation, Twitter (and others) are working to get ahead of that.
Sure, the lines may be blurry now, but that's no reason to claim that companies weren't arbiters of offensive words or actions in the past.
Thank you for the offer, even if you don’t get to me.
A bot-only subreddit where the bots post content based on Markov chains. There are bots for many of the more popular subreddits so, essentially, each bot has a "personality" that reflects a specific subreddit.
That said, I wonder the details of why it was discontinued (the gritty details available to the final decision makers) and whether those same people who blame themselves today might still have decided to discontinue it had they had the total picture.
This feedback is great, and it reminds me how delicate phrasing can be and how differently things might be interpreted.
I'm going to polish it up and lighten the tone quite a bit. Thanks!
[1] http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=hp_l...
While it's an important cause to fight for, some privacy discussions that are consuming various parts of the tech community these days are just silly.
I don't find anything about this service incredibly worrying. I'm much more worried about what we don't know -- the data-collecting activities we don't knowingly participate in. But since we don't know what we don't know, I try not to waste away my life hand-wringing over those things either.
It may be a great town, but it isn't the only one and it certainly isn't the most exciting or engaging. There's too much else going on in the world to put one place on a pedestal.
Especially in a company the size of Google, there is no mutual exclusivity between working on Product X and implementing minuscule feature Y.
The zip code in the iGoogle page weather widget suggested it was someone that lived in my general area, but I didn't recognize the name. This wasn't a shared laptop. I believe this also predated SSL-on-by-default so I guess it is possible traffic got mixed up somewhere.
With Debian, you can use the PPA as-is. This requires adding that to your /etc/apt/sources.list and manually adding the signing key with apt-key.
Something else the author doesn't directly address is that ZFS on Linux is really only usable on 64-bit systems. Funny things may happen if you use the 32-bit version, such as OOPSing when doing simple things such as ls -a.
I've had nothing but great experiences with running this on my home NAS.