Another person's reaction to your actions say a lot more about them than you. It's a classic case of reaction formation.
I am reminded of this NY Times article reporting on the empirical evidence that some of the most vocal anti-gay people out there are actually gay themselves and have not yet come to terms with that.
...what's important is that O'Reilly is emerging as a powerful force for transparency within the European Union, seriously trying to hold the powerful to account.
While it is admirable she's calling bullshit on the Commission, it doesn't seems that she has any power. Without the ability to to mete consequences after her suggestions are inevitably ignored, she appears no more influential than a journalist or blogger. But of course I'd be delighted to be proven wrong on this.
Gaitgate: where the current Dressage "champion" displayed what most experts view as too much forward motion during his Piaffe. Can you believe this outrage?
"Available" as defined in the new Government and Corporate Deceivctionary
If you are looking for your press release to describe the way you *believe* the world to be but actually isn't, then pick up a copy of the new Government and Corporate Deceivctionary. In this indispensable resource, you can use terms like "available", "terrorist", "collect", "hack" and others in ways that lead people to believe you are saying one thing, but really mean another.
Widely available* at popular† booksellers worldwide‡
* accessible in at least one non-imaginary location † as defined by the author ‡ somewhere in the world (For example at the CIA Starbucks)
"The Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." —John Gilmore
PageRank isn't going to be fooled, regardless of under what authority the new domain is created. If the most relevant health-related websites are under .health, they will be highly ranked. If not, then they won't.
If I were in the health care business, I would focus on creating a valuable site and service for my customers, and worry a lot less at which specific characters appear in the URL bar.
Re: I am outraged something I don't really understand changed for a small sub-population that probably doesn't include me!
I did a web search for "traditional morality" and this well-stated paragraph was one of the top hits:
"From time to time I hear people talking about 'traditional morality' or 'traditional values' as though it were a single thing, set in stone. They usually turn out to be talking about whatever morality or values they, themselves, accept. Calling your own values 'traditional' gives them a certain weight and authority—if whoever you're talking to doesn't have a critical mind."
I know there are whole communities of people who would consider a woman showing her face in a photo on Facebook to be immoral. Women covering their face in public is a tradition in their culture. Should Facebook cater to their view of traditional morality? Who resolves the conflict when the traditional morals of 2 or more cultures conflict?
Re: I am outraged something I don't really understand changed for a small sub-population that probably doesn't include me!
Seriously? You think there is one universal definition for "morality" and that Facebook just needs to follow it? If only it were that easy. You have a very naïve viewpoint, Mason. I hope for your sake you're a Freshman in college just exploring these issues for the first time. Because there's a big, diverse world out there and I can guarantee you that the majority of it does not think or believe the same way that you do.
I can't control what anyone does with information on me they scrape off the internet or convince my friends into revealing about me. But I don't see how this is any more shocking or "amoral" than what Pipl, Spokeo or even Google do. I suppose you think you have some "right to be forgotten" by Facebook and any other internet site out there, amiright?
Clearly this run is in honor of the tributary of Bull Creek in the NW part of the state. As soon as the organizers make this clear to MGM, I'm sure they will drop their suit.
Re: I am outraged something I don't really understand changed for a small sub-population that probably doesn't include me!
And exactly how is Facebook interfering with your rights here? Did they force themselves into your home and force you to put up a profile? Go all Clockwork Orange on you and force you to view a newsfeed of cute cats and Farmville requests? Oh you poor thing. Abu Ghraib pales in comparison.
FWIW, I do not identify as a libertarian. I for one value Net Neutrality, local fire departments, and the relative stability provided by the Federal Reserve. But as a consumer I know I have choices, and no one forces me to use Microsoft, Google, Facebook, or any other particular company's product/service.
I am reminded of the Belgium newspapers v. Google. You sounds a lot like them in saying you want to continue using Facebook because it's valuable, yet you want it to work a specific way that coincides with your particular definition of right and wrong. Good luck with that, my stone shaping friend.
Re: I am outraged something I don't really understand changed for a small sub-population that probably doesn't include me!
And who gets to decide what these "basic codes of conduct and ethics" are, Mr. Mason? You? What if my concept of what is ethical doesn't match yours? You are basically advocating government regulation to some undefined social standard simple because Facebook became big and successful. See also US v. Microsoft and EU v. Google.
Yes, I deleted my Facebook account years ago when their privacy practices were abysmal. I rejoined later when things had gotten better and because I ran for public office and it was to the benefit of my campaign to connect with voters there.
Re: I am outraged something I don't really understand changed for a small sub-population that probably doesn't include me!
Of course I read the ALT text. That doesn't change anything. Facebook is a private business and can choose what it wants to show to people, how it determines that, and make changes at any point. If people don't like it, they can leave.
Your assertion of what Facebook should or should not be doing is laughable. Who are you to determine the rules that others "should" play by? Check out any 12 step program; you are powerless. Personally I LIKE the fact that when I say "I don't want to see this", Facebook hides that post and uses that information as an input for determining which new posts to show me
You don't like how they're doing it? Create your own social network and show us all how it's done.
I am outraged something I don't really understand changed for a small sub-population that probably doesn't include me!
Let's not forget the very valid point Randall Munroe made in XKCD when this first came out:
"Facebook shouldn't choose what stuff they show us to conduct unethical psychological research. They should only make those decisions based on, uh... However they were doing it before. Which was probably ethical, right?"
Me: "Excuse me, I'm a tourist here and I'm looking for the Inner Harbor. Can you tell me where that is?" Native Marylander: "Outrageous! You are conducting research on me—a human subject—without my consent. Police!"
Personally I was shocked when I heard that a government agency was collecting all traffic on Twitter. Of course I know about BDSM and the gathering of the public tweetstream. But to also gather private messages, profile updates, correspondence with Twitter staff, etc. is yet another sad breach of privacy and public trust. Or did the author's imprecise words imply a broader scope than he intended?
If you really intend to recreate the concert experience, it's going to require a heck of a lot more sensory input than just video and audio: • The wafting smell of pot that fading in and out • That group of narcissist frat boys behind you having an overloud and unrelated conversation about their camping plans for the weekend • Getting crappy overpriced beer spilled on you as some guy trip over a dozen people trying to carry 7 cups iwith his hands, forearms, chest teeth and chin. • The pillowy pressure of an overweight girl and her friends progressively infringing upon you personal space, who don't have seats in your section and are trying to inconspicuously hang out in the aisle without the usher noticing. • Waiting for 20 minutes in line just to pee, while listening to one of your favorite songs muffled from a quarter mile away. • A drunk girl screaming the lyrics to your favorite ballad, thus mitigating your enjoyment • Shivering uncontrollably for the last half of the concert because you forgot how cold it gets in California in the summer after the sun goes down. Then paying $50 for a concert sweatshirt you really don't want. • Hanging out in your car at midnight for 45 minutes after the show—moving about 14 inches feet ever minute—trying to exit the parking lot with that nauseous "my body needs sleep" feeling.
If you can figure out how to pirate that, I can't wait to see it. ;-)
I love the fact that everyone now has a hi-def video camera with them at all times. We all need to keep recording and publishing our interactions with authority figures. Sunlight is the best of disinfectants.
The electromagnetic spectrum belongs to the public
An important point Mike fails to make here is the key difference between wired and wireless is that the wireless "medium"—the electromagnetic spectrum—belongs to the public. The FCC leases certain bands to private companies with the contractual expectation that they use them for the public benefit. If certain companies don't want to play by the rules imposed, then fine. You lose your license and your spectrum will be reallocated to someone who will be more than happy to comply. It's nothing personal; it's just business.
On the post: Supreme Court Refuses To Hear Sherlock Holmes Case: Holmes Is Now (Mostly) Public Domain
Re: Re: Rule 39 FTW!
"We must find the hound of the Baskervilles, Watson. I have a curious desire to rub my naked body all over its luscious fur."
Cue cliché music: Bow-chicka-wow-wow
On the post: Supreme Court Refuses To Hear Sherlock Holmes Case: Holmes Is Now (Mostly) Public Domain
Rule 39 FTW!
On the post: Not Just Governments Hacking Your Computers Via YouTube Videos; Malicious Ads Found On Popular Videos
Glad I use an ad blocker
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/adblock/gighmmpiobklfepjocnamgkkbiglidom
On the post: Obama Administration Has Put Media Leakers In Jail For Nearly 50 Times As Long As All Other Administrations In History
Reaction formation much?
I am reminded of this NY Times article reporting on the empirical evidence that some of the most vocal anti-gay people out there are actually gay themselves and have not yet come to terms with that.
On the post: EU Ombudsman Slaps Down European Commission For Lack Of Transparency -- Again
"A powerful force"? Really?!
While it is admirable she's calling bullshit on the Commission, it doesn't seems that she has any power. Without the ability to to mete consequences after her suggestions are inevitably ignored, she appears no more influential than a journalist or blogger. But of course I'd be delighted to be proven wrong on this.
On the post: Apple's Responds To Tech Mag Showing The Amazing Bending Phone By Freezing Them Out Of Bendy Apple Products
Will Dressage ever be the same again?
On the post: MPAA Tries To Ignore The Fact That The Study It Paid For Reveals Very Few Top Films Are Available On Netflix
"Available" as defined in the new Government and Corporate Deceivctionary
Widely available* at popular† booksellers worldwide‡
* accessible in at least one non-imaginary location
† as defined by the author
‡ somewhere in the world (For example at the CIA Starbucks)
On the post: Health Experts Issue Call To Prevent ICANN's Commercialization Of New .health Domain Leading To Exclusive Control Of Online Health Information
The TLD is of only minor relevance to PageRank
PageRank isn't going to be fooled, regardless of under what authority the new domain is created. If the most relevant health-related websites are under .health, they will be highly ranked. If not, then they won't.
If I were in the health care business, I would focus on creating a valuable site and service for my customers, and worry a lot less at which specific characters appear in the URL bar.
On the post: Law Professor Claims Any Internet Company 'Research' On Users Without Review Board Approval Is Illegal
Re: I am outraged something I don't really understand changed for a small sub-population that probably doesn't include me!
I know there are whole communities of people who would consider a woman showing her face in a photo on Facebook to be immoral. Women covering their face in public is a tradition in their culture. Should Facebook cater to their view of traditional morality? Who resolves the conflict when the traditional morals of 2 or more cultures conflict?
On the post: Law Professor Claims Any Internet Company 'Research' On Users Without Review Board Approval Is Illegal
Re: I am outraged something I don't really understand changed for a small sub-population that probably doesn't include me!
I can't control what anyone does with information on me they scrape off the internet or convince my friends into revealing about me. But I don't see how this is any more shocking or "amoral" than what Pipl, Spokeo or even Google do. I suppose you think you have some "right to be forgotten" by Facebook and any other internet site out there, amiright?
On the post: Citizen Organizing Small Get-Together 'Rocky Run' Sent C&D By MGM Because Of Course She Was
Run for the watershed!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_Run_(Bull_Creek)
On the post: Law Professor Claims Any Internet Company 'Research' On Users Without Review Board Approval Is Illegal
Re: I am outraged something I don't really understand changed for a small sub-population that probably doesn't include me!
FWIW, I do not identify as a libertarian. I for one value Net Neutrality, local fire departments, and the relative stability provided by the Federal Reserve. But as a consumer I know I have choices, and no one forces me to use Microsoft, Google, Facebook, or any other particular company's product/service.
I am reminded of the Belgium newspapers v. Google. You sounds a lot like them in saying you want to continue using Facebook because it's valuable, yet you want it to work a specific way that coincides with your particular definition of right and wrong. Good luck with that, my stone shaping friend.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110718/16394915157/
On the post: Law Professor Claims Any Internet Company 'Research' On Users Without Review Board Approval Is Illegal
Re: I am outraged something I don't really understand changed for a small sub-population that probably doesn't include me!
Yes, I deleted my Facebook account years ago when their privacy practices were abysmal. I rejoined later when things had gotten better and because I ran for public office and it was to the benefit of my campaign to connect with voters there.
On the post: Law Professor Claims Any Internet Company 'Research' On Users Without Review Board Approval Is Illegal
Re: I am outraged something I don't really understand changed for a small sub-population that probably doesn't include me!
Your assertion of what Facebook should or should not be doing is laughable. Who are you to determine the rules that others "should" play by? Check out any 12 step program; you are powerless. Personally I LIKE the fact that when I say "I don't want to see this", Facebook hides that post and uses that information as an input for determining which new posts to show me
You don't like how they're doing it? Create your own social network and show us all how it's done.
On the post: Law Professor Claims Any Internet Company 'Research' On Users Without Review Board Approval Is Illegal
I am outraged something I don't really understand changed for a small sub-population that probably doesn't include me!
"Facebook shouldn't choose what stuff they show us to conduct unethical psychological research. They should only make those decisions based on, uh... However they were doing it before. Which was probably ethical, right?"
http://xkcd.com/1390/
On the post: Law Professor Claims Any Internet Company 'Research' On Users Without Review Board Approval Is Illegal
Take it to the limit (one more time)
Native Marylander: "Outrageous! You are conducting research on me—a human subject—without my consent. Police!"
On the post: NSA Cheerleader Ben Wittes Takes A Written Swing At The Anti-NSA Crowd And Misses His Target Entirely
"All traffic" ≠ "all public traffic"
On the post: U2 Claims It's Working With Apple On A New Music Format That 'Can't Be Pirated'
Recreating the concert experience
• The wafting smell of pot that fading in and out
• That group of narcissist frat boys behind you having an overloud and unrelated conversation about their camping plans for the weekend
• Getting crappy overpriced beer spilled on you as some guy trip over a dozen people trying to carry 7 cups iwith his hands, forearms, chest teeth and chin.
• The pillowy pressure of an overweight girl and her friends progressively infringing upon you personal space, who don't have seats in your section and are trying to inconspicuously hang out in the aisle without the usher noticing.
• Waiting for 20 minutes in line just to pee, while listening to one of your favorite songs muffled from a quarter mile away.
• A drunk girl screaming the lyrics to your favorite ballad, thus mitigating your enjoyment
• Shivering uncontrollably for the last half of the concert because you forgot how cold it gets in California in the summer after the sun goes down. Then paying $50 for a concert sweatshirt you really don't want.
• Hanging out in your car at midnight for 45 minutes after the show—moving about 14 inches feet ever minute—trying to exit the parking lot with that nauseous "my body needs sleep" feeling.
If you can figure out how to pirate that, I can't wait to see it. ;-)
On the post: TSA Not Sure If It Groped Man Before Flight, Demands To Grope Him After Flight Is Over
Keep piling up the evidence
On the post: Wireless Providers Desperate Not To Be Subject To Net Neutrality Rules
The electromagnetic spectrum belongs to the public
Next >>