By extra, I mean the standard pricing. If Smart TV's designed to scrape data from the home aren't coming with a deep discount on price, the true cost is being hidden.
Can someone elaborate on the Telecommunications Act of 1996?
According to Wikipedia Title I is "Telecommunication Services", not Title II as referenced in the article.
Title II is defined as "Broadcast Services", which sounds a lot like the bundling of channel packages we see on cable tv. Bundling of website packages from isp's is not the direction I would like to see the internet move toward.
The distinction of Title I or Title II has huge implications -- I'm pretty sure we want Title I.
There is a bit of genius behind Geoffrey Stone's approach.
It is far too easy when being blasted by public and press opinion to simply circle the wagons and ignore the criticism. To simply resist the opposing viewpoint. To trivialize it.
What is the ideal result one can hope for going forward? In my opinion that result looks like opening doors to tighten privacy laws and ending some of these unfettered metadata collection activities.
By reinforcing to the employees at the NSA that they are doing a good job, and protecting the country, then placing blame outside the NSA George diffuses the personal nature of the argument. This allows employees to be more receptive to the message, and plants the seed that accepting change is not equated with a defeat.
In terms of realizing a true significant modification of these programs, planting this seed is brilliant move. Continuing to water it may grow additional support for these ideas from within. Splitting hairs by demonizing the entire organization, as reprehensible as past actions might be, is a certain way to maximize resistance.
I like the focus on "what is the desired outcome?" rather than reactionary outrage.
This opinion might be unpopular. I believe Mark Griffiths is correct to be unsettled, but is going down the wrong path with linking things to gambling.
Candy Crush has been tuned perfectly to maximize micro-transactions. The game has an insidious way of leaving the player only one or two turns away from completing a level, then dangles opportunities to spend money or spam friends to continue.
I consider the practice of dangling the carrot of level completion over children to be predatory. I would love to see pay-to-win micro-transactions reigned in on games marketed toward children.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by decrement.
Detecting Sarcasm
Leveraging Facebooks user base to develop the ability to detect Satire is a convenient stepping-stone toward this direction.
It also feels a lot like rolling all Facebook accounts into a research project without the ability to opt-out.
Source:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/us-secret-service-wants-software-to-detect-sarcasm-on-soc ial-media/
(untitled comment)
By extra, I mean the standard pricing. If Smart TV's designed to scrape data from the home aren't coming with a deep discount on price, the true cost is being hidden.
Title II (?)
According to Wikipedia Title I is "Telecommunication Services", not Title II as referenced in the article.
Title II is defined as "Broadcast Services", which sounds a lot like the bundling of channel packages we see on cable tv. Bundling of website packages from isp's is not the direction I would like to see the internet move toward.
The distinction of Title I or Title II has huge implications -- I'm pretty sure we want Title I.
Results vs. splitting hairs
It is far too easy when being blasted by public and press opinion to simply circle the wagons and ignore the criticism. To simply resist the opposing viewpoint. To trivialize it.
What is the ideal result one can hope for going forward? In my opinion that result looks like opening doors to tighten privacy laws and ending some of these unfettered metadata collection activities.
By reinforcing to the employees at the NSA that they are doing a good job, and protecting the country, then placing blame outside the NSA George diffuses the personal nature of the argument. This allows employees to be more receptive to the message, and plants the seed that accepting change is not equated with a defeat.
In terms of realizing a true significant modification of these programs, planting this seed is brilliant move. Continuing to water it may grow additional support for these ideas from within. Splitting hairs by demonizing the entire organization, as reprehensible as past actions might be, is a certain way to maximize resistance.
I like the focus on "what is the desired outcome?" rather than reactionary outrage.
(untitled comment)
Candy Crush has been tuned perfectly to maximize micro-transactions. The game has an insidious way of leaving the player only one or two turns away from completing a level, then dangles opportunities to spend money or spam friends to continue.
I consider the practice of dangling the carrot of level completion over children to be predatory. I would love to see pay-to-win micro-transactions reigned in on games marketed toward children.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by decrement.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt