stevew20's comments

As someone who has dropped almost all social media (mostly so I can get more done, but also for privacy), I can point out some non obvious consequences. This blog post mentions that stopping the use of Facebook will prevent you from seeing your nephews baby pictures... This is true.

My extended family and remote friends actually got upset when I dropped Facebook. They asked why I didn't want to be part of their lives, asked why I was choosing not to talk to them anymore... All while texting me on phones that allow instantaneous communication of any type of election media imaginable, more so that Facebook allows.

Moral of the story: Facebook and other social media makes most people socially lazy with continuous use. If you don't believe me, go try to meet someone under the age of 30 "out in the wild", at a bar or venue. Bars used to be easiest places to meet anyone at, just walk in, sit at the front, and start chatting. I'm not talking about people who are on their phones ignoring the outside world; even people just chilling and having a beer just don't know how to talk to someone outside of their social media platforms.

I think he's saying that in the persuit of security, Google has engineered the usefulness and useability out of this application.

There are good, sane, safe ways to hold login credentials. Instead of those ways, Google has picked one that is incredibly inconvenient, and with opening a server on your machine, also opens a new attack surface... I hope they deviated from their aweful coding practices and made the server right...

No, takes a ridiculously long time on my school's network, which is blazing fast. It's limited by my laptops cpu and ram, which is maxed the whole time it's loading

Yea

Ah yea, mostly, just frustrated that they just keep creepin on all of us. No means no, ya know?

Is it just me, or do all of these state operated bulk data spying programs come off as incredibly rapey?

NSA: hey, can I read your email?

Me: nah, I really don't know you that well...I like my privacy, and frankly don't really trust you with my data... You tend to accidentally leak it to hackers, because you're irresponsible.

NSA: I'm gonna read your email. Read every single message. Every byte. Every bit.

Me: okay that's creepy as fuck, please go away.

NSA: ahhh yeha I'm taking your email to party town! I'm looking at all your contacts now

Me:Jesus just get the fuck away... Aren't you funded by my tax dollars? Why am I paying you sick fucks???

NSA: cause we are the NSA, and you don't have a goddam choice. We are gonna take whatever we want from you, and you are gonna smile and bend over, cause there are no other options!

Me: yeah okay well maybe this is why the 2nd amendment is a THING

I disagree. Musk as CEO drove Tesla, against every estimate I've seen or heard of, to be profitable. Prior to musk, the cars didn't exist... So they were unavailable to buy. And I don't see how changing him out will fix quality issues, other than having a future CEO halt innovation in favor of bug hunting... Which would be the start of a quick end for Tesla. They are built on innovation.

Like in the US government...

"As broadband became more common, web sites got needlessly heavier."

100% this. About 8 years ago, I had LIGHTNING fast loading times on every page I visited. 800-1000ms was average, on a connection that is slower than mine is today... Now 4-8 seconds is average, and the new Gmail takes 10-12 seconds to load.

I'm nostalgic for the days when the web was faster and more functional than it is today.

Thanks for adding substance and insight to the argument!

Zing!

Affirmative.

Musk being banned from serving as an officer or director of a public company... Does anyone else see this as the beginning to the rise of a super villain?

Think about it: our insanely legislated government decides that a rich and accomplished engineer/businessman can no longer run his businesses? He would totally turn evil, buy an island, and start building his super lair!

I can't agree with this more. Way to get beyond the sexism.

Instead of pushing for a data driven conclusion, what about this:

A police officer has 1.0 amount of time in a shift. If he spends 0.2 of his shift sitting at a speed trap trying to meet some quota, he has 0.8 of his shift left to patrol / help solve crimes; however, the reciprocal of this ratio could occur to, depending on which duties he is assigned.

Now step back... The entire police force has 1.0 amount of time per officer per shift. In order to meet budget goals, they allocate 0.8 of that time to speed traps. Now 0.2 of man hours are spent actually doing anything useful (hint: solving crimes do not pay the bills... ).

We can examine data to confirm this, however I don't see the need. When you have a time budget, every activity takes a portion of that time. If you spend 90% of your time playing solitaire at work, you aren't going to be very productive. The relationship is absolute, so the data should support it. If not, there is some noise interfering.

Off by one.

War on Weather!

Always knew the FBI was pitching for the other team...

So like... RSS... But way less awesome?

May? This is something that is established by serious scientific inquiry about every 15 years, since the early 60's. Also, LSD and Ayuhasca have similar effects.