I thought astroturf was in contrast to a organic, "grassroots" effort.
Derailing discussion forums in itself is not really astroturfing. Maybe I misread and that's not all of it.
Astroturfing is just pretending to be a grassroot, that is pretending to be a non-sponsored individual supporting a certain point of view. Any paid commentator not explicitly stating they are paid, is an astroturfer.
I have a simple question - Why do liberals only acknowledge the bias of Fox news or other such outlets, and never the more extreme bias of MSNBC or CNN?
Because CNN is very right-wing, but not as extremely as Fox? MSNBC I see get a lot of flak for being generally shit, including its weird attempt at counterbalancing Fox.
Certain news stories come up, and people make the most twisted arguments imaginable to deflect, downplay, or show shades of grey. Sometimes it's from long-term users with varied post histories - are these well-crafted astroturfers, carefully building up a false history to deflect suspicion?
No, they are likely smarter or just as as you. You should listen to them.
My last remembered example was the one about home solar installations: The panels give unused power to the grid during the day, and the users take power from the grid at night.
Exactly. Briliant example. The naive point of view is to let them abuse the net as storage, but any person thinking it through can tell you that will not work in the long run.
Every major government does it. It's still evil, and only by educating the public about the foreign agents subverting public discourse can we avoid the consequences of a malign deception. Education without which democracy fails.
No, they don't. You are again implying a falsehood to make someone you like look better.
Either, in the sense there are drones flying around all the time: Now.
Literally filed or overcrowded with drones: Never, what would they be doing?
What models of American cars are exported? Ford/Chevy have separate divisions and make completely different models for Europe. I'd buy a European made Ford long before an American.
They sell large overcompensating cars to places like Saudi Arabia and China.
AFAIK they have only found one of the flight recorders, the one recording voice in the cockpit. Once the second is found and analysed more will be known.
Even if you wrote this in C in the style in which they did it the program would be slow. Since there's no way to "extend" a C string, it would require determining the length of the current string (which involves scanning the string for a null byte), malloc'ing a new buffer with one more byte,
There is. It is called realloc. If you are unlucky, it will just divide the number of times the system actually performs by 16 or whatever the malloc implementation uses as an alignment, but once the allocation gets big enough you get a pages directly from the system, and it just maps in more pages on the end.
Brace yourself, but most people who consume packaged food products have little concern over any chemicals in them.
The corollary to this is most people who consume packges chemicals have very little concern if there is any actual food products in them.
I recently saw "imitation American-style cheese food slices". Now, "American" "cheese" isn't legally cheese in most of the world. So what the fsck is imitation artificial cheese?
I'm not even sure it had any dairy in it.
Reminds of McDonalds in the 90s when they were forced to changed the description of their burgers from containing beef to containing meat in the EU (the meat didn't contain enough beef to qualify as beef, but the pink goo did qualify as "meat") . Always beware of too generic food descriptions.
on the speed of your memory, and the speed of your disk, SSD's are getting more common.
No, it doesn't. Memory is faster. If they get a result saying otherwise, they are doing it wrong, and are actually just measuring the performance of the in-memory cache speeding up the simplest implementation vs the performance of their own crappy implementation.
I call BS. Before the atomic bombs, Japan's strategy was to basically arm every citizen and make the invasion of the mainland such a bloody
No, they were negotiating surrender. They were just not offering unconditional surrender, and the American leadership demanded.
2: An attack on Iran would rally every Mecca-facing worshiper to attack the US and Israel.
No, Iran are Shias. Most of the Muslim nations would love to see them gone.
3: Iran is pretty damn powerful. They sell plenty of oil to China and Turkey. Even with sanctions, they are the top producing car maker in the region.
4: Iran is no "shit-o-stan". Attacking Iran would be like attacking Germany or France, with retaliation that a First World government would return with.
No. Iran is powerful and has a serious military, but so did Iraq. The two were in the same league. Somehow Iraq's one million men under arms was still not comparable to less than 100,000 western troops.
Doesn't BBT say that men working in STEM are actually just dumb kids but women working in STEM are intelligent, rich, well respected and never put a foot wrong? Bernadette and Amy never seem to make goofs or mope around like little kids but the men are so brainless they can't even fix themselves a meal or plan a vacation, it seems. Indeed the most brilliant can't just be an amazing scientist but has to be mentally deficient. Even the supposed "dumb blonde", Penny, merely has to look at the men and she has the idiots eating out of her hand.
Now that stereotype of men in STEM maybe has a lot going for it, but holding up BBT as supporting men as cherished scientific role models seems pretty far off the mark.
That was not the point. The point was how it makes fun of people in those fields in general. Women are more sensitive to fashion subjects than men, and will be quicker to avoid those that are being made fun off.
I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.
