Comment Re:Cause it's fuckin cool bro (Score 1) 21
Cause it's fuckin cool bro
For bonus points, produce an analysis that's neither subjective nor stupid.
Cause it's fuckin cool bro
For bonus points, produce an analysis that's neither subjective nor stupid.
Statistics can be used to arrive at a conclusion - or support one.
But I don't need to tell a shill that.
I remember seeing the same story in the 80s when credit cards became widely available to everyone. I guess it's a lesson each generation needs to learn anew.
Giving children a solid gambling addiction by age 16 via the sports card industry pimping "1 of 1" golden tickets to parents spending the mortgage chasing a cardboard dragon, with that effort only being financially worth it with the drunken gamble of spending hundreds of dollars to submit it for professional grading in which only a dice roll of a perfect PSA10 will avoid bankruptcy in a viral market begging for a recession that has fucking ruined card collecting.
Credit cards, weren't being marketed and sold to children before. BIG difference. This makes candy cigarette imprinting look like a fart in church by comparison.
Indeed. People tend to brush off the disclaimer and believe the influencer anyway. It's like those drug commercials with the soft, droning voice telling you how many ways the drug can kill you, while the video shows pictures of people having fun together, jumping into the water, setting off fireworks, anything to make you not notice that droning voice. *This* is how we should regard reviews that contain these disclaimers. The disclaimer is there to distract us from the pleasing words surrounding the product, attempting to be "honest" while at the same time saying what the advertiser wants you to hear. Those influencers know full well that if they don't say things the advertiser wants them to say, the advertiser money will soon disappear.
Believe the "influencer"?
Oh yeah. I'm always worried about the impact on my axe throwing plans when I'm considering an anti-inflammatory to take after a skydive.
A North Korean soap opera about who won World War 3, has more authenticity.
People who aren't you can tell the difference between an honest review and a shill using the same basic critical thinking skills they developed in primary school.
Even the best critical thinking skills are still ignorantly human. As AI marketing advances, you won't even know the bot on the other end scamming you, isn't real. Even when you're looking right at it.
30 years from now you won't be able to tell when it's walking right at you.
The real dipshits in society, are the ones who assume otherwise. PT Barnum would have been the first multi-trillionaire today.
I have been working with Ubiquiti equipment and it needs cloud connection to be set up, and it's in general not the best equipment if you mix it with other equipment or even in some cases build a too complex network with their equipment.
Combine them with iSpy and you'll have a good solution.
Social media has become a toxic dump. If you wouldn't allow children to play in waste effluent from a 1960s nuclear power plant, then you shouldn't allow them to play in the social media that's out there. Because, frankly, of the two, plutonium is safer.
I do, however, contend that this is a perfectly fixable problem. There is no reason why social media couldn't be safe. USENET was never this bad. Hell, Slashdot at its worst was never as bad as Facebook at its best. And Kuro5hin was miles better than X. Had a better name, too. The reason it's bad is that politicians get a lot of kickbacks from the companies and the advertisers, plus a lot of free exposure to millions. Politicians would do ANYTHING for publicity.
I would therefore contend that Australia is fixing the wrong problem. Brain-damaging material on Facebook doesn't magically become less brain-damaging because kids have to work harder to get brain damage. Nor are adults mystically immune. If you took the planet's IQ today and compared it to what it was in the early 1990s, I'm convinced the global average would have dropped 30 points. Australia is, however, at least acknowledging that a problem exists. They just haven't identified the right one. I'll give them participation points. The rest of the globe, not so much.
And soooooo unexpected!
Recursion is the root of computation since it trades description for time.