Forgot your password?

The Single Vigilante Behind Facebook's 'Real Name' Crackdown 305

Posted by Soulskill
from the feeding-the-trolls dept.
Molly McHugh sends this story from Daily Dot: When Facebook issued an apology this week for suspending user accounts that had what it alleged to be fake names, it pinned the whole debacle on one person. This "individual," Facebook reasoned, sewed confusion into its flawed reporting system—intended to protect against bullying and online abuse. Facebook Chief Product Officer Chris Cox explains that Facebook was caught “off guard” by a lone actor who reported “several hundred” accounts as fake. According to our source, who claims to have spent "hours and hours" systematically reporting Facebook users from the drag community and beyond, thousands of accounts were suspended—and they've been at it for weeks. ... Given the timing and the accounts suspended, they believe that they are in fact the mystery "individual" who threw a wrench into Facebook's system, noted in Facebook's explanation of the events. "Considering the hours and hours I spent reporting accounts over the course of the past month, it is likely that I am."

Comment: Re:People (Score 4, Insightful) 481

by ugen (#48064925) Attached to: Is an Octopus Too Smart For Us To Eat?

Self-preservation. We are people, hence by social contract we (no longer) eat each other. That way each of us can feel safe that others will not consume him. We consider people who violate that rule criminals or insane and deal with them appropriately.

There is no such social contract with animals. We can eat them and they, occasionally, eat humans too.

Comment: Way to be offensive in the apology (Score 3, Insightful) 280

by ugen (#48046323) Attached to: Facebook Apologizes To Drag Queens Over "Real Name" Rule

The so-called "apology" is in itself offensive and patronizing. "Drag queens" to LGBT is what "Exotic dancers" are to being a straight woman (or a man, I suppose). The choice of names they used in the example is also not coincidental.

I wonder if reaction would have been different were facebook to require all married women to use their husbands name (Mrs Robinson), and then apologized by way by letting them keep their "Lil Miss Makemeasammich" monikers.

It's only "PC bullshit" until it's your problem.

Comment: Re:Sales figures are news now? (Score 4, Informative) 206

by ugen (#47968979) Attached to: Apple Sells More Than 10 Million New iPhones In First 3 Days

Not sure about other products, but here is the recent article about Samsung Galaxy S5.
Samsung sold 5 million Galaxy 5S phones in the entire month of May (which was evidently the first full month of sales)
The article says that it sold less in its first month than Apple sold iPhones 5S in the same month.

I know there is always a "many Android phones vs one Apple" argument. But numbers are what they are.


Apple Sells More Than 10 Million New iPhones In First 3 Days 206

Posted by samzenpus
from the get-it-now dept.
An anonymous reader writes Apple has announced that it sold over 10 million new iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus models, just three days after the launch on September 19. From the article: "Chief Executive Tim Cook said the company could have sold even more iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus models if supplies had been available. Analysts had estimated first-weekend sales of up to 10 million iPhones, after Apple booked record pre-orders of 4 million on Sept. 12, the day pre-orders opened."

Comment: Re:Pleasant? (Score 0, Troll) 174

by ugen (#47946635) Attached to: The Minecraft Parent

Any game that takes an effort to make "safe" cannot be described as pleasant or safe by default.
It takes more than a little effort or research. Unless you constantly monitor servers for content or audit server list daily - you cannot claim that the game is played "safely". Server content can change at any time, and your children can add and delete servers as they see fit.

Something is up with /. reader's ability to comprehend the material today :)

Comment: Re:Pleasant? (Score 0) 174

by ugen (#47946505) Attached to: The Minecraft Parent

1. I am not in the micromanaging my kids business. Sitting next to my child every minute they are on the computer, and watching their every step is not viable. I prefer services (and games) that are designed from ground up to provide child enough freedom without having to have a permanent guard set next to them.

2. You are making my point for me. As a game universe, in general, Minecraft is *not* nonviolent or purely creative, as it is being generally described. It has its fair share of sex, violence and useless junk. It takes a conscious and significant effort to protect players from that. This is something that articles about Minecraft seem to conveniently omit.

Comment: Pleasant? (Score 1, Flamebait) 174

by ugen (#47946357) Attached to: The Minecraft Parent

As a parent, I don't see Minecraft through the rose-colored glasses, as it seems to be commonly described. While a game was supposed to be nonviolent, plenty of Minecraft servers seem to have added functionality that allows direct fighting and ability to kill other players. Chat capabilities go unmonitored and "adult language" is widespread.

Due to Minecrafts de-centralized nature there are no effective technological age or content controls, leaving children (mine anyway) exposed to kinds of things that I would prefer them to consume in limited amounts or not at all.

The only realistic technical measure of control is to prohibit playing Minecraft at all, or at least prohibit network play. Unfortunately, given Minecraft popularity this is not feasible. My parenting approach does not include use of force or abuse of my authority, (where safety or law is not directly concerned), so I can't in good consciousness prohibit it outright.

On a personal level, it annoys me that a game world with a level of 3d graphics and physics sophistication that was state of the art 20 years ago is extremely popular today, but I can see the draw of "retro" look and feel.

+ - NASA awards "space taxi" contracts to both Boeing and SpaceX->

Submitted by ugen
ugen (93902) writes "Contrary to the rumor posted on Slashdot earlier today, "NASA will partner with Boeing and SpaceX to build commercially owned and operated "space taxis" to fly astronauts to the International Space Station, ending U.S. dependence on Russia for rides, officials said on Tuesday... Boeing was awarded $4.2 billion to SpaceX's $2.6 billion. ""
Link to Original Source

Somebody ought to cross ball point pens with coat hangers so that the pens will multiply instead of disappear.