brymaster

Yeah one would hope these guys had some kind of ethical compass but history of Big Data (Google, FB, ad networks and their ilk) shows otherwise. Everyone in "social" just wants their Fuck You Money and "fuck users" because they're the product. Apathy and subversion of the web from the big players or anyone with a Facebook Jr biz is why the surveillance state exists.

"Silicon" Valley is working on spy tools and innovative ways to get more people to click ads.

> Right, and... what would the harm be there?

That's a little too obvious to state so I won't pretend there's people here that haven't figured that out yet for the sake of overly-pedantic or naive arguing. You're moving into "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" territory.

> Is that just a fundamental value for you?

Yep. It's in my country's constitution and protected under various laws.

When we give up all privacy, suddenly it no longer exists.

Why does criticism of Apple products bring out rage in people as if they're being personally attacked?

Why do users need to 'get' or furthermore 'approve' of how Apple works?

> As a developer, I would take the 13" MBA over the MBP

Weird thing to say considering the decrease in specs with the MBA. Are you the type of developer that compiles code and wants to do so quickly?

Reading this is a breath of fresh air from the traditional "defend Google or other corporations at all costs" type comments. Maybe now we can drop the meme that Google is some altruistic entity and realize that ~97% of their revenue is from advertising. This is why they exist.

It's now just a matter of time before paid inclusion results show up in the organic SERPs like Yahoo used to have.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paid_inclusion

Edit: Whoops they already broke that promise too!

http://marketingland.com/once-deemed-evil-google-now-embrace...

The best part is in Google's original IPO filing they promised not to ever accept money for inclusion of results:

> "Google users trust our systems to help them with important decisions: medical, financial and many others. Our search results are the best we know how to produce. They are unbiased and objective, and we do not accept payment for them or for inclusion or more frequent updating."

> "We do not accept money for search result ranking or inclusion. We do accept fees for advertising, but it does not influence how we generate our search results. The advertising is clearly marked and separated. This is similar to a newspaper, where the articles are independent of the advertising."

> "Some of our competitors charge web sites for inclusion in their indices or for more frequent updating of pages. Inclusion and frequent updating in our index are open to all sites free of charge."

> "We apply these principles to each of our products and services. We believe it is important for users to have access to the best available information and research, not just the information that someone pays for them to see."

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1288776/0001193125041...

Times sure have changed!

> What can they do with it that damages me?

You can take your pick here and see what's most important to you: http://pleasedeletefacebook.com/

The consequences range from enabling the surveillance state, data theft, NSA slurping, job loss, employer intrusion, bullying, lowering of credit scores, depression, stalking, jail.

These are some interesting ones to name a few:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/07/03/198129...

http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/26/technology/social/facebook-c...

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/06/finding_sociop...

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/07/13/1247257/facebook-scan...

> Doesn't take many of those for wholesale evacuation of Facebook, does it?

Sadly, I wouldn't bet on it.

No privacy consequences with Facebook? I don't think that sounds right. They've been hell-bent on destroying the term since conception which isn't good for most users not mindful of that.

> "With that audience and that growth, what could the smartest people in the industry turn them into if they were armed with functionally infinite spending money?"

Ad-ridden, privacy-destroying malware I'd imagine. Since that's all the "smartest people" in the biz are working on: getting people to click ads and subverting the web.

The Facebook Jr's out there won't like to hear it but that's the cold truth.

> A forum full of men not understanding how a $3.8 billion company is successful.

I guess that begs the question: how is a web app that reposts content that doesn't belong to them and with zero revenue a "$3.8 billion company" again? I won't accept any answer from an investor or web "entrepreneur" type that has everything to gain from cashing in. The real lesson here is speculation and shortsightedness never changes and this is 1999 all over again.

Looking forward to the coming IPOs of Pinterest, Snapchat, Rap Genius!

These "social" big data companies have a history of doing evil (or sometimes, stepping right up to that line) and $LKND certainly isn't in business to be altruistic.

Their iphone app used to slurp up your data without authorization: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/06/your-iphone-calendar-is...

Furthermore:

LinkedIn: The Creepiest Social Network

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5680680

LinkedIn opts 100 million users into sharing information with ads

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2872030

LinkedIn is Evil

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=220138

> Nerd outrage hyperbole much?

How is that even close to a valid response to someone that's exercising critical thinking?

I get the impression you've never actually used the software.

Year old review (software improves) and you may have missed this: http://cdn.arstechnica.net//wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Scree...

Oh yes, you're right. They don't work just as well, they work better.

AirParrot has additional features like sending only one specific application window to the ATV and control over quality.

Beamer lets you seamlessly stream any kind of movie format you want and also gives control over subtitles.

Both work all the way back on 10.6. I don't suppose you could give me any advantages of Apple-branded AirPlay Mirroring huh?

No, because third party alternatives like AirParrot or Beamer work just as well and without the hardware restriction.

It's not. All hardware has a planned lifecycle and it's just up to them to draw the line in the sand. They'll also do it through software updates by making less features available on the older model in order to compel you to upgrade to the newer. "AirPlay Mirroring" only available in Sandy Bridge or greater because of the usage of Intel QuickSync is an example of that.

For any cocoa/obj-c dev that's dealt with constant deprecated API's on Mac, they know exactly what I'm talking about.

Since you're being credulous, I'll bite:

Just because it's "free" and you can update systems that are on Snow Leopard, doesn't mean it'll update all systems on Snow Leopard. For those paying attention, Apple killed off quite a bit of hardware with 10.8. Those certainly aren't upgradable to Mavericks.

Carmack had some interesting notes on this, a couple being:

- This would be perfect for games common in emulation where frame rates are capped but vertical sync isn't used. https://twitter.com/id_aa_carmack/status/391303034745401344

- This technology will come later to laptop and mobile devices and sadly, he tried to get Apple to do this years ago. https://twitter.com/id_aa_carmack/status/391303627278925824

No, Google is merely squeezing organic results off their SERPs and replacing them with ads. That's not helping consumers as they prefer organic results. They have to continuously stuff more ads into the model to keep the growth machine running, making tweaks here and there. Google is probably only a few years away from adding "paid inclusion" into the results like Yahoo used to have, where you could literally pay to have your result listed at the top of the page where it wouldn't look like an advertisement.

"Google said that paid-for clicks increased by a quarter during the July-to-September period, from a year earlier, the highest rate of growth in the past year."

How Google is Killing Organic Search

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5971560

Forrester: Consumers Prefer Organic Search, Not Search Ads, For Discovery

http://searchengineland.com/forrester-consumers-prefer-organ...

No, dollars are scarce so there's more competition for those dollars. Advertising has become more relevant but that's not an indicator that "times are good." Tactics are used to get people to spend money they don't have.

There's also "two clicks for better privacy" like Heise.de started and that Scheiner also uses on his blog. http://www.heise.de/extras/socialshareprivacy/ & https://github.com/panzi/SocialSharePrivacy

They should be applauded for getting one over on consumers.

This sounds familiar. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

> Beat aimed to create a new online journalism model with paid subscriptions and respectful comment threads

Well good luck with that. To lose faith in humanity, one has to look no further than comment threads on news sites. The current comments on the Reuters article are already facepalm-inducing.

Disagree with your thoughts on the system being better. Check some of the comments in the article and you might understand why.

It's interesting that none of the smart hackers here have 'innovated' an open discussion forum yet. Everyone knows of the problems with moderation and hellbanning, everyone knows that this forum isn't a democracy and yet, here we all are.

Nonsense, we're talking about a word processor here and Office/Word has been heavily criticized for it's interface and incremental features (or lack of reasons to upgrade) in each release. Features? 99% of the time you're either writing a letter/resume, reading some lengthy terms and conditions doc or reading someone else's resume.

Office/Word is what they learn in school (lock-in strategy) and Office/Word is what corporate apathy and only "knowing" MS software leads to in the workplace. You work somewhere, you use Office. Period.

I really think that has to do with Microsoft's lock-in strategy and the fact that people only "know" Office in the corporate space.

Thanks. I had submitted that link to the "Black Nobel Laureates" earlier and let it sit for 30 minutes after no upvotes, then deleted it. Made it appear as if this thread was pride-based upvoting that de-evolved into "Jews have super human intelligence" with no discussion on socioeconomics.

Great tumblr. This could be contender for the "Fucked Company" of Web 2.0 if it was frequently updated.