lakechfoma

All of the creators I follow either do it for free and fun, or some combination of patreon plugs and trinkets you can buy from them. Ads are not the only way for creators to find value in creating.

Youtube became a crap platform in the search for the $$. Things like recommended videos used to be related to the video you just watched but now its whatever fail army is. I would like to see a new platform where monetization via ads and UX abuse doesn't exist because the experience is just awful now.

That article was so hard to read. He jumps to so many conclusions without any logical path like the use of TLS will stress the bandwidth of providers, claiming its like "unauthorized taking of the provider's transport network resources". How will TLS vs not TLS meaningfully impact amount of traffic on a network? He doesn't say, just claims it. I'm guessing he means the provider can't throttle/control traffic based on packet inspection as easily? Regardless, this is like saying everyone in the neighborhood running all of their faucets at the same time is like stealing from the water provider. That's literally their only job, to be a pipe for water. People aren't stealing by stressing the network, if anything the network would be stealing for not running as advertised.

"TLS 1.3 significantly facilitates widespread malware distribution" this guy...has to be getting paid by someone to say this, right? Who is this dude, what is CircleID?

Off topic, your screen shots look pretty but kinda funny: one is advertising TouchID integration on an iPhone X.

That said, quick glance at your website and Narmi looks good! Good luck to you, and I hope your product does well but also encourages the rest of the market to adopt some things like stronger auth.

Since I've been getting support so much lately with a few institutions, I've been asking them questions like that as well. They all serve up that same answer.

For me, and I'd guess a lot of other people, I don't care if the money can _eventually_ be returned, I'm concerned for the day that my life savings goes missing and I have to spend days or weeks stressed to shit about when or if I'll get it back, meanwhile not sure if I can pay rent.

Discord has stronger authentication methods than any of the 8 or so financial institutions I have accounts with.

All 8+ do their auth quite differently yet they're all broken and they all fall back on SSN. Why hasn't this industry standardized around one process that is actually effective?

Recently I made an account with Fidelity brokerage. Username maxes at 12 chars or something, password at 20. Not the worst, but then I had to get phone support and to authenticate over the phone you need to enter either your username or SSN on the keypad, and then the password on the keypad. The charspace of both the username and password have thus been reduced to 0-9 and * for all specials.

Another institution is for my employee share purchase plan. The phone support can initiate sells and transfers I'm pretty sure, yet their only auth is for my full name, employee number, and birthday. My employee number is literally printed on my laptop and some other stuff next to my full name, my birthday easily googleable with my name.

Only for high value transfers? Interesting that they felt the need in that context but didn't roll it out everywhere.

I hadn't thought of that. Obtrusive ads are bad unless they are our obtrusive ads.

I also want to understand what % of ads they'll be blocking are from competitor ad platforms and what % are self impacting vs the same for ads they don't block. Will this effectively devalue their competitors in a significant way?

"Were people complaining that clicking “yes” on an RSVP email took them to the invitation site? Were they asking to have a video chat window open inside the email with the link? No. No one cares."

I don't want this new feature and am glad I moved away from gmail, but I think the author is mistaken if they think people don't want this. Some people don't want to leave their gmail app to click one box on a now slowly loading web page full of content/ads they don't care about. I procrastinate on some mail because I don't immediately feel like dealing with the context switch. Then the mail gets buried by others and I forget. I'm ok with that mode of operation and I can also see a lot of people not being ok with and being delighted by AMP in gmail.

If you can't beat them, join them? Make ads less annoying and the argument for an adblocker kind of goes down, less people begin using adblockers and more people see ads eventually. I guess that's a win win.

Scary that a company which operates off ad revenue can now control the ad revenue of other companies. How will they be accountable/transparent for scenarios like that?

Your definition of "enjoyed the culture" is from Kotaku anecdotes and at least one of the women interviewed has taken issue with their framing of the story.

Really bad comparison on my part in GP but I think my point stands. Just because something was "common" back in the day doesn't mean it's acceptable today and we shouldn't be rewarding people for things that today we see as harmful even though they weren't considered to be in the past.

Rewarding shitty past behavior is how we remain stuck with shitty behavior.

And again, you really need to evaluate whether it's a "vocal minority" or is actually a majority with a vocal subset.

Removed my comment because I think it was insensitive. The point I am trying to get across is that some people enjoyed working there but that doesn't change that some did not and just because some did doesn't make it a healthy work environment.

A lot of things about this piece irk me but probably the two biggest ones are 1) the author kind of doxes the PT guy. Yeah he revealed his name on FB but he clearly preferred to keep it anonymous so I think it's wrong to be throwing his name around. 2) a lot of this is grasping for literary connection and some kind of academic prowess. Primitive Technology as a name is not an oxymoron. He's creating technology...that is primitive. Why complicate things.

Kind of ruining a great channel here.

Can someone explain why FB can't become a paid service that engineers itself for the good of users?

I don't know anything about corporate financing but naive napkin math says if their 2 billion user base pays $1/month they would be pulling $24 billion a year. Wikipedia says their revenue is $24b/year. Now if they removed their entire advertising aspect (the human labor, infrastructure) their operating costs would go down and that $24b/year would mean more than it does now.

Is that bad math? I would readily pay $1/month to use a service designed for our well being rather than advertisers. I think anyone would. Why isn't this a thing?

I love the Office UI/UX. My only complaint is with cloud integrations it defaults the save dialog to onedrive or whatever, which I never use. But otherwise what problems do you have with it? The breadth of tools/options is incredible. The ease of use of many of them is on point. The only reason I prefer MS Office over Libre is because of the UI honestly. I would rather use Libre but I can never find what I'm trying to do.

A little OT but I'd like to know what part about getting map info is too difficult to automate. Are they lacking the recordings or what? I'd love to see the maps included in the dataset.

This is a shame for obvious reasons but I don't like the comparison to "god view". Uber designed a UI around accessing PII for their employees to use wanton, Lyft sounds like they need to get their data access under control, stop making excuses for why anyone "needs" real user data, and actually run audits.

Your point is not at all obvious, you're just saying "they used to be better, now they're spitting in my food gahh"

Ah I guess I meant non-charitable then! I'm pretty clueless on how the money aspect in a non-profit works.

And again, your comment is just anger and not an actual answer of what alternatives there are. What is your point? Do you care to actually answer my curiosity on what business models besides advertising are available to fund the continuing development of Firefox?

Anger abound regarding advertising etc but question: what's the alternative for Mozilla to be a viable company without depending on money from advertising either in the form of Pocket and new tab or via search engines paying for default?

We can all pay a subscription to use Firefox instead. But of course Firefox is open source so...

I mean I'd love for something like Facebook to cost $10 a year, I think that could work. But I don't see any other business model for Mozilla besides charitable donations.

That's a good history and makes a lot of sense. Thanks for being active in the community and for everything that DDG does!

I haven't opened one of those in literal years. I've been buying most durable goods online and probably anything that historically would have come in one of those demons now comes in easy to open/recycle boxes from Amazon.

I'm not getting that, what are you using? I'm using uBlock Origin. I wonder how those work, if they detect extensions or what

Yeah I was running down that walk during construction, very odd area but I guess cool if you work at one of those corpos, dig whole foods, and don't mind a lack of local character. That walk would be beautiful to run on if it weren't Houston, I am not used to that humidity!

I was there recently, I don't think it hits the mark. Way too corporate, too expensive, something about it is fake or trying too hard or something. It's also just a few islands of walkable spots interspersed with 4 lane divided roads. I felt like it was Exxon trying to impress business travelers, not something we can really replicate everywhere.

Why is the measurement on questions asked for the first couple of graphs and then user traffic for the latter set? I wonder if traffic is the better measurement for the first two as well but I bet the graphs won't look quite as doom and gloom.

But again probably less <this is losing popularity> and more <this is no longer cool to tag>. That's a really nice tool though

People think it already costs too much to use and the prices keep going up as it is. So then it comes back to political situations like Christie ending a project in the name of lower gas prices.

Ah well that put a positive note on my morning coffee. I didn't know that.

But still wouldn't it be valuable to the bidders for Amazon to fix this? Or shouldn't Amazon value better targeting because relevant ads convince users to engage with the platform more? The people selling the coffee filters are still guaranteed my business, just not before 6 months. I always buy from the same seller too so it could be a good opportunity for a competitor to sneak in right at the 6 month mark and make a new repeat customer.

I guess the answer to that is probably "well the system works well enough elsewhere so that would just be hyper-optimization"

Very true. Oh you just spent $400 on a top of the line product that'll last a decade? Here, check out these $100 bottom of the barrel alternatives that'll surely break in a month.

I get that Amazon is doing auction advertising but it seems like the value of their ads would be higher if they could correctly target them.