polarix

No problems with the main thrust of the article, but the conclusion that "America's jobs crisis needs to be looked at as a failure of employers and job boards to ensure an accurate and fair employment process" is laughable. The problems with the re-employment engine are multifold, and not trivially reducible to a single sentence.

An interesting, and more nuanced take on the issue from a very different angle, which at least starts to grasp the enormity of the problem: http://lesswrong.com/lw/hh4/the_robots_ai_and_unemployment_a...

HYPE*rloop

I'm not sure what it is, but something feels very wrong to me about sublime package control. It might be the instructions for submitting new packages. It might be the difficulty of installing a bunch of packages at once.

Okay, looking at this again, it's clear that the video/transcript has the good stuff. However:

1. the top banner is too big

2. between it, and the talk of free/premium, and the hype-sounding stuff in the short intro, somehow this pattern-matches to scammy sites for me, and without watching the video I'm expecting it to be minute after minute of buildup with contentless up-selling.

3. Having the transcript in a scrolling box makes it harder to notice that it's actually a representation of what I want, especially when:

4. Leading with the sponsors is really tough. I expect to see sponsors at the end, after I'm appreciative of what the content was. Seeing them at the beginning just annoys me and makes me feel like they're in the way of what I'm trying to do. Since the earlier hooks triggered negative heuristics for me, I didn't power through, and never got to the good stuff.

Hope that's more constructive.

I actually can't tell which parts of that page are ads and which are the real content.

"Microsoft is oblivious if it is not doing something to divorce itself from the NSA"

No John, unfortunately it is not really an option to move 57,000 employees and a headquarters out of the United States. That is what would need to be done. None of the people making statements for these large corporations are lying voluntarily.

what?

Don't really see why this is a problem, as long as they are confident replacement part stocks will hold out.

APPLE technique: (?)

- Ask

- Pause

- Probe / Pick

- Listen

- Elaborate

per http://www.exforsys.com/career-center/facilitator/core-skill...

"An effective facilitator does not just end at asking effective questions. Proper timing and accurate delivery are also important. For a good and effective facilitation, the APPLE technique might work best. APPLE is the acronym for asking the question, pausing to allow the participants to comprehend the question and think of an answer, picking a member to provide an answer, listening to the answer provided, and expounding or elaborating more on the answers given. More importantly, listen to the answers of the questions you asked."

"data aggregation imposes a negative externality upon society"

This is obviously true. It is also obviously true that data aggregation imparts a (perhaps equally) significant positive externality to society.

Being interesting to the world carries enough power to compensate for any attention asymmetry.

Can you clarify? Why is "great content" == "landing pages"? How are landing pages spam?

Every time she says "protect the american people from" I keep filling in "the NSA and other overreaching government agencies" in my head.

This is really an incredible spectacle of audacity.

Yeah, it's been frustrating.

I think there's another reason: there appears to be only one human, and he is both the engineer and spokesperson. If the engineer could be read in and forced not to communicate with either the public or the rest of the team, it would be a more feasible operation.

Uh, hah? Haha?

The best hope for evidence would be engineering and construction documentation of the reporting mechanisms.

Moreover, these people cannot speak the truth since they do not know it. The surgeries were done far away from the C-suite.

See the people who are making these statements don't know. The only people who know are the ops teams, and they really can't tell, because they could fairly easily just disappear.

No, because that should adjust your expected value.

Yes; let's increase frustration for everyone based on some flimsy evidence!

"One [study] in Ireland, for example, found no reduction in overdoses"

Woah, Deja Vu!

And a far richer and more thorough expose on the subject is @michaelochurch's Gervais-Macleod series. To whom you responded.

Abduction should be solved by physical surveillance.

Lack of empathy, sure. But this is orange sunshine perspective.

Successor? It's the same program!

"When you walk into a store, they'll already know who you are. When you interact with a policeman, she'll already have your personal information displayed on her Internet-enabled glasses."

That makes it sound really useful, and terrific for society.

Sweet sweet irony

If you're talking to investors regularly, it's probably worth your while anyway.

You might think you could possibly have done this in the physical world for a few years now. Don't fool yourself. You have a face and DNA. You will not be anonymous (or even pseudonymous) as long as you carry a body.