5,168 karma · joined June 14, 2011
This is not a new thing.
That's a rather strong opening to limiting free speech. Who gets to decide that my speech was without thought? Is there an approval process? Can I repeal the decision? Do I have to document my thoughts before I speak to prove later that I did indeed think before I spoke out against the people that make those distinctions?
Because that requires money.
Do we wait until it can be shown that companies such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc. influenced elections because they refused to serve information from a candidate they didn't like? If we aren't already there, it's not long before it is.
What do you think would happen if these "private companies" with such deep hooks into our communication infrastructure suddenly decided to remove all data associated to the Republican Party? For that matter, the Democratic Party?
It seems to me that Facebook and Twitter are trying to have it both ways. They can choose to police the content provided by their users but can't be held responsible for said content? Are they a publisher or a platform?
I don't think comparing old thinking based around old methods of communication compares to what we have today, it requires new thinking. These aren't like newspapers sold by kids on the corner in a city that can have dozens of newspapers countering each other. Imagine if there were only three newspapers in the entire country, soon the world, controlled by a small group of people who wish to use their publishing for their own agendas.
Tim Pool is right, at this rate, sooner or later, the Feds will come knocking and will shut that party down.
As for the burger flipper, I'm willing to bet there are barriers in place that prevent the flipper from living the life you describe that has little or nothing to do with the joint they work for. Often times there are exterior forces being applied that people are more than happy to ignore so they can blame the wrong target for their own agendas.
First, go watch it before the rumored Ryan Reynolds remake. It's a fun movie and holds up fairly well.
Second, when released for home they rolled all three endings into the storyline so you get to see all three.
Three, watch it again after the viewing the endings to see how all three actually do work in the story. May require more than one additional viewing to get it all, but worth it in my opinion.
Four, relatively safe for children and my kids love it.
The whole thing is a farce designed from the beginning to be abused.
Totally depends on the situation.
And why the assumption that modern versions of jQuery don't make use of modern DOM APIs?
The jquery example delegates #foo, so it can be injected in the page after load and the click event will still work.
But there are ways to mimic the behavior as another person has pointed out.
Claims that deleting the related file causes the game to no longer launch. Why is that necessary for marketing tracking or were they just too lazy to skip over that particular file not found error?
That the SteamID can be transmitted. Seems like identifiable information to me despite the claims otherwise.
There is a way to opt out of the tracking. Going to the opt out page I see a request for your gamer ID for the game in question. Which goes back to that being identifiable information. It also states a game could have opt out options in place so I'm wondering why those seem to not be available in the game?
At this point I say I'm surprised that their actually is surprise from developers at this backlash. This sort of things gets attempted every few years that comes to the same result.
Who first tested and implemented CSS? Browser programmers.
These days it's under the control of committee. I think I would disagree with the notion that CSS devs are the ones to blame in this case. Sure, there's lots of blame to share for the problems. To imply that CSS developers intentionally forced it to be complicated for purposes of job security is laughable.
After all, CSS is not C++.
But at least you are entertaining.