xcavier

Guy whose business model is predicated on hoovering up everyone's personal data so he can sell advertising (and similar targeting services) now wants to give everyone a "fatter" pipe for hoovering even more (and different types of) data...

When linking my Google Mail, Composio was asking for some concerning data (DOB, exact street address). I noped out of that

Can't we get proper noise cancellation first before they worry about gesture control…

I'm sure this would be interesting if it actually rendered on my device…

I agree. He did not misspeak. He said exactly what he believes, and he's now being called out for it.

Is this where we request commentators to ‘out’ themselves as Australian citizens/residents (or not) before they respond (born Brisvegas 1970 here)

Chances this is a shonky attempt to drag new training data from private users?

In addition to the environmental issues, surely a wide disparity in dialects and speech patterns must have played a role? ML/NLP models largely be trained on clear, precise - and predictable - English language must struggle when you add in an accent, slang usage and age/geo-specific language choice?

Just the other day I was wishing there was a uBlock but for podcasts...

Also... McDonalds isn't in the business of selling food. It is in the business of owning real estate and selling "inputs" to its franchise holders. It makes money by selling equipment and food inputs to franchisors. It can't grow revenues if it doesn't find new things to sell to franchisees.

I think the biggest issue with the decentralised crowd is they think their target market is their (technical) peers. Web publishing was a cul de sac until it went WYSIWYG. Dialup internet didn’t take off until the likes of AOL dumbed it down.

Until the decentralisation experience becomes AOL simple, it will remain a backwater.

I think the key language here is pause "commercial use". They're not asking for a pause on R&D - just not making the tech/products available to the market (to quote: "temporarily pause commercial use"), until such time as agreed guardrails can be applied. This is a much more pragmatic solution than the "open letter" calling a halt on R&D.

I've seen an increase in strangers messaging me on WhatsApp. When I ask them how we know each other, they tell me a friend passed on my details and said I was a good person to know, they're new to the city etc. If I press on the details, they eventually say something along the lines of "Oh, I mistyped the number I was given - I was meant to text someone else" (in some scenarios they go straight to this line when I ask how we know each other). Invariably they then say "you sound like a nice person, let's chat". Classic scam setup.

I read that headline as precisely the opposite: oh, bugger, they are not doing well and that money won’t help

Is the strategy that he wants to force traffic to twitter.com, thus maximising ad revenue?

>> > If there are employees not aligned with that vision, he will chew them out and he will do it in a vicious way, which is his right as owner.

Is it? >>

Yes, this is the sentence that stopped me in my tracks. No-one has that "right". But more importantly, it isn't right...

>>The actual human connection features of Facebook turned out to be a novelty<<

I don't agree. FB play(ed) an important role for me: helping me keep my extended family across the goings on in my child's life (they all live elsewhere). It was quite good at making grandparents/aunts/uncles feel connected etc.

But that utility is largely buried beneath a growing list of 'features' with little appeal - I don't need prompts to add people I know. I don't need yet another marketplace. I don't need short-form videos from complete strangers.

Today, 80%+ of my newsfeed feels like irrelevant content - and that's what's killing FB.

Personally I am curious why no one is exploring the M2M applications of crypto.

If we look forward to the time all (most?) vehicles are autonomous, I can see a need for a ‘market mechanism’ which allows vehicles to request/cede priority.

Driver A wants to get to Point B in a hurry, so has an incentive to request Drivers C and D to allow their vehicle to pass. If Drivers C and D have no rush, they accept the incentive. Crypto (or a similar token), handled by the vehicles, enable this.

Because small dick energy just doesn’t work for me. Some 95% of commentary on the topic is off the rails. The 5% rarely gets a mention here.

My take is that it is a leadership skill weakness. It is an outgrowth of the (poor) management principle of: if you can't measure it, you can't manage it.

A lot of executives have little experience working with/managing staff - in real time - they cannot see. I've certainly worked under CEOs whose default mindset was "If I cannot see X at their desk, they are not contributing" etc.

Yes, these execs can look at monthly productivity/output reports and do the math retrospectively, but on a day-to-day basis, they lack the skills/tools to manage what they cannot see.

When I embarked on writing my first (of 10) books, my publisher shared a wise quote/insight, which I have never forgotten:

[The quote has been attributed to many authors, so I won’t engage in that debate]

“I don’t enjoy writing. But I love having written.”

Na’er a true word has been spoken.

Any beer consumption index that doesn’t include Australia is suspect...

I honestly doubt this - especially if the photo is indicative of his ‘rig’

So, in essence, our (Australia’s) government blinked

Appears to have been removed...

Absolutely agree. The main takeaway was an accelerated stratification. The big got bigger, small companies shrank (went niche), and the (major) middle collapsed. That doesn’t bode well for the average employee.

MC’s no.1 source of work is it’s global network of former-MC alumni

Millions of customers - including many not in the US. He couldn’t even be assed enough to at least segment his client list before spamming them...(said as an Aussie who received his email)

I’ll ignore the “won’t someone think of the children” argument, and highlight the research into how frequently DNA evidence is misused, and how poor juries are at understanding both DNA science and probability/stats.

My take is it is inferred box office receipts.

When they ‘four wall’, they pay a single fee to rent the entire cinema (the ‘small fee’ they paid to a friendly cinema owner.

They then ran 5 viewings.

So they are claiming being sold out for each of the viewings. (5 * seat capacity * ticket price), but didn’t actually pay themselves for all the tickets (no revenue - small fee = small loss)