jamestc

The title isn't negative, though. Just radical.

Interesting, but not very useful to somebody who's an avid deleter of old e-mails. Kind of paints an odd picture.

Also, anyone else get a stuck logout&delete button after getting the data? Ended up having to revoke access via Gmail Accounts.

Oh, I absolutely guarantee it. Your FB search history, other people's FB search history (of your real name and of your fake name), which pages you view in correlation with what e-mail contacts you might have, the schools the people you talk to went to, etc.

Luckily there's no online record of relationship history or it'd be an open and close case.

>Is it unlikely that 3rd party would buy data from Facebook or some entity that obtained the inaccurate data from Facebook?

Probably. Using a fake/altered name is incredibly common on Facebook, especially among younger people. I think any 3rd party assigned with that task would realize that and avoid it.

You aren't alone. People are organizing protests and preparing letterheads, as they should be, but it all feels just as ineffective as the last time. The ugly truth, as many people know, is that these complaints/protests are built-in to the infrastructure, they're expected and they disrupt absolutely nothing.

We need a new conduit for effecting change.

Threads like these might as well be generated by an algorithm.

>NSA news >Why is everybody so surprised!? comment

Like clockwork. Let me ask you, though. Do you really think that people only "suddenly" care (with the implication of ignorance or a contradiction on their part) or is it possible that there are nuanced differences between all of the things you casually reference as common knowledge and the current NSA news? I mean, there is speculation and there is confirmation. There are hunches and there are reputable sources. There is pointing somebody to the Room 641A Wikipedia page and there is telling somebody, "hey, look, this guy who was a part of the NSA is not only confirming this, but has sacrificed his career to give us even more information about it."

The public unconscious may have assumed that this was going on, clusters of people may have known, but you're underestimating how people compartmentalize this kind of knowledge. So when we have an event that brings a lot of this knowledge together and to the forefront and gives us something we can point to and talk about (even if it's only a story or a face at this point), I don't think we should pass up the opportunity to develop a louder voice about all of this rather than being cynical AGAIN just because we can't resist putting down public outcry.

Mathematics education is a bit odd now for sure. I think if there was an effort to teach kids the logical and even creative side of math early on, they'd have an easier time building intuition for certain computational aspects later on. As it stands, most people are unaware that math is no longer predicated in reality, which seems nonsensical. You generally teach grammar before (or along with) composition.

I've never seen much ad hominem or meanness in the comments here. In fact, I think this place is awfully civil. People here have no problem calling one another out on something that is incorrect or dubious, and I like that. I'd rather a spade is called a spade than a bunch of people skirting around the issue in the name of politeness.

>He says that data can be gathered showing how many people see a particular painting or share it online, and thus reach conclusions on how successful an artist is.

Wouldn't this just lead to art becoming a new form of spam when people try to game this system? Not to mention that not all art is painting or can be easily shared.

While I agree with the general point of your post, I think that before resorting to the stock "old man yells at cloud" joke it's worth acknowledging that as a society we've been throwing ourselves at more and more technology fairly mindlessly, letting it take up vast amounts of our time, letting our children use it and develop their minds around it, and restructuring our lives/thinking around it.

So I think we ought to welcome channels of criticism/contemplation rather than just continuing the cycle mindlessly. I get that he hasn't used the product, but at the same time I get where he's coming from. Just because we can do something doesn't mean we necessarily should. It's a worthwhile thought whether or not you agree with his particular criticisms.

Nothing about how anybody other than yourself perceives your work?

That's weird. I didn't think humans were susceptible to "natural courting poses". Is there any scientific literature on this that isn't based purely on speculation?

I thought you might be basing it on the fact that he couldn't even finish his blog post.

Less memory. Less research. It only has one job to do, etc. No extra bullshit.

I know I'm being ridiculous. I'm just bummed that I can't read some of these really awesome books with the same leisure that I can a Kindle book or a physical book. First world problems, etc. I have to get over being phenomenologically appalled at the idea of reading a book in the same space I read message boards. There's a weird mental block there.