saudioger

I mean... how does history not already tell you this? Nearly every person we remember as a historical figure was able to "sell" something to get there. The typical exception to this is the person who did something interesting, but someone else sold it for them after they died.

In the eyes of their lifetimes and most of history, Edison won the Tesla v Edison battle nearly 100%. Edison was a vastly better salesperson.

If you ask the average person who Nikola Tesla was today, they'd probably say something about the car company. Elon Musk sells the name Tesla better than Tesla himself ever did.

If your idea of success is obtaining money or changing hearts and minds, you better learn how to sell (or I guess you could devise a spectacularly dangerous weapon).

you're asking this question in a thread about Mark Cuban... yes, 100% salespeople

what other famous national landmarks avoided getting a building permit for 135 years?

that's like "discovering" the eiffel tower, it's not like you're stumbling into an unexplored land

fetal position

More important. The only innovative thing I can come up with to avoid having to fix my leaky toilet is shitting in the yard.

Wish this wasn't software bound to hardware

Ehhh, I imagine the seed/filament weight ratio is much closer than the human/filament weight ratio... if you blow this up to human size/weight proportions the filaments would likely need to be gigantic.

Check it out, it does an OK job at filtering out adult content... but it's 99% garbage.

I hear that, my daughter can't even read but can play some really complex games with almost no direct intervention. Kids are incredible learning machines.

The restrictions on the iPad are rather mature at this point. I've blocked all unrestricted internet holes and just keep her within apps i've vetted.

There's a crisis of opinion like this in every generation. It happened with radio too.

I personally feel like the best approach is moderation for everything, but hey, people who don't watch media probably have more interesting hobbies than I do.

That's my experience, and why I pulled the plug on it. Unless you're on top of your kid the entire time, it's incredibly difficult to keep an eye on that. YouTube is designed to just shove as much content in front of your face as possible, quality, content, age-appropriateness, be damned.

I strongly recommend that you don't let your kids watch YouTube. There's some really low-quality garbage out there and there's just too much to properly curate. After some exploring on my own I absolutely do not trust YouTube at all to filter appropriately. This is just pure garbage streaming into your kids' faces.

Do anything else, Netflix at least has some barrier for kids content... but torrent a bunch kids shows if you have to.

I think the intention with mentioning a car is the fact that the US is so commute-heavy that the majority of our fast food is intended for car consumption.

I can't cite this case specifically, but normally it would be incredibly difficult to impersonate a government official as a source.

In my experience verifying a source means weeding out that possibility before publishing... e.g, cross-checking data from a third party (background checks, employment history, social media accounts, public records), then photos of credentials, video chats, etc. Then you cross-reference information with other sources on the story, etc... conspiracy is possible, but unless Bloomberg is inflating the number of sources it has, it would have to be a massive undertaking (state-sponsored).

Anonymous doesn't typically mean someone just calls up and says something and then it's off to the presses. They know exactly who gave them the information, but they're protecting the identities.

Maybe claims of "fake news" would be a lot less common if more people knew what went into verifying information before a major news outlet publishes a story.