You're too kind, Chris

quote:

Originally posted by Zoso I think I'll ask the wife to clam slam me this evening.

I've thought short and hard about doing the same, but I can't stop thinking about the risks if anything goes wrong, from becoming an innie to hitting the bum's eye.

Either way, I don't think it would be followed by a similar swag

___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

I've been just ill enough to write off this whole weekend to lounging around in bed not quite doing anything.

___________________
Mixes:
> Maximum Elevation [Progressive House]
> DI.FM 26th Anniversary Guest Mix [Progressive House]
> Live @ Dance:Love:Hub London, 11.10.2025
> Higher Peaks [Progressive House]
> Dance:Love:Hub Afterparty (The Return) 23.11.24

Like these sets? Come see me play live at Kibosh in Manchester: https://www.instagram.com/kibosh.mcr/

quote:

Originally posted by Lira short and hard

lololololol

Well, honesty IS the best policy

___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

I got my replacement phone from Google yesterday. It's a refurb; however, they sent me a Pixel XL 128gb when I only had a Pixel 5" 32gb before. Awwwwyeah.

Birthday is this Saturday. But my neice is born on the same day so probably wont get to celebrate it. My gf and I are going for dinner the night before though.

Being an adult and nobody caring about you anymore sucks. Turning 36 sucks even harder.

If you’re still on Facebook in 2018 you’re a fucking dickwad. Period. All social media for that matter.

I was struck that on the surface it looked quite adversarial. Senators were trying to ask fairly pointed questions (despite any technical ignorance). But underneath the surface, the two parties here have fairly well aligned goals -- less freedom on the Internet. The senators want to show that they're doing something, and Facebook welcomes regulation in order to suffocate would-be competitors with it. I'm sure they're going to collaborate to find something that works well for both of their interests. We're witnessing the death of the free internet. It was a nice experiment while it lasted.

The best part was someone asked if Facebook tracks you even if you've logged out of their website. Holy shit, moment of truth for Zuck, I thought. Nope, he deflected by saying he'll get his team to get back to the senator, and then he spewed jargon ("I know websites use cookies [bla bla] for security"). Oh, he knew the answer, but he couldn't say it in front of all the cameras watching. And of-effing-course he knows what cookies are.

And also he emphasized too much how people are in control of what data they share. The better question is, what data does Facebook save that the users can't see: all the analytics, all the location tracking, all the websites they visit. I didn't volunteer that data to you, Zuck, and I can't even control whether you have that data or not! (Well ok, on desktop I have Ghostery that blocks many many tracking pixels...).

Last edited by cevb on Apr-11-2018 at 14:03

quote:

Originally posted by cevb If you’re still on Facebook in 2018 you’re a fucking dickwad. Period. All social media for that matter. I was struck that on the surface it looked quite adversarial. Senators were trying to ask fairly pointed questions (despite any technical ignorance). But underneath the surface, the two parties here have fairly well aligned goals -- less freedom on the Internet. The senators want to show that they're doing something, and Facebook welcomes regulation in order to suffocate would-be competitors with it. I'm sure they're going to collaborate to find something that works well for both of their interests. We're witnessing the death of the free internet. It was a nice experiment while it lasted. The best part was someone asked if Facebook tracks you even if you've logged out of their website. Holy shit, moment of truth for Zuck, I thought. Nope, he deflected by saying he'll get his team to get back to the senator, and then he spewed jargon ("I know websites use cookies [bla bla] for security"). Oh, he knew the answer, but he couldn't say it in front of all the cameras watching. And of-effing-course he knows what cookies are. And also he emphasized too much how people are in control of what data they share. The better question is, what data does Facebook save that the users can't see: all the analytics, all the location tracking, all the websites they visit. I didn't volunteer that data to you, Zuck, and I can't even control whether you have that data or not! (Well ok, on desktop I have Ghostery that blocks many many tracking pixels...).

k

quote:

Originally posted by cevb I was struck that on the surface it looked quite adversarial. Senators were trying to ask fairly pointed questions (despite any technical ignorance). But underneath the surface, the two parties here have fairly well aligned goals -- less freedom on the Internet. The senators want to show that they're doing something, and Facebook welcomes regulation in order to suffocate would-be competitors with it. I'm sure they're going to collaborate to find something that works well for both of their interests. We're witnessing the death of the free internet. It was a nice experiment while it lasted.

You as much as this comes across as a little batshit-ie, I think you might be right;

The FCC railroading the net neutrality vote, led by a former lawyer/lobbyist for Verizon was the first step.

To see Zucktard asking for "regulations with teeth" smacked of basically saying close the gate so we're the only ones out in the field. When he built FB and it grew this huge, it was in huge part becuase there were so little rules to the web and case in point, FB has been getting away with murder in terms of data harvesting (which is the revenue, not ads).

By asking for regulation, it makes it that much harder for some other startup to get to FB's position or rise like they did, completely unfettered.

I would imagine the telecoms industry would LOVE to tax the internet in different way and we really might be seeing the death of a free net.