YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube
211–220 of 276 posts
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube
#212Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean the leadership that put Google cofounder Sergey Brin's sister-in-law in charge of Youtube?
And not only sister in law. Executive leader of that highly successful project, Google Video, which ended with Wojcicki being so beaten that she had to tell Google management to buy her only competitor for over a billion dollars.
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube
#214'Freedom Expression' isn't so cool without money, right, Google?
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube
#215Let this be a lesson to all: intelligence does not in any way correlate with self awareness. It's likely that 'smart' people are just as likely to be unaware of their own follies or inabilities, I would argue, maybe more so as a lot of smart people tend to be 'inwardly focused' and less concerned about their direct environment. This kind of thing happens all the time among Exec. level, but normally we'd expect it fro…
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube
#216Let this be a lesson to all: intelligence does not in any way correlate with self awareness. It's likely that 'smart' people are just as likely to be unaware of their own follies or inabilities, I would argue, maybe more so as a lot of smart people tend to be 'inwardly focused' and less concerned about their direct environment. This kind of thing happens all the time among Exec. level, but normally we'd expect it fro…
More people will hear about the first part of that sentence so I guess it's still somewhat advantageous to them?
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nowdays, if somebody wins an award, they are the exact opposite. We live is opposite world now.
I have something that I call 'Potato-Law' for this. It's like how the potatoes in discounters always say 'premium quality' or 'premium potatoes' but if they are, they wouldn't be so cheap or you couldn't buy them at the discounter. OTOH, if you go to a specialty goods shop, they don't write premium on their products. So if something has to be labeled on how good it is, it's probably not.
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube
#218I think people here are fundamentally misunderstanding what happened here. There is a nonprofit, the "Freedom Forum Institute" that awarded this award. Only the award ceremony was sponsored by YouTube. It's common practice for nonprofits to use awards like this as an opportunity to ask for donations, and for the company associated with that person to offer to sponsor the awards ceremony. I don't see anything to indic…
An award that the recipient pays for isn't a meritorious award.
[0] http://gannettblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/as-freedom-forum-pos...
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If male == can sire children and female == can bear children, then infertile people don't have a sex which is nonsense. Your conclusion is nonsense, the premise is not. A broken computer is still in essence a computer, even if it can't actually do any computing as a result. > Yes, it would. Humans only usually have 5 fingers on each hand. But it isn't important to emphasize that there are 6-fingered humans because…
> Your conclusion is nonsense, the premise is not. My conclusion is derived from the premise. Since it's nonsense so is the premise. > A broken computer is still in essence a computer, even if it can't actually do any computing as a result. An infertile woman is broken then? > It's some kind of genetic disorder, an anomaly. With your standard you can't describe anything, as almost nothing is true 100% of the time. Of…
I don't know if I would necessarily use this particular word as it's mostly associated with lifeless objects, but in a sense - yes. Similarly to how having a disability or being an amputee is, for the lack of a better term, being "broken", as your body fails to function is some manner. Life is more nuanced and it's not all about that of course, but you get the idea.
> Of course you can. 100% of non-broken computers can be used for computing -- the "non-broken" part is usually implied when talking about them.
So a broken computer is no longer a computer? I'm too stupid to delve into a philosophical debate about what truly makes a thing a thing, but I just don't accept that.
Even still, there is always a chance that the computer will randomly malfunction and do something unexpected at any time. Unlikely, but possible. So you can never say for sure that an operation of 2 + 2 will result in 4.
> If the members of a category don't have any shared traits -- i.e. something that is true for all of them -- then what is it even useful for?
If it's accurate enough then it's useful for making predictions. You know, science and stuff.
I wonder, how would you describe what a 'human' is?
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure how to respond other that it's interesting how people switched from accusing everyone of being ignorant to demanding from them to be ignorant. Or was it always some kind of doublespeak? Not sure.
Respect for other's privacy has never been considered ignorance, even if it may match a dictionary definition.