21–30 of 54 posts
And whose attack dog is the NYTimes? This is the 2nd hitpiece on facebook by the nytimes on the frontpage as of this moment. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18462671
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hah. It would be a hit piece if it were untrue and simply attempting to sway opinion against. Facebook applying for patents on distinctly creepy inferences from photos is hardly a hit piece. It puts it squarely in the category of Facebook bringing it on itself.
> Facebook applying for patents on distinctly creepy inferences from photos is hardly a hit piece. That one is by buzzfeednews, not the nytimes. I know it's hard to tell the difference between news companies today. There are 3 hitpieces on facebook on the frontpage. 2 of those are by the nytimes. There is a 4th by the businessinsider trying to make it's way to the frontpage. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18465…
It doesn't seem like they're being singled out unfairly to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just a polite reminder that using "butthurt" to mean "resentful"or "angry" paints a picture that is often homophobic and nearly always making light of rape. In my opinion, we should try not to normalize its use any further.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anal_retentiveness
Key takeaways: 1. Before Ms. Sandberg’s Senate testimony, Facebook lobbyists pushed lawmakers to refrain from questioning her about privacy, censorship and other issues, and to stick to election interference. The committee’s chairman, Senator Richard Burr, Republican of North Carolina, was swayed and warned members to stick to the hearing’s planned topic, The Times reported Wednesday. 2. Facebook had also lobbied for…
“Instead of learning from Google about being transpernt on how they use user data” I am curious evidences of this. Or are you comparing objectively with the two relative to recent events? Then sure. FB’s been very sketchy all this time with little knowing until the whole election interference and Cambridge scandal went public and viral did people pay attention. But thanks for the takeaways.
Google, for all the negative press and bashing they are getting lately, has not hidden what they collect, how they collect. They also do not sell user data (that's not their business model). Sure, they have had their share of issues, but I don't think they are systematic or intentional. They are happy if you want to take your data and go to someone else - they released takeaway tool more than 10 years ago.
Fb, on the other hand, never were trustworthy, even before any of the recent scandals became public. They have had history of changing things around that led to users unknowingly expose their details they thought they had locked down, more than once. They have been caught lying to advertisers about clicks and views.
But those finer points are lost when they have successfully dragged Google in the mudbath with their smear campaign, irrespective of the scale or intentions at Google.
Key takeaways: 1. Before Ms. Sandberg’s Senate testimony, Facebook lobbyists pushed lawmakers to refrain from questioning her about privacy, censorship and other issues, and to stick to election interference. The committee’s chairman, Senator Richard Burr, Republican of North Carolina, was swayed and warned members to stick to the hearing’s planned topic, The Times reported Wednesday. 2. Facebook had also lobbied for…
Just a polite reminder that using "butthurt" to mean "resentful"or "angry" paints a picture that is often homophobic and nearly always making light of rape. In my opinion, we should try not to normalize its use any further.
And whose attack dog is the NYTimes? This is the 2nd hitpiece on facebook by the nytimes on the frontpage as of this moment. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18462671
And whose attack dog is the NYTimes? This is the 2nd hitpiece on facebook by the nytimes on the frontpage as of this moment. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18462671
Are you being paid to post anti-media and anti-left articles? You've registered only 13 hours ago and the majority of your posts are anti-media, anti-left, pro-government. Smells like a paid plant.
(Of course, Mark wouldn't know anything about it.)
BTW, does HN make their content available in programming friendly way (like Reddit)? It would be interesting to do some analysis on age of account vs their comments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
america destroying its own tech companies. these ppl really are 'enemy of the ppl'.
Jeong and Swisher are the captains of the anti-tech crusade at the Times. Guess the clicks for those Trump articles are drying up.
Key takeaways: 1. Before Ms. Sandberg’s Senate testimony, Facebook lobbyists pushed lawmakers to refrain from questioning her about privacy, censorship and other issues, and to stick to election interference. The committee’s chairman, Senator Richard Burr, Republican of North Carolina, was swayed and warned members to stick to the hearing’s planned topic, The Times reported Wednesday. 2. Facebook had also lobbied for…
Just a polite reminder that using "butthurt" to mean "resentful"or "angry" paints a picture that is often homophobic and nearly always making light of rape. In my opinion, we should try not to normalize its use any further.
Butt is not same as butthole.
Key takeaways: 1. Before Ms. Sandberg’s Senate testimony, Facebook lobbyists pushed lawmakers to refrain from questioning her about privacy, censorship and other issues, and to stick to election interference. The committee’s chairman, Senator Richard Burr, Republican of North Carolina, was swayed and warned members to stick to the hearing’s planned topic, The Times reported Wednesday. 2. Facebook had also lobbied for…
Just a polite reminder that using "butthurt" to mean "resentful"or "angry" paints a picture that is often homophobic and nearly always making light of rape. In my opinion, we should try not to normalize its use any further.