61–70 of 229 posts
> companies that use cross-site tracking for things like website optimization OK, I was hoping someone already addressed this, but apparently not. What "website optimization" requires cross-site tracking? Is there any real application for cross-site tracking besides advertising? I honestly would like to know.
I thought Korean soap operas were good until I read this article. What a whole bunch of unnecessary drama. The W3C always appeared to be one of the most dysfunctional entities in existence, and now the article leaves no question as to why. Funny this Rosewell guy. "Should web browsers really become implementation mechanisms of specific government regulation?" -- Isn't everything a mechanism of specific government reg…
> Isn't everything a mechanism of specific government regulation? Um, no?
I don't care how big this man's business is, Rosewell is a parasite bent on preserving the established order of datamining the shit out of everyone for his own personal profit. He is gumming up the works with pointless philosophical bloviating, using the anti-big-tech argument as a cudgel of convenience for bludgeoning a nascent privacy movement that has taken decades to get off the ground. I've sat in a large audien…
agree with the sentiment but the vulgarity dilutes the weight of the message.. centuries of privacy rights are drained and drowning right now IMO
W3C being basically Google and a couple of other 10000-pound gorilla companies at this point...
These decisions might as well be made in closed rooms at Google and Mozilla, and there wouldn't be much you could do about it. By the power of browser market share, they could just skip W3C and implement whatever they want. What they'd get away with is only limited by the point where someone with a different agenda starts funding their own browser fork (and can convince users to use it.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great, politeness is racist now?
I don't think that politeness is inherently racist, but it has been used as a tool of racial suppression, and as a way of keeping itinerants in line https://www.ferris.edu/HTMLS/news/jimcrow/question/2006/sept...
> companies that use cross-site tracking for things like website optimization OK, I was hoping someone already addressed this, but apparently not. What "website optimization" requires cross-site tracking? Is there any real application for cross-site tracking besides advertising? I honestly would like to know.
It's referring to things like analytics, hotjar etc. Optimisation as in conversion optimisation. Imo, a lot of this stuff ends up being just as bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Vulgarity is often just a verbal tic for the inarticulate. If this doesn't apply in your case, then you and your message will be disadvantaged by association. This is incorrect. Vulgarity is the strongest possible choice when evaluating one's choice of words for emotional impact. I don't know what makes otherwise intelligent folk so damn afraid of them but that is not a part of the world I understand. Why would oth…
> Why would otherwise chaste people shout "FUCK!!" when they stub their toe? Because in a moment of pain, people are emotional and inarticulate. Obviously. Vulgarity serves many purposes, but the fact that the words can be used almost anywhere, in almost any grammatical form, makes them substitutes for the more specific expressions that they replace. "Vulgarity is often just a verbal tic for the inarticulate." (Empha…
Not every statement is to be boiled down to intellectual delivery devoid of emotion. We're expressly humans, not computers.
The idea that "Intelligent people resist emotional persuasion, or at least try to." is for the consumer to apply, when and how they like.
Communication with vulgarity is not to make you emotional but to succinctly communicate the emotion of the poster.
Depending on your perceived relationship with the poster you may feel something yourself.
Similarly, if you are not the desired audience for this comment, you are free to move along with no further thought.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
agree with the sentiment but the vulgarity dilutes the weight of the message.. centuries of privacy rights are drained and drowning right now IMO
> but the vulgarity dilutes the weight of the message Actually vulgarity was invented (and has historically been used) to improve the weight of such messages. It works too: "Writing in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science a team of researchers from the Netherlands, the UK, the USA and Hong Kong report that people who use profanity are less likely to be associated with lying and deception." [1] Can…
...
That report doesn't say what you want it to.
"Honesty" is not necessarily reality. Someone who is moved to high expressiveness is plausibly sincere, but they are not necessarily rational, reasonable, or correct.
Appealing to emotion works but it is still a cheap trick. If that's what we do here nowadays, well OK, but it's a loss.
It's easy to mock the pettiness of all parties described here, and it's common for people on this forum to take absolutist stances with regards to privacy/advertising, but it's also important to recognize that these arguments will actually define the future of the internet for the average user. There are trillion dollar companies on both sides of the argument, and their eventual compromise will establish the defaults…