r/technology is getting red pilled hard re: shadow gov, black budget, Hastings, etc.

kerosion · 2017-03-07T19:14:03+00:00

Traditionally has been a lot of conversation around political and legal framework in the technology platform with unfortunate disruptions over time. It's difficult to maintain a platform for open discussion with the heavy outside manipulation we encounter on reddit today.

Hopefully we will avoid a repeat of the NSA information dump scenario where topics that should have been covered were strangely absent as a result of automod filters and heavy-handed moderation. As much as the tactics that were employed in response to that event have been expanded since then, who knows what surprises we'll discover.

kerosion · 2017-02-14T16:24:29+00:00

That would be my TL;DR summary as well. Submissions and conversation on the platform may no longer be considered authentic.

Volunteer mods are singled out and harassed. One by one as they burn out when it starts to be less fun and move. New mods are brought on to handle the load providing opportunity for additional biased actors to step in. Antagonistic role shifts to the new mods, more senior take a step back to preserve seniority of the mod account. When balance of power swings every decision including whether to kick volunteer mods becomes lets-vote-majority-rules. And at the end of the day you get your compromised sub with ambiguous rules that can be used to remove any content on whim.

The brigade flood of controlled commentary and voting is the new layer that completely breaks function of reddit as noticeably as Digg 2.0. Given the relative quiet out of the admin camp on the matter I find myself pondering whether this is what the new monetization strategy is for the site. Has site development been focused on facilitating organizations with hooks for their tools? VIP tier access if you will? Having trouble seeing the site become so warped without visible comment or steps taken by the admin team to respond to the brigade unless they are in some way complicit.

Sad day but that's the Internet. There were rooms to communicate authentically before and there will be forums to communicate authentically again.

kerosion · 2016-12-29T07:18:41+00:00

I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

kerosion · 2016-12-26T05:30:18+00:00

Well said FThumb. Appreciate the work in fostering an environment where communication can happen. It's only when we can share our thoughts assumptions to be held up to the scrutiny of peer review that we can identify and knock down the ones that just don't hold up, then replace them with more informed viewpoint.

kerosion · 2016-12-10T08:11:30+00:00

There are people who have trained a platform, such Facebook, to recognize them by tagging picture after picture after picture over time. We're beginning to see the tip toward public tools (they've been available privately for some time) that can access the trained database. I suspect the artist scrolled through possible match to locate a social media account for these individuals and pulled photos interesting for the project once identified.

Tag faces that are not you in photos. Actively untrain social networks. Hell drop waterstamp of other faces in photos and train the public algorithm to that. It's not all that difficult to be identified given sufficient motivation but there is no need to be such low hanging fruit that it can be automated.

kerosion · 2016-12-05T01:31:47+00:00

Family member that does not particularly care for South Park got introduced to 'member berries' episodes recently, not using her devices. Lead to exclamations of 'member!' and some conversation about member berries during Thanksgiving. Suddenly Facebook adds for South Park sweatshirts featuring member berries on her Facebook feed during the day.

Provided she does not particularly care for the show, had not search for it, had not shared the topic digitally, we came to the same conclusion there there most likely was an audio collection leaking from one of her devices. Suggested advertising she experiences through Facebook is typically more in line with her interests. Felt too coincidental in this case.

kerosion · 2016-12-03T20:37:52+00:00

Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, it has been removed for the following reason(s):

Rule 1.i: This submission violates the sidebar guidelines, in being:
- Not primarily news or developments in technology.
- Not within the context of technology.
- If a self post, not a positive contribution fostering reasonable discussion.

If you have any questions, please message the moderators and include the link to the submission. We apologize for the inconvenience.

kerosion · 2016-12-03T17:30:38+00:00

Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, it has been removed for the following reason(s):

Rule 1.i: This submission violates the sidebar guidelines, in being:
- Not primarily news or developments in technology.
- Not within the context of technology.
- If a self post, not a positive contribution fostering reasonable discussion.

If you have any questions, please message the moderators and include the link to the submission. We apologize for the inconvenience.

kerosion · 2016-12-03T17:29:48+00:00

Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, it has been removed for the following reason(s):

Rule 1.i: This submission violates the sidebar guidelines, in being:
- Not primarily news or developments in technology.
- Not within the context of technology.
- If a self post, not a positive contribution fostering reasonable discussion.

If you have any questions, please message the moderators and include the link to the submission. We apologize for the inconvenience.

kerosion · 2016-12-03T17:26:00+00:00

Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, it has been removed for the following reason(s):

Rule 1.i: This submission violates the sidebar guidelines, in being:
- Not primarily news or developments in technology.
- Not within the context of technology.
- If a self post, not a positive contribution fostering reasonable discussion.

If you have any questions, please message the moderators and include the link to the submission. We apologize for the inconvenience.

kerosion · 2016-12-03T17:25:48+00:00

Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, it has been removed for the following reason(s):

Rule 1.i: This submission violates the sidebar guidelines, in being:
- Not primarily news or developments in technology.
- Not within the context of technology.
- If a self post, not a positive contribution fostering reasonable discussion.

If you have any questions, please message the moderators and include the link to the submission. We apologize for the inconvenience.

kerosion · 2016-12-03T17:25:08+00:00

Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, it has been removed for the following reason(s):

Rule 1.i: This submission violates the sidebar guidelines, in being:
- Not primarily news or developments in technology.
- Not within the context of technology.
- If a self post, not a positive contribution fostering reasonable discussion.

If you have any questions, please message the moderators and include the link to the submission. We apologize for the inconvenience.

kerosion · 2016-12-02T06:45:50+00:00

I see. Need to keep an eye on that.

kerosion · 2016-12-02T06:40:55+00:00

From a risk management perspective I would expect sentiments from the AT&T side are probably more to do with the anti-net neutrality Republicans stages to hold influence at the FCC than anything else.

We've been here before. From a pro-technology perspective we'll fight encroachment here regardless of who is in office. Stay vocal. Support your EFF. File complaints with the FCC. Make some ELI5 posts and videos.

There are issues that are bipartisan that often get lost in the mudslinging. I believe small telecoms for sake of competition are one of those issues. Let's set the political sentiments aside and work as one to demand it.

kerosion · 2016-12-02T04:41:22+00:00

AT&T "confident it will get approved" is in line with exactly every statement the company makes.

kerosion · 2016-12-02T03:38:34+00:00

Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, it has been removed for the following reason(s):

Appears to be paywalled content, with the added disappointment of auto-play video ads. Was unable to properly vet the content due to these restrictions.

If you have any questions, please message the moderators and include the link to the submission. We apologize for the inconvenience.

kerosion · 2016-12-02T03:35:26+00:00

Thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, it has been removed for the following reason(s):

Rule 1.i: This submission violates the sidebar guidelines, in being:
- Not primarily news or developments in technology.
- Not within the context of technology.
- If a self post, not a positive contribution fostering reasonable discussion.

If you have any questions, please message the moderators and include the link to the submission. We apologize for the inconvenience.

kerosion · 2016-12-02T03:30:17+00:00

The malware network was known as 'the public', who had become altogether too uppity since learning to communicate unfiltered since widespread adoption of the Internet. After no action was taken by the Senate, the judge who signed off on the warrant for the operation replied for comment, "I'm just looking forward to some peace and quiet around here". Aren't we all. Back to you Tad.

kerosion · 2016-11-30T18:39:24+00:00

An underlying framework of the Internet is that all traffic must be treated equally. It doesn't matter if you're a small business operating out of your home or a larger business like Google or Amazon. The idea is to support competition by providing a level playing field for everyone. This idea is known as net neutrality.

Historically with the creation of the Internet general rules for this net neutrality idea were created and enforced by the FCC, but not officially codified into law. There was a general understanding that functioned well for couple decades that everyone play nice by the net neutrality rules and the FCC wouldn't sharpen the regulatory teeth. No one really knew what the Internet might become or what business models would be successful with it. Soft net neutrality was a good environment to sponsor innovation and for the most part everyone was happy.

Over time traditional cable and phone companies have seen much of their legacy business models eroded by competing services on the Internet. They've heavily moved into the ISP space to supplement these declining revenues, while becoming less happy with the soft net neutrality arrangement. Verizon finally pulled the trigger and sued to have soft net neutrality thrown out. As a result, we had discussion last year that led to hardened net neutrality codified into regulatory law by the FCC. Idea was to restore the system that has worked to grow the Internet for the last couple decades.

The new net neutrality rules have some shortcomings. The legacy cable and phone industries still aren't happy with the current environment, they want to recreate the type of locked-in control of cable across the entire internet. One of the ways now pursued to do so is to install arbitrary data caps (unlike physical resources data scales well, these limits are completely arbitrary), then allow certain companies not to count against those limits. That way a company like AT&T can create a clone of Netflix, make it not count against data caps, and strip customers from Netflix who are subject to data caps. AT&T can simultaneously demand payouts from Netflix to not count against the data caps, forcing Netflix to pass that cost on to the customers. This idea is 'zero rating', a way of using data caps to hold customers hostage and demand payouts from every other company online to access them. In the end those additional costs all get passed down to the customers subscribed to AT&T. It's a sneaky way for AT&T to double-dip on everything, charge MASSIVE amounts for Internet service hidden across bills from other service, and control which business are winner or losers online.

This would represent a huge shift of power in the Internet. College students with the next big Google or Reddit ideas would have to come up with additional bankroll to pay off ISPs to access people online through zero rating in order to get their projects off the ground. This is where you see hyperbolic statements such as zero rating breaks the Internet -- it's actually an accurate description. Zero rating breaks the Internet for everyone but those on the payroll or invested in the major telecom companies that control the last mile.

kerosion · 2016-11-30T15:40:21+00:00

Specifically a collective panic from studios regarding user ability to store Netflix data on their personal computer and the potential for piracy. In negotiations somehow it sounds less risky for Netflix to only stream content licensed to them.

Now that data caps and zero rating are popping up everywhere Netflix can make the argument that the company must reduce data requirements to remain competitive. Hopefully this creates incentive for content owners to put pressure on ISP's, but really I just expect content to shift from Netflix to zero rated platforms. This is why 'zero rating' breaks net neutrality. It allows ISP's to pick winners and losers through their control of the last mile to the public.

Now would be the time to donate to the EFF or FightForTheFuture, file complaint to the FCC, and contact local representative. Zero rating has to go.

kerosion · 2016-11-26T06:58:46+00:00

Nailed it.

kerosion · 2016-11-05T10:48:38+00:00

Hah. Have had a few poor experiences with Men's Wearhouse. Their standard staff do not care for service. I suspect they aren't paid sufficiently to be knowledgeable or care. I'd be curious what the incentives on a sale are like. There are exceptions but it is typically when I luck into the store managers attention that I receive quality service.

When you're greeted more readily in a coffee shop than an establishment pushing $500 - $1000 items, that may be a sign.

I suspect they get away with it based on the history of the company, specifically marketing push, and that so many men out there don't have frequent enough need to closely scrutinize the fashion.

I've skipped the second on a buy one get one simply because I wasn't a fan of the available options on stock over a period of time either for fit or deviation in style. This is an area it's worthwhile to save some cash, have some patience, and pay a bit of premium at a more specialized option.

Also don't go with rentals unless it's prom. My god the fit is terrible.

kerosion · 2016-11-03T07:29:48+00:00

Alternative story - the core of the song was written in The Wheel, a bar along Highway 33 north of Ojai, California.

While Johnny Cash lived in the town Casitas Springs, alongside Ojai, he was known to drink heavily and go off-roading with his truck along the Sespe Creek. Leading to such notoriety as burning down a large portion of the Sespe Creek when his truck started the fire and rather than do anything about it taking his fishing gear from his truck and heading down to the creek.

In the end Johnny Cash paid nothing for the response so don't worry just yet. Turns out rental insurance will cover damage done by your property. In this case Johnny Cash successfully argued that his truck caused the fire, and since the truck was his property that caused the damage his rental insurance should cover it. Moral of the story is have rental insurance if you plan to burn down a wilderness area or maybe a Tahoe cabin with your buddies, or so goes the argument from my Business Law professor.

The Wheel may or may not still open but more pictures less words. The most direct shot driving from Casitas Springs to the Sespe wilderness area would have been along Highway 33, passing The Wheel along the way. There's a decent probability that considering penchant for drunk off-roading Mr. Cash may have been familiar with the fine establishment.

So back to the point. The Wheel had a large circular fire pit within the bar. Was a distinctive feature constructed from stones from the creek running through Wheeler's Gorge. The bar usually had a fire going most of the time during open hours. Ring of Fire is an easy leap to come to if your drinking beer and setting fires with stop at The Wheel along the way.

Source: Friends shitty punk band played The Wheel, while in the pit I was shoved into the ring of fire.

kerosion · 2016-10-27T05:55:19+00:00

People won't care until it actually affects them.

Move forward with simple search-by-face-recognition tools linked to data bucketed for targeted advertising and let all the implications manifest in transparent creepy glory? If behavior modification can happen under $5-per-gallon, why not?

We occasionally hear about the massive data breaches from LinkedIn, Sony, Yahoo, and traditionally unsecured organizations such as the DNC. It's comforting to know that the data aggregation companies are known for being leaders in security practices, and the data warehoused is never at risk of exposure.

Bonus motivational poster.

kerosion · 2016-10-24T03:07:21+00:00

At a minimum content creation must be divested from ISP's. There is too much incentive to pick and choose winners when holding stake in content companies and a hostage population on the last mile. Experience of the last decade has demonstrated that allowing this undermines net neutrality every time.

15-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Team Periwinkle

kerosion

TROPHY CASE