admin

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Yeah, nor does the country crowd source the money for the investigation, so I'm starting to see a pattern in your answers.

Have a good weekend.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (7 children)

You keep trying to move the conversation to different subjects, but I want to address your initial claim - inviting a third party to do an independent investigation of a company's alleged wrongdoings. I never heard of such a thing occurring.

But fine, let's go with your example.

If there was a scandal at GN, and they'd use that crowd source money to pay for a third party investigation, it would somehow be better than what LMG did now?

[–] [email protected] 20 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (10 children)

That's not what I was referring to. I meant using a commercial third party investigation for the alleged wrongdoings of a company (just like what happened here), except it's funded through crowd sourcing. When has that ever happened?

Like, who is the demographic that would pay for that? In the end, I figure it would still most likely be an invested party coughing up a substantial part of the money.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago (12 children)

What.

In what world does this happen?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago

TLDR: nothing new in this article from what we heard earlier this week.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The scary thing is, even when there is a button "only required" right next to it, it's scary how many people automatically click "accept all". Even among tech-savy people.

The conditioning is frightening.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Without datamining and that works out of the box? Please let us know when you find out.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

And then they started putting ads for subscriptions in the os.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

I checked the report, but it seems at no point it seems to clarify what they consider "bot traffic". Is it measured in api calls, page views, or bytes? Generally the term traffic is meant as raw data transported, but in that context those numbers make no sense.

For example, one of the biggest traffic consumers in the Internet is video streaming. There's no way in hell that half, or even a tenth, of that data is fake - it would simply cost too much to waste it on bots. Both for the bot owners as well as the streaming providers.

This level of vagueness and lack of transparency (what do the numbers mean, and where do they come from) does not fill me with confidence on this report.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Only in the last case there is a chance that the amount of jobs will remain the same, the other cases will lead to lost jobs.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

But the amount of workers will only stay the same if demand grows at the same rate as the production output.

view more: ‹ prev next ›