The successful, reliable format is right there in the beginning: Saying that one sentence face-to-face in private.
That's half the point of the article, that the culture is to follow that one clear format to avoid ambiguity, and that other formats are seen as creepy, privacy-invading, etc.
Not OP, and not points that make Twitch "unusable", but some changes that make it unpleasant:
- Really pushing softcore porn by putting their icons in the sidebar and over home page by default (they disappear once your stream viewing history is something other, but default behavior is to recommend it to all)
- Adding more noise to chat: Obnoxious particle effects once "enough people pay money to Amazon", highlighted flashy banners
- Overlays over the video that you can't turn off, makes the player very heavy, popups over the player that you have to click to close
- Autoplaying media on home page
- Strange inconsistent regulations of streamers (who/when they get banned and how long)
- Strange attempts at noisy virtue signalling - such as overlaying sombreros and maracas on emote images for "Hispanic celebration month", which is so unnecessary and comically unthoughtful
It really is an arbitrary diagram. Any regular user of any of these levels can confidently say all levels have "decomposed morals". All levels have videos of animal abuse, posts for teen prostitution, et cetera.
And there really is nothing cozy about data-hoarding closed mega-corp software like Discord and Snapchat. As convenient as they are, 'cozy' is not the word.
The writer likely just thinks "LinkedIn and Facebook == Bad!" and "My two Discord servers with my friends == Good!" and just made huge generalizations from there.
The second paragraph quotes them as being "slum-like spaces" so I'm not sure where you derive cause for reducing the author's viewpoint to naive idealism like that. If anything this seems like a pretty conventional viewpoint these days, that the web has shifted from broadcasting to smaller peer-to-peer interactions. It doesn't seem particularly controversial.
Sometimes a decomposing carcass ends up resting on the forest floor instead of buried or scavenged.
... but not for long, and it's not the expected common-case continuously-observed scenario when one walks in the woods. The point is that such a thing is a transient, unstable configuration at one layer and the expected configuration at another layer.
It effectively is for large Reddit communities, as most of them rely on Imgur to upload NSFW content. There aren't many free image hosting sites as "generous" as Imgur (unlimited bandwidth, large sizes, no visible compression, "permanent") so it'll be interesting to see where they move to.
You have to wonder how long that's going to last, though, as Reddit is in the same situation of quietly tolerating pornographic content while not explicitly promoting it.
The worst possible outcome for Reddit is that this move shines light on how many porn communities exist on reddit, which causes media scrutiny, which causes advertisers to bail or threaten to bail, which causes Reddit to ban NSFW subreddits, which spells the end of Reddit.
Reddit tolerates porn because the customer base for their ads product are overwhelmingly no-name companies that aren't in a position to dictate content standards.
I wouldn't imagine 18 USC 2257 applies to people posting themselves to Reddit. Among other things, subsection a(2) requires that the content be mailed or shipped in interstate or foreign commerce, or intended to be. In other words, the law targets commercial pornography.
nah, there are some good ones. The mechanical keyboard and ergomechkeyboards ones are fun to browse, bodyweightfitness is generally good, and I've started exploring the music production one recently, it looks nice.
As best I can tell, Reddit's limitations on posting NSFW with Reddit hosting the image or video are implemented client-side, and unevenly across their first-party clients at that.
that is only for images in comments. image submissions to subreddits are still ok. A lot of communities have imgur-only rules due to other image hosts having lower retention or invasive UX.
OP's problem is not about telemetry. Their problem was exactly what the title meant, "Opt-in" means user should make it true if they need, instead they have an opt-out with a name opt-in.
Imagine buying wipes labelled wipes, but they were actually dry tissues.
It’s not about Kibana, or telemetry, or telemetry being opt-out. It’s about exactly what I copied from the page for lack of a deep link: the opt-out setting is deceitfully named opt-in.
Quite sad to see this hands-off approach being praised. I was raised in this kind of environment, along with most others I know, and that's how we all got to see our first beheading, suicide, or some grotesque sexual content before we even hit 12. It's not something you seek as a kid, but you get presented with it.
Sure, this would be considered the "excess", but I'm not sure if it's the kind that children should be made to deal with at such an age in such high volumes.
The lack of public beheadings is more of an exception of the last century than the norm. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but I don't think it really affects children all that much. rotten/liveleak certainly didn't make me any different -- if anything it was beneficial to understand that there's a violent world out there.
Agreed, I found that writing also chose to use quite manipulative, or even emotional language to subtly get the lean towards the author's way.
Which is completely fine if the book were presented as "Here's just my opinion on what may have happened", rather than presenting it as "Scientific history of mankind" - this aspect is what bothered me the most.
But we suppose the group who would fall for this kind of strategy is the exact audience the author was going for.
