Who are these unnamed large companies (which are not Microsoft, Google, Apple, and Mozilla - ok, Mozilla's not that big) that are driving the W3C?
someone already suggested Fa[e]cebook...
5200 posts • joined 1 May 2015
There are no "more altruistic standards bodies".
that's not necessarily a BAD thing...
THEIR altruism isn't necessarily MY altruism, nor the kind of altruism that OUGHT to be implemented. If "the rest of us" are HELD BACK because of 'politically correct issue of the day', for example, it's not helping.
I _ALSO_ have to wonder if "the big 4" got together one day to "2D FLATSO" 'teh intarwebs' and got away with it... because right now, there's no significant presence of a BROWSER that doesn't have an Australis-looking UI with a hamburger button instead of a menu, FLATSO elements, and fat-finger-friendliness that can't be taken away. And WEB PAGES that _SHOULD_ have 3D skeumorphic elements _INSTEAD_ of flat-looking BOXES that ACT like they're buttons... FLAT BOXES like the "buttons" labeled 'preview' and 'submit' at the bottom-right of this edit thing [and with font text that is almost UNREADABLE because the FONT is WAY TOO SMALL!]. "Standards" made THAT happen, maybe?
So it would seem to _ME_ that "the big 4" running "the other standard" from the W3C's "Standard" are JUST AS BAD, but in a different way. And I don't believe that ANY of the motives behind these things is helping ANYBODY.
[as for me, I use OLD SCHOOL HTML, rarely use script, and use PNG and JPEG files for buttons so they can retain that nice 3D SKEUOMORPHIC look, instead of being a FLAT BOX that ambiguously "looks like a button". I also deliberately pick text vs background color schemes that are easy on the eyes and high contrast, NOT like grey on white [for example], or light blue on white [even worse, MICRO-SHAFT, _YOU_ do this ALL of the time!]. And the bandwidth requirements are _SMALL_]
"The test isn't whether disabled people can access content, but whether content and agent comply with standards which themselves are inaccessible to and unrepresentative of disabled people"
Using tiny grey text on bright white background should be PUNISHABLE by DEATH!
That, and ads that have moving content. or use script. or track me.
just to point out, if this is a ballot initiative, those kinds of things don't need to involve politicians. In fact, they can be used to STOP politicians [since vote fraud seems to keep them in office, the only plausible explanation at any rate]. There's currently one in the works to REPEAL a ginormous gasoline tax increase, for example (because NO crooked politician EVER dislikes a tax increase, especially if it increases THEIR power and control over citizens' lives, "for the children" or roads or whatever, it always gets diverted into their pet projects and buying votes, and then they *BEG* for *MORE* and do it *AGAIN*).
On the other hand, these ballot initiatives are
sometimes often de-railed by the courts [which are also pwned by the 'political class'].
And as such I'd expect any ballot initiative that attempts to empower the people to first be EMASCULATED, then MADE IRRELEVANT, by 'twisty' legal action combined with political lobbying and corruption in general.
Cali-Fornicate-You's state legislature has been called one of *THE* most corrupt institutions in the world, with lobbyists on the floor at all times, regularly consulted on EVERY piece of legislation before any vote. Cali-Fornicate-You legislators are therefore some of the WORST crooked politicians on the planet, the best that lobbyist money can buy.
And considering this, Google and Fa[e]cebook will find "a way" to circumvent ANY will of the people. Don't doubt me! Sacramento needs an ENEMA, starting with the legislature.
[and lobbyists won't be able to 'kill off' this law, they'll just emasculate it and render it irrelevant, like they always do, as soon as "the right people" are in office]
"They already actively piss around with the way they return results anyway."
And, THIS case with NT1 and NT2 justify them doing it even MORE...
"But, but, but we HAVE to tweek our search engine results, because, because, EU laws, that's why!"
1. fake rolex/handbag marketing
3. blatant violators of the law
4. defamation and slander/libel
5. 'copycat' domains
ALL of these will NOW be made EASIER.
thank you, gummint overreach.
"unintended" consequences? or not?
/me points out that an 'abuse@' e-mail address that is ignored and/or filtered won't be able to receive complaints. A valid mailing address and/or phone number also guarantees that the owner isn't trying to HIDE from authorities. Anonymizing services are available. I use them as well as most domain owners. Why do we need to "GDPR" the domain name registry?
"Just wondering how you guys know what urine tastes like"
probably had something to do with 1) a diaper changing accident, 2) a dare while intoxicated, 3) a night with Hurricane Hessie (those tropical rains) [I can't screw in this kind of weather] 4) a combination of an overfull bladder and a morning stiffy that won't go away in time 5) survival training [they say that drinking your own pee is 'a way' to survive severe dehydration, possibly extending your own life for a few days]
OK is this getting way too graphic now?
Haggard's law... https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Haggard%27s_Law
Seriously I'd never heard of that before! But that might be a corollary of something I've definitely observed (and I think there's even something like that in the bible, something about a log in your eye), and from church people no less. Another example of moralist activists once again not reading the thing that defines their morality. Who knew?
But what's funny about THIS case is how a bunch of 'sex worker' feminists are all SELF-RIGHTEOUS about this, claiming that shutting down the web site was some kind of DISCRIMINATION against women or something.
OK lemme get a straight answer to this [as someone who's apparently X-chromosome-impaired by having only one]: Is prostitution the EXPLOITATION of women, or THEIR RIGHTS as women?
Or, are men just FSCK'd no matter what!!!
a) it's a CURRENCY - so it's a CASH ADVANCE
b) using a BANK loan as investment capital for currency speculation is probably ILLEGAL in the USA. [I know it is illegal to buy stock with a loan]
Now, if you wanted to pay for something WITH a crypto currency, and the bank offered you an exchange rate, that would be perfectly acceptable, and they could THEN charge an 'exchange fee'. Anyone purchasing things with a credit card overseas (whether you're there or using the intarwebs) knows about those transaction fees. It's not much, but yeah.
Additionally, when you purchase something with a credit card, there's a transaction fee for the seller. But if you do a cash advance, YOU pay for all of it.
I expect that the bank's policy already indicates ALL of this. And it's NOT a purchase to buy crypto-CURRENCY with your credit card. Personally, I think it's FOOLISH, but there ya go.
And, because currency speculation would be considered a form of INVESTMENT, it might actually be considered ILLEGAL.
I wonder what kinds of nefarious things can be done with THAT...
a) spear phishing
e) evil gossip
f) get target to show up someplace at a given time
g) get target to take pictures doing specific things
h) all of the above
I can think of many ways to do "all of those", if given the ability to make this happen. Good thing I'm a 'white hat' [ok maybe a slight touch of grey]
consider what 419eater has been able to do, for example, with 419 scammers. And I really liked that 'Africa' video with the song 'Africa' by Toto. It was a crowning moment of awesome!
it was always about hype and marketing
"We are excited" <-- like a dog when you grab the leash
"will share" <-- psycho-babble speak for "let you know"
I actually had someone tell me to use the word 'feel' instead of 'think' because 'think' sounds too strong. It's based on THAT kind of *FEELING* (not thinking). Touchy-feely psychobabble PAP.
And Micro-shaft's upper management is FILLED with that kind of "*FEELING*" apparently.
WHO endorsed Diamond and Silk - ZUCK? NO way, F.B. silently *BANNED* them from sending updates to their subscribers... then Zuck LIED about it!
And, saying things that are a) politically incorrect and b) going against the expectations of the left (based on things like race, sex, etc.) is _NOT_ _DIVISIVE_!
What's divisive is things like: ANTIFA, "hands up don't shoot", and THIS.
"it should be a crime to allow the smart to trick the stupid into throwing elections."
and if it were a crime, the Demo-Rat party would all be in jail (for getting OBAKA elected - TWICE). Mrs. Clinton notwithstanding of course.
Or else corruption in the FBI and DOJ would declare them all 'innocent' before the investigation even starts, whichever. Yeah, THAT would never happen, right?
"You are the lab rat."
What must be the psychological mindset of someone who would actually treat other people this way? In other words, people (in general) are de-humanized, and then monetized, and *tricked* into accepting all of this for a potentially addictive 'fix' that temporarily boosts (or not) their emotional states?
Well, at least it's not smokin' up MY air... [other than THAT, it really DOES seem like 'Big Tobacco' spiking cigarettes and breeding tobacco specifically to make it more addicting, etc. which is what all of the allegations have been over the years, and "F.B." as a corporation is no exception to this kind of mindset, or so it would appear]
Answer to first question: a sociopath. knows what he does is morally wrong, but he does it anyway.
1. look for a lack of shame
2. See if the person is constantly lying
3. See if they are able to stay eerily calm in spite of circumstances
4. Consider if they are extremely charming and generous—at least at first
5. Notice if the person is manipulative
6. Look for signs of instigating violent behavior [ANTIFA? divisive politics?]
7. See if the person has a huge ego
8. Notice if the person has few real friends [I wonder...]
9. Consider if the person likes to isolate you [creepy clingy?]
10. See if the person is immature [does not learn from mistakes...]
11. Look for gaslighting [F.B.'s treatment of 'Diamond and Silk']
12. Observe if they use an intense, manipulative stare to attempt to intimidate you [not to be confused with the 1000-yard stare, the look from someone who can't be broken because it's already happened, and he survived]
anyway, not all of these would apply, but it looks like MOST of them could! If not to anyone in particular, to the organization as a whole...
What does FB stand for?
being from across the pond, I had to try and figure it out. I found two terms, both with the initials 'FB', that most likely qualify.
a) Friend with Benefits
b) FEEL Buddy [word substitution for humor]
I'm guessing 'b' [the un-bowdlerized version]
what it says in the title.
any - repeat *ANY* application *STUPIDLY WRITTEN* enough to preview attached (or especially REMOTE) content (or HTML, for that matter, especially with respect to DOWNLOADED or ATTACHED FONTS) in a preview window *DESERVES* whatever "UN-LOVE" it gets for doing so.
'Virus Outbreak' is INSECURE BY DESIGN.
(don't use it)
icon, because, *facepalm*
In Hawaii, it just happens when you click the wrong button in the UI.
(ok it's a link to the 'washington bleep' but still...)
yeah, that's the cover story. social engineering notwithstanding.
Ah, yes, Marshall, Texas
"The Town That Trolls Built"
Apparently, last year, the Supremes ruled that trolls can't go venue shopping like that any more. I have to wonder why Apple's lawsuit was there...
"Do you use the HTML src attribute for that? If not, nothing changes for you. If yes, why the hell?"
well, if you're a MALWARE author, and you ftp'd your malware crap onto someone's server (after cracking it) and NOW have an FTP URL to it in an HTML element, then MAYBE your malware load will break.
Yeah, TOO! BAD!!!
tried before. Micro-shaft 'Passport'. Failed then, too.
And don't forget "Log in using Face-bitch". NO tracking THERE, right??? Or 'log in via Google'. Same thing.
A centralized "single point of failure" logon for the ENTIRE intarwebs is likely (like a 'Micro-shaft account' for your windows box) to TRACK YOU EVERYWHERE. Why? Because there has to be a server side credential exchange for EVERY! SITE! you visit that's "aware" of it.
And their revenue model: slurp a few cents for every site that uses the API, but only for BIG sites [which is what Google does for things like 'maps']. If you have a low access rate personal or company site, it'll be free. if you have a million hits a day commercial site, PAY UP!
yeah you can see THAT coming... no, wait, ALREADY HERE (for maps anyway, as pointed out previously):
I'd expect that to be (eventually) extended towards the "common logon" as well, if it's ever adopted.
let's hope it's NOT EVAR adopted. it's bad enough ALREADY when web sites give you a 'forbidden' response when you disable script. Last thing I'd EVAR want is to see the vast majority of web sites buying into this crap and DEMANDING a login.
a missing item, how Face-bitch treated 'Diamond and Silk', a pair of trump-loving ladies who happen to be black. Ted Cruz MADE A POINT of mentioning them, for they were told by Face-bitch that their million-subscriber page was deemed "unsafe to the community" by Face-bitch (nevermind their NOT making such determinations with regards to violent groups like ANTIFA).
"the duo recalled what they called a months-long battle with the company after noticing a drop in engagement in September 2017"
(this is how they found out about it - Face-bitch didn't tell them)
eventually, after an apparent and lengthy 'back and forth' e-mail exchange over several MONTHS, "they wrote and said that they deem our content and our brand ‘unsafe to the community,’"
If you've ever seen these ladies on TV [some Fox News hosts like to bring them on as guests] you can hear them make some rather entertaining conservative-leaning points about current issues. And apparently they have over a million subscribers.
So, absent from the El Reg article is Ted Cruz making a SPECIFIC POINT about how Face-bitch OVERTLY DISCRIMINATED against these 2 ladies. And *I* think it was a form of RACISM. Because, according to "the liberal viewpoint", these 2 women should be LIBERALS, not conservatives. And they should HATE Trump. And when you have examples of women who happen to be black SUPPORTING Trump, it goes against "the narrative", and GETS CENSORED as 'unsafe to the community'.
UNSAFE, huh? UNSAFE to go against the liberal mantra with respect to your race and sex? And THAT is why I believe it is a FORM OF RACISM for these two women to be DISCRIMINATED AGAINST by Face-bitch, and why I'm _SO_ glad that Senator Cruz MADE A POINT of this, and put the screws to Zucker-b0rg.
Well, Zuck did 'the side step' the entire time from the clips I've seen, like that one politician in that movie from the 80's starring Burt Reynolds and Dolly Parton...
I miss 3D Skeuomorphic [in windows anyway]
The article's example photo had those DIETY CONDEMNED 2D FLATSO DECORATIONS like "Ape" and Win-10-nic.
I remember when Windows XP was accused of being 'bulbous'. Well, so the hell WHAT. It's a lot BETTER than FLATSO.
Win 3.x with its File Manager and Program Manager sold BECAUSE OF THE 3D SKEUOMORPHIC APPEARANCE, which was CLEARLY SUPERIOR to the Windows 2.x "flatso" look.
At least Win 2.x had more COLOR in their 'Flatso' than APE or Win-10-nic.
How many of you have a digital cable box? I think they use TCP. that means LOGS, and they know who YOU are. They know what channel you're watching at a given time, so they know what programs you're watching. There's no way in hell that the media companies aren't USING THAT to do their ratings schhtuff. No need for 'Nielson Families' any more. TV isn't over the airwaves, it's being decrypted and therefore (probably) requires you to fetch the temporal keys, so een satellite could be monitoring you.
And if they CAN, they DO.
Given that, the privacy of the kids watching disney and cartoon network and nickelodeon and any otehr channel with children's programming knows EXACTLY what commercials and shows they're watching. Don't forget the cable converter boxen that are watching YOU.
what, don't believe me? Verizon has a PATENT ON IT! (and there are others...)
"if a user is watching a television program, a traditional targeted advertising system fails to account for what the user is doing"
" the targeted advertising may be based on one or more ambient actions performed by one or more users of an access device"
"a user may be presented with targeted advertising in accordance with the user's specific situation and/or actions"
the document goes further to determine what it is you are doing while the 'media content' is being 'viewed', if you're paying attention, laughing, playing a musical instrument [these are in the document, search, you'll see] and whatnot, then TARGET ADVERTISEMENT based on (literally) the TV SET TOP BOX WATCHING _YOU_ - like a bad Yakov Smirnoff joke. Aside from it sounding like tin-foil-hat material, THIS SCHTUFF IS REAL!
there are open source BIOS images out there, too. Some of them disable things like 'management core'.
just because the sheeple are using "Win-Tel" (with its potential back-doors, etc.) doesn't mean YOU have to. Those same sheeple use FACE-B*TCH and TW*TTER, too.
(the use of 'asterisk' is because I only have one ass-to-risk...)
ack. too late for guns, and now knives. Those genie's are out of the bottle, and have been out for a LONG time.
Make them illegal, and ONLY the criminals will have them. SO much for defending yourself, preventing thieves from cracking your bank accounts, etc. when ONLY the bad guys have the necessary means to protect themselves, _AND_ to attack YOU.
I'm not surprised the Demo-rats are behind this. Their so-called position for pro-civil-rights is nothing more than a SHAM. They've been about controlling the masses for a LONG time. The Republi-crats ("establishment" Republicans, mostly RINOs) are, too, but they've been singled out in the past.
NOW, Dianne Franken-Feinstein [who occasionally made sense in the past] has gone full-on bat-blank nutzy-cuckoo crying for back-door'd encryption, not knowing a cipher from a key.
These idiots are SO emotion-based and irresponsibly sinister in their motives, it's pathetic.
time to "clean house". TEA PARTY!
NOTE: when you take away the right of an individual to speak his own mind AND to defend himself, you end up with SHEEPLE. And they're *EASY* to control, like a herd of sheep.
1984 anyone? that's a TYPO.
"If you start shitting on those of us that have spent out entire adult lives working to do better, then we will stop and you will shit out of luck when it matters most."
Who is John Galt? (sounds just like that).
It could happen, if there were a 'frontier' to go to to escape the nonsense...
Worthy of mention, I believe that women often make better office managers than men. Pay based on how good you are at your job should help skew women's pay scale upwards over men within that realm.
I have to wonder whether women also make better project managers for the same reason, when the goals are NOT to participate in doing the project, but to 'manage' the project. (in the case of participating in the project, I would say men and women are equal).
It may actually be a sex-based characteristic, something for which 2 X chromosomes do better than only one (or the lack of a Y chromosome, for that matter). It may be that women's instincts with herding small children are often effective in an office environment.
That being said, it's an area where, if women ARE more competent, they should be paid better for it (and hired more often).
But it also may suggest that women actually gravitate towards MIDDLE management, rather than UPPER, which would skew the apples/oranges wage comparison (this is pure speculation on my part, no facts to back it up).
After all, according to the article: "The gender pay gap does not compare the same job roles because it would be illegal to pay women with the same jobs less"
ACK to that. I wouldn't WANT to work for a company that based wages on anything OTHER than your value to the company, based ENTIRELY on job performance (etc.).
"the party in power is allowed to delete the other parties"
a few years ago, back when Putin was first elected in Russia, there was this one Russian guy that posted on the alt.hacker newsgroup. After a few months, he stopped posting. he was occasionally saying anti-Putin kinds of things, didn't like Putin, thought it was the end of everything when he got elected, etc.. I was not convinced back then. Now I'm not so sure...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019