khorum
Murder Apologist
- 24,338
- 81,363
LOL the only comfort is that this somehow costs Netflix a hundred million dollars' worth of their shareholders money flushed down the drain.
If you haven't shorted these cunts, you should right now.
The Netflix Thread
- Thread starter Brikker
- Start date
LOL the only comfort is that this somehow costs Netflix a hundred million dollars' worth of their shareholders money flushed down the drain.
If you haven't shorted these cunts, you should right now.
Alex
Still a Music Elitist
- 14,496
- 7,409
I still don't understand this. Just because Tulip is a badass (as she's always been)? Or is it because Cassidy's had massive nerfs since first season? That latter one I definitely agree with, but your SJW infestation opinions on that show are unwarranted.
- 1
khorum
Murder Apologist
- 24,338
- 81,363
I made that point absolutely clear in that thread and it's just as abundantly clear in THIS show as it was in that. These producers and the whole fucking writing room for this show are just as hell-bent on using this title to INJECT SJW VALUES into another geek-culture space as Seth Rogen was in turning Preacher into a fucking SJW pulpit for his raving cuckfaggotry.
Lauren Hissrich and her entire team are virulent SJWs and they've made it clear that their mission has been to feminize this space more than it's ever been to produce a show that respects the fandom or the original material:
Half that room are on the deepfreeze.it list of anti-gamergate and comicsgate SJW activists who have publicly acknowledged that their mission in life is colonize geek culture for cuckfaggot bay area SJWs.
- 1
Slaanesh69
Millie's Staff Member
- 5,857
- 16,308
Right, it was. Now the question is - should it be more as a backdrop/enhancement or as a GoT central theme. Can it come in and out of the story of Geralt or is it PARALLEL to Geralt's story and half or more of the show, which is what the teasers show.
I want it to be about the Witcher. Not The World of WItcher: Game of Thrones Edition.
But I am not likely to get what I want. It will be more likely "The Women Who Rule The World of The Witcher - also starring Geralt as the WItcher".
- 1
jooka
marco esquandolas
- 14,391
- 6,104
Fucker
Log Wizard
- 11,518
- 26,009
I didn't make it through the first episode. I think it was written by a bunch of emo teenagers. More trash for Netflix's increasingly massive heap of trash.
- 1
- 1
Slaanesh69
Millie's Staff Member
- 5,857
- 16,308
I love how the hook in the trailer is "Trump campaign and Brexit" and then the doc is really about Silicon Valley Giants ruling the world with your information. Well done!
Also, it is too late, people. Cry to the heavens all you want, have as many hearings as you want, every single person has been compromised, without question, on the internet. My internet exposure is very minimal (no FB, no twitter, no snapchat, etc etc) and I have no illusions that I have STILL released enough information to be identified and profiled by aggregation of the tiny facts I have doled out over time.
And call it cynical, but I also think that governments are so corrupt, and greed so central to humanity, that there is no way Silicon Valley is ever going to be found guilty of anything. It is all going to just fade away after some fines and slaps on the wrist. Maybe Google WILL be broken up into smaller pieces but the invisible spider web will still exist and the same people will still run ALL the shows.
Edit - and if you don't think the government is in cahoots with these companies to gather information on everyone, you are truly naïve. That is the funniest irony of the Mueller talks this week where Republicans were all up in arms how the US government was spying on several of their own citizens. Son, your false outrage may fool the uneducated, but we know the truth.
Technology is too insipid in our culture and society and the last couple of generations are too dependent on it all to ever change their ways. It would take a literal war with Cyberdyne to change the tangent on which civilization finds itself.
So buckle up, and learn these words "Expectation of Privacy is a thing of the past".
Edit2 - on reading this is "THEY ARE MAKING THE FROGS GAY" levels of conspiracy but I truly believe it.
Slaanesh69
Millie's Staff Member
- 5,857
- 16,308
So Starbuck is officially typecast now for low budget Sci-fi? Is it her constant angry pursing of the lips that limits her? I dunno, she seems okay but is really cashing some shit movie/show checks.
Her husband/boyfriend in the trailer is, in my opinion, the single worst actor of all time. OF ALL TIME. He was in that stupid Dragonball Evolution movie and was the son in Cruise's War of the Worlds. Gah I looked him up and he is Canadian, ugh my poor Canadian soul cramps to see that. He is just the worst. How he gets work still I cannot understand.
Anyway this looks horribly derivative, unoriginal and boring. Will miss, and be sad because I love sci-fi, and good low budget sci-fi is always a treat.
- 1
- 1
Alex
Still a Music Elitist
- 14,496
- 7,409
I work in social media. Work with technology that builds aggregate profiles of everybody, connecting it with other customer databases and data lakes, use that info to send you highly targeted ads and shit. So yeah, all the stuff most people hate. But no one gives a shit about you. Corporations care about people like you. It's all about bucketing people into various cohorts to understand and target those audiences better.
pysek
It Didn't Happen, It Should've, and It Will.
- 17,328
- 107,511
No one gives a shit about you until they need to. That right person at the right time scenario. Then the amount of info companies and/or governments have is massive. The only real solution is Fight Club levels of info wiping, which we'll never do.
On an additional tangent, I firmly believe that after supplanting our educational systems, the smartest thing the lefties ever did was ensonce themselves in our places of work. HR, Diversity Officers, etc. Your whole fucking JOB is dependent upon finding reasons and ways to divide people. By color, religion, gender, etc. All in the name of 'diversity'. Of course it's never enough and it will never end until we eliminate universities as we know them and streamline businesses. Again, things we'll never do.
Welcome to the Endgame.
- 3
dizzie
Triggered Happy
- 2,509
- 3,937
Everyone should be worried by big techs manipulation and censorship.
I'll post this here, posted it before in politics a while back.
Spoiler for length.
I'll post this here, posted it before in politics a while back.
Spoiler for length.
“#VoxAdpocalypse”, YouTube’s newest scandal, and Google’s subsequent tightening of the noose around unfriendly content, has people wondering how you kill a giant. A boycott is being suggested, but underlies the biggest issue with taking down Goliath: YouTube does not make money. YouTube has never made money. Google’s parent company Alphabet pays for YouTube out of pocket to control what information it puts in front of you.
In its latest blog post, Google unambiguously declared it manipulates you and intends to continue manipulating you even more aggressively:
Notice that YouTube also says it only targeted Americans with this new algorithm. That is because many foreign countries are more conservative than America, and are more religiously orthodox than America. Russia and eastern Europe in general is very unfriendly towards the LGBT. So, if Russians started noticing efforts to get them to watch pro-gay content on YouTube, it would cause outrage and encourage Yandex (Russia’s Google competitor) to consider opening competing platforms, eating into YouTube’s market share and loosening its grip. The goal is to tailor these suggestions and start shifting thought across nations with respect to the existing beliefs without being apparent.
Google can also tailor these suggestions based on age. With LGBT as an example specifically, many older Slavic people may be completely unwelcoming, but the younger people might not care. See “Elsagate”, a 2017 YouTube scandal. At the time, nameless animation studios were pumping out hundreds of videos, and given titles that would be found by children searching for their favorite shows and characters, or things they’re curious about. Some of these cheap, weird, and often disturbing videos got viewed billions of times by children. So of course, YouTube can know if a viewer is a child, and, with all these ambitions combined, YouTube can use these suggestions to influence different demographics in different countries more effectively without alarming or upsetting older people in those regions.
If Google knows who to put ads in front of to sell product, they know who to put opinions in front of to sell ideas.
Facebook is another contender for a ‘most evil company’ award — not that that is an unpopular opinion after the Cambridge Analytica scandal showed data harvested from Facebook with Facebook’s permission was already being used in U.S. elections. In his apology tours, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been to Congress and the EU to stop talk of breaking up the company and assure people he’s “doing more”. He’s also asking how Facebook can better implement world-wide censorship on ideas to comply with stifling European hatespeech concepts.
I have a Facebook page I only use for helping small businesses do advertising. I use it for nothing else. However, I am continually suggested that I add my old roommate as a friend. We were never on any contracts together, I’ve never written his name online, we’ve never had each other as friends on any platform. However, when I was putting together a server in our living room, he took a picture of me with my device and put it on his Instagram to show it off. I immediately asked him to delete it, which he did, but Instagram had already recognized my face and knew that this man knew me and now suggests I reconnect with him at least once a week.
Unlike YouTube and Twitter, Facebook does make a profit with its advertising, and its advertising is very good. In my experiments with both, Facebook Ads are more precise and more worth their money than Google Ads. Facebook lets you find exactly who you want to put an ad in front of, and enables you to place it at precisely the time you want. This gives you great returns if you do it right. But, as it becomes a more and more publicly reviled enterprise, people are fleeing from the platform — onto other platforms Facebook owns, such as Instagram. Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp are also both owned by Facebook and are also in the list of top 10 most popular social media services in the world.
Most young people who prefer Instagram to Facebook don’t even know the two collate data, but they feel safer with the illusion of choice and privacy.
Twitter is not owned by large corporations, only profited off advertising for the first time in 2018, and is sustained only by angel investing. Angel investing means a network of millionaires and billionaires pour money into a money sink that its users seem to hate using because Twitter serves their own political objectives.
Twitter admits that it uses complicated mechanisms to determine what information people see. This started with the removal of the chronological timeline. Instead of seeing recent tweets first, now you see information that Twitter wants you to see in the order Twitters prefers you to see it. This is done in the name of convenience, but the practical effect is that targeted individuals do not have their most outspoken fans see their content. The most prolific sharers and likers will not see the tweets, will not engage them, and thereby hurt the targeted individual’s reach. I know this is the case because I follow a huge number of people I do not see any content from unless I visit their timeline, but I do get to see every single thing Ben Shapiro has ever said as soon as he says it.
Gab.com is the main competitor to Twitter, which is painful to even say, because Gab is awful to use and is managed by an imbecile. It’s also had issues with hosting, issues with cloud providers, and issues with payment processing. Twitter’s main rival faces the same issue with monetization that Twitter itself has, but even if it could somehow find a way to financially exist, it would not be permitted to by Mastercard. Payment processors are not obligated to service your customers and their word is final.
Not to mention Gab suffers from what I refer to as the “8chan problem”, or perhaps more succinctly, the “quarantine problem”. If you make a new service just for people banned from an existing service, you will end up with only that audience. What is attractive about Gab to people not banned from Twitter? Absolutely nothing. There is no reason to go there as someone unaffected by Twitter’s censorship, and furthermore, even as someone affected by Twitter’s censorship, I have no reason to go there because I know people there will mostly agree with what I have to say anyways and it will gain no traction outside of that audience.
People banned from Twitter are not just set back, they are banned from the platform for life. Journalist Nick Monroe was banned last week because Twitter discovered he had previously been banned back in 2014. Monroe’s account was inoffensive and mostly just recycling information about ongoing world events. He was a very classic use case for the Twitter service and could easily be avoided if you didn’t like him, but something he said must have made the owners dig up an excuse to obliterate him. Thousands of other people face the same issue, and with the President of the United States using Twitter as his primary means of communicating with the country, Twitter stands only to grow in popularity and cultural significance without those people ever being able to rejoin the conversation.
What’s especially frustrating with Twitter is that it’s mostly just text. YouTube is an incredibly expensive service to run, transferring and storing an inconceivable amount of audiovisual data every second. This is a point in their favor for running it how they want. Twitter, on the other hand, is mostly text. It’s just ideas. There’s little to worry about in terms of bandwidth, storage space, copyright theft, child pornography, gore, and the slew of other problems YouTube has to adequately deal with, which not many corporations other than Alphabet could deal with at all.
The three giants continue to dominate conversation in the country and increasingly around the world. There is little hope in curtailing them. Suggesting Washington D.C. apply a fix may result in those large companies simply moving to Europe where governments will allow them to operate as they please. Many of them already headquarter out of Ireland thanks to significant tax advantages.
The government attempting to fix things itself poses serious risks to the influences around us. Do you trust the FCC to manage your video recommendations and timelines any more than YouTube and Twitter? Do you want to give Trump / Obama / your preferred Antichrist that power?
I think about this every day. Not one day passes where I don’t think about how completely fucked we are, and in that time I see a few possible fixes that might work independently or in conjunction.
Poison #1: Social Media Neutrality Reclassify unprofitable social media sites as a public service. These public services can be used for advertising and data collection, but cannot ban any idea, expression, or person. They cannot attempt to influence users, their views, or politics. Facebook proper is profitable so it can do what it wants, but YouTube, for instance, would either need to deal with the requirements or find a way to become profitable. For YouTube to become profitable, it would essentially need to become Netflix, and then a new and better YouTube can potentially rise from the ashes.
Poison #2: Payment Processor Neutrality I think a lot of problems might resolve themselves if the fear of losing payment processors did not exist. Right now, a huge bottleneck in alternative services is Mastercard/Visa Card. If MC/VC were required by law to process transactions no matter what, it would be far easier to conceive of profitable and fairer alternatives to what exists already. It wouldn’t promise anything, but right now it’s just flat-out impossible.
Poison #3: Buy a GoPro and Subscribe to PewDiePie With the way that these censorship efforts are affecting people, and with the blatant disregard for the well-being of those affected, I suspect to see more violent outrage as a result. I don’t believe, nor would I want to believe, that violence can fix things, but eventually these companies will ban people who disagree with me. They already have. Will this result in substantial change in these platforms? Probably not. Developers are expendable, and the people at the top live on secure private islands in countries with no extradition treaty to the United States.
With new cryptocurrency and P2P technologies, I am expecting to see successful attempts at making decentralized websites accessible to broader audiences by 2020 that deal with a lot of the issues these centralized services are creating now. There is an entire arena of new issues with that (such as state-level censorship, ISP-level censorship, domain registry censorship, etc), but it’s on the horizon and I’m excited about it.
I’m very doom-and-gloom in general, but I hope 2019 will be the darkest year for the Internet. My gut tells me 2020 will be the start of something new.
In its latest blog post, Google unambiguously declared it manipulates you and intends to continue manipulating you even more aggressively:
To summarize: if you watch something Alphabet does not want you to watch, it will start suggesting videos it does want you to watch. They go for the benign and easy example of Flat Earth Theory. If you watch a video about how the Earth is flat, it will propose you watch an ‘authoritative’ video on how that isn’t true. YouTube will start doing this with everything it wants, in accordance to its political objectives, and it will not tell you suggestions are politically motivated when doing so.
Notice that YouTube also says it only targeted Americans with this new algorithm. That is because many foreign countries are more conservative than America, and are more religiously orthodox than America. Russia and eastern Europe in general is very unfriendly towards the LGBT. So, if Russians started noticing efforts to get them to watch pro-gay content on YouTube, it would cause outrage and encourage Yandex (Russia’s Google competitor) to consider opening competing platforms, eating into YouTube’s market share and loosening its grip. The goal is to tailor these suggestions and start shifting thought across nations with respect to the existing beliefs without being apparent.
Google can also tailor these suggestions based on age. With LGBT as an example specifically, many older Slavic people may be completely unwelcoming, but the younger people might not care. See “Elsagate”, a 2017 YouTube scandal. At the time, nameless animation studios were pumping out hundreds of videos, and given titles that would be found by children searching for their favorite shows and characters, or things they’re curious about. Some of these cheap, weird, and often disturbing videos got viewed billions of times by children. So of course, YouTube can know if a viewer is a child, and, with all these ambitions combined, YouTube can use these suggestions to influence different demographics in different countries more effectively without alarming or upsetting older people in those regions.
If Google knows who to put ads in front of to sell product, they know who to put opinions in front of to sell ideas.
Facebook is another contender for a ‘most evil company’ award — not that that is an unpopular opinion after the Cambridge Analytica scandal showed data harvested from Facebook with Facebook’s permission was already being used in U.S. elections. In his apology tours, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been to Congress and the EU to stop talk of breaking up the company and assure people he’s “doing more”. He’s also asking how Facebook can better implement world-wide censorship on ideas to comply with stifling European hatespeech concepts.
I have a Facebook page I only use for helping small businesses do advertising. I use it for nothing else. However, I am continually suggested that I add my old roommate as a friend. We were never on any contracts together, I’ve never written his name online, we’ve never had each other as friends on any platform. However, when I was putting together a server in our living room, he took a picture of me with my device and put it on his Instagram to show it off. I immediately asked him to delete it, which he did, but Instagram had already recognized my face and knew that this man knew me and now suggests I reconnect with him at least once a week.
Unlike YouTube and Twitter, Facebook does make a profit with its advertising, and its advertising is very good. In my experiments with both, Facebook Ads are more precise and more worth their money than Google Ads. Facebook lets you find exactly who you want to put an ad in front of, and enables you to place it at precisely the time you want. This gives you great returns if you do it right. But, as it becomes a more and more publicly reviled enterprise, people are fleeing from the platform — onto other platforms Facebook owns, such as Instagram. Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp are also both owned by Facebook and are also in the list of top 10 most popular social media services in the world.
Most young people who prefer Instagram to Facebook don’t even know the two collate data, but they feel safer with the illusion of choice and privacy.
Twitter is not owned by large corporations, only profited off advertising for the first time in 2018, and is sustained only by angel investing. Angel investing means a network of millionaires and billionaires pour money into a money sink that its users seem to hate using because Twitter serves their own political objectives.
Twitter admits that it uses complicated mechanisms to determine what information people see. This started with the removal of the chronological timeline. Instead of seeing recent tweets first, now you see information that Twitter wants you to see in the order Twitters prefers you to see it. This is done in the name of convenience, but the practical effect is that targeted individuals do not have their most outspoken fans see their content. The most prolific sharers and likers will not see the tweets, will not engage them, and thereby hurt the targeted individual’s reach. I know this is the case because I follow a huge number of people I do not see any content from unless I visit their timeline, but I do get to see every single thing Ben Shapiro has ever said as soon as he says it.
Gab.com is the main competitor to Twitter, which is painful to even say, because Gab is awful to use and is managed by an imbecile. It’s also had issues with hosting, issues with cloud providers, and issues with payment processing. Twitter’s main rival faces the same issue with monetization that Twitter itself has, but even if it could somehow find a way to financially exist, it would not be permitted to by Mastercard. Payment processors are not obligated to service your customers and their word is final.
Not to mention Gab suffers from what I refer to as the “8chan problem”, or perhaps more succinctly, the “quarantine problem”. If you make a new service just for people banned from an existing service, you will end up with only that audience. What is attractive about Gab to people not banned from Twitter? Absolutely nothing. There is no reason to go there as someone unaffected by Twitter’s censorship, and furthermore, even as someone affected by Twitter’s censorship, I have no reason to go there because I know people there will mostly agree with what I have to say anyways and it will gain no traction outside of that audience.
People banned from Twitter are not just set back, they are banned from the platform for life. Journalist Nick Monroe was banned last week because Twitter discovered he had previously been banned back in 2014. Monroe’s account was inoffensive and mostly just recycling information about ongoing world events. He was a very classic use case for the Twitter service and could easily be avoided if you didn’t like him, but something he said must have made the owners dig up an excuse to obliterate him. Thousands of other people face the same issue, and with the President of the United States using Twitter as his primary means of communicating with the country, Twitter stands only to grow in popularity and cultural significance without those people ever being able to rejoin the conversation.
What’s especially frustrating with Twitter is that it’s mostly just text. YouTube is an incredibly expensive service to run, transferring and storing an inconceivable amount of audiovisual data every second. This is a point in their favor for running it how they want. Twitter, on the other hand, is mostly text. It’s just ideas. There’s little to worry about in terms of bandwidth, storage space, copyright theft, child pornography, gore, and the slew of other problems YouTube has to adequately deal with, which not many corporations other than Alphabet could deal with at all.
The three giants continue to dominate conversation in the country and increasingly around the world. There is little hope in curtailing them. Suggesting Washington D.C. apply a fix may result in those large companies simply moving to Europe where governments will allow them to operate as they please. Many of them already headquarter out of Ireland thanks to significant tax advantages.
The government attempting to fix things itself poses serious risks to the influences around us. Do you trust the FCC to manage your video recommendations and timelines any more than YouTube and Twitter? Do you want to give Trump / Obama / your preferred Antichrist that power?
I think about this every day. Not one day passes where I don’t think about how completely fucked we are, and in that time I see a few possible fixes that might work independently or in conjunction.
Poison #1: Social Media Neutrality Reclassify unprofitable social media sites as a public service. These public services can be used for advertising and data collection, but cannot ban any idea, expression, or person. They cannot attempt to influence users, their views, or politics. Facebook proper is profitable so it can do what it wants, but YouTube, for instance, would either need to deal with the requirements or find a way to become profitable. For YouTube to become profitable, it would essentially need to become Netflix, and then a new and better YouTube can potentially rise from the ashes.
Poison #2: Payment Processor Neutrality I think a lot of problems might resolve themselves if the fear of losing payment processors did not exist. Right now, a huge bottleneck in alternative services is Mastercard/Visa Card. If MC/VC were required by law to process transactions no matter what, it would be far easier to conceive of profitable and fairer alternatives to what exists already. It wouldn’t promise anything, but right now it’s just flat-out impossible.
Poison #3: Buy a GoPro and Subscribe to PewDiePie With the way that these censorship efforts are affecting people, and with the blatant disregard for the well-being of those affected, I suspect to see more violent outrage as a result. I don’t believe, nor would I want to believe, that violence can fix things, but eventually these companies will ban people who disagree with me. They already have. Will this result in substantial change in these platforms? Probably not. Developers are expendable, and the people at the top live on secure private islands in countries with no extradition treaty to the United States.
With new cryptocurrency and P2P technologies, I am expecting to see successful attempts at making decentralized websites accessible to broader audiences by 2020 that deal with a lot of the issues these centralized services are creating now. There is an entire arena of new issues with that (such as state-level censorship, ISP-level censorship, domain registry censorship, etc), but it’s on the horizon and I’m excited about it.
I’m very doom-and-gloom in general, but I hope 2019 will be the darkest year for the Internet. My gut tells me 2020 will be the start of something new.
- 1
Alex
Still a Music Elitist
- 14,496
- 7,409
Yeah well I'm not important enough and neither are any of you. Trump proves that it doesn't really matter in the end anyway. If you read his social media presence in a vacuum and then read that he's one of the most powerful men in the world you'd be confused how #metoo was ever really a thing.
- 1
- 1
Alex
Still a Music Elitist
- 14,496
- 7,409
Slaanesh69
Millie's Staff Member
- 5,857
- 16,308
Please elaborate because on the face of it, this seems especially retarded. But I may be confused as to the message here.