I think if we’re honest, the most likely outcome under Kamela would be that the US would not have attacked Iran, so there would be nothing to negotiate. It’s possible Israel may have done so anyway without US support.
I think there are other reasons and am capable of critical thought. A variety of synergies have been discussed publicly for at least 9 years. This article lists several of them.
Chrysler (now Stellantis), Honda, Toyota and Geely all had/have rocketry divisions and many more auto companies have/are involved in the Aerospace industry more generally.
Interestingly, I have some weirdly relevant direct experience to share here.
Pokémon Go was released at the beginning of July 2016. A week later, the Air Force kicked off its Red Flag exercise in Nellis AFB outside of Vegas. For the several thousand active duty folks participating, this is a month-long TDY from their normal base to Vegas. The premise is a large-scale war simulation, and it encompasses essentially all major wartime functions. I was directly involved in supporting drone operations (including live strikes) during this exercise.
The thing that’s funny about your comment is that because Pokémon go was just launched a week prior, a huge percentage of the participants were playing it in their downtime between exercises. You have to understand: these are thousands of 20/30-somethings (and occasionally even teenagers), meeting back up with friends from all over the world in Vegas. On and off base, people are socializing, having fun, and playing games. While phones were limited to outside of SCIFs, most of the base had no such restrictions. I recall wandering around base at 2am with friends playing it.
What’s funny is the same was happening with our deployed friends as well at the same time. This was a game that all their friends back home were playing, and when deployed, you need all the morale you can get. There were technically OPSEC policies this all probably violated but this was before any blowback from Strava accidentally revealing military bases or other similar incidents, so there was no specific guidance or moratorium on it.
All this to say, I understand what you’re trying to arrive at via deduction, but I think your understanding of the world in this case may be a bit too limited to meaningfully speak to this. That said, is the headline sensationalist? Probably.
Ha certainly, and thank you for translating! Weirdly my first experience with the term TDY came from an internship at the Red Cross, where I showed up and they informed me my manager would be gone for the entirety of my internship “on TDY”. I had no idea what I meant, until months later I learned she was on maternity leave. I’ve never heard it used that way since, but it’s always stuck with me.
In the military it’s basically whenever they send you off on training or even deployment can be considered a type of TDY. Usually they’re pretty competitive to get selected for, as it’s a huge break from daily monotony, and often comes with some relatively significant financial incentive (hazard pay, tax free income, per diem, relocation $).
This is off topic and I understand we’re not supposed to comment on such things, but was anyone else mystified by the decisions that went into the scroll progress bar up top (on mobile)? It seems to be two part, where part of it would accurately reflect your scroll state, while the other had some weird latency associated with it. And then it ended up hidden behind the top of page blur unless you scrolled very aggressively, to the point where the blur could not keep up.
It works for me. I didn't dismiss the first dickover, but did dismiss the second dickover. Scrolled all the way to the bottom smoothly (minus the pause for the second dickover).
Having worked at Apple, I will say I firmly believe they do not sell data. I worked in data science and we had the shittiest inference because we had essentially no access, even internally, to longitudinal or cross-app user data. Best we had was 15 minute rotating sessions for a single app. There are internal teams dedicated to deanonymizing data to try to narrow down users - if they can successfully do so, and relevant fields that lead to deanonymization get permanently purged from internal logging.
I can’t speak to the current architecture but Apple has shown a consistent willingness to sacrifice access to user data in the name of selling privacy instead at a premium price (you could argue precisely because no one of their competition have any meaningful posture on this). I do believe they are quite serious in their commitment to that, as they have found this strategy to be more valuable than the data itself.
This comment makes it sound like they sold private recordings to whomever was willing to pay for them, but they paid third parties to evaluate Siri recordings.
Illegal to share data with entities that are themselves law enforcement, and which they are known to be demanding, not just asking to share out of good will?
It’s funny because that is a guy with enough sense to both see what is going on and also not short it, because he knows that none of this actually matters with regard to stock performance for a properly frothy investor class.
It’s really not though. There is no personalized algorithm, which is 98% of the issue with social media. It may seem pedantic, but it’s like saying a horse and a car are essentially the same thing, the car just has an engine.
The personalized algorithm is not the root issue though. The root issue is that social media sites live by increasing engagement of its viewers. Because of this, they all get away from the original stated purpose of bringing people together, and go all in on maximizing engagement by increasingly shady ways. Of course, the personalized algorithm is a huge one, but there are also things like "Show HN" controlling what is on the front page, selectively taking down flagged material. Remember, HN has advertisements as well, and will regularly post job ads for positions in startups. They know that outright going in the direction of 'personalized algorithm' would alienate their viewerbase, so they avoid it, but still do all of the other practices that social media sites do.
I think it can be argued that, because human interests are so different and fractal, there's only so much damage that can be done with non-personalized algorithm. Ads for a certain demographic will just alienate the other demographic. But with personalized algorithm, the poison can be customized for each person and be more fatal.
We can imagine 100 different websites each with different non-personalized algorithms - another algorithm decides which one is best for you and directs you to that site. That's effectively a personalized algorithm with extra steps.
Yeah but then each of those websites would only have 1 audience, which would be economically ruinous. Even HN has >1M daily view which is quite a lot of eyes to cater.
I guess there can be a sweet spot in a certain amount of MAU. And this is why I prefer medium-sized subreddit.
reply