I had the strangest interaction with the Messenger app a few months ago.
I was spending time with friends, and I took a few pictures of all of us (didn't send them through either FB or Messenger). A few hours later, messenger popped up a notification telling me something along the lines of "Hey, I see you took pictures today of <friend>. Want to send them to her?"
Made me feel incredibly creeped out that FB would take my photos and (presumably upload and) analyze them even when I hadn't given them to FB.
"By recognizing your Facebook friends in the photos you take (just like when tagging or sharing photos on Facebook), Messenger can create a group thread for you to share the photos with those friends in just two taps."
I am still shocked about that feature. The messenger app is installed by millions of people. Does anyone know how the app does the friend recognition? Local on the phone or on FBs servers?
Facebooks servers. Phones could not be capable of doing that much facial recognition that quick. Plus that bandwidth to grab all your friends images to compare to would be a metric ton of images given some selfie-addicts.
The other day tinfoil me finally gave in and installed the Instagram app. Marshmallow gives me more granular permission control, but naturally I had to give it access to the file system to be able to upload pictures. Knowing about their ways with Messenger, I guess it's only a matter of time before Instagram scans my whole phone for images and videos to perform biometric analysis.
You don't need to take it to the congress; just stop using the services of a company whose practices you don't agree with. If more people would do this, maybe the company will get the message and change its practices.
This information is too valuable to dissuade companies from collecting and using it. You can't do much as an user if everyone is doing it. In many situations you might not even know that you're being tracked, there already technologies that track you in public places.
Congress is broke and the tech companies know it and optimize against this and will continue to make hay while the sun shines (i.e. before the US produces any effective consumer privacy legislation).
Strangely enough, Elizabeth Warren was able to put together comprehensive legislation to work towards ending Intuit's (to name the largest offender) corporate welfare [1] in the tax prep software space. Or is there an anti-private corporation/pro IRS tax prep lobbyist I'm missing?
I don't follow the sausagemaking process in DC, so I don't precisely know in that instance, but my guess would be a public advocacy group.
In my state legislature, which I follow, it's really common for various groups to write sample legislation. Everything from duck habitat preservation to open source software.
I saw that now too. Opt-in isn't enough here, the user of the messenger app should get consent from all folks on those pictures before auto-uploading anything.
Facebook lets you opt-out of being tagged, which is about all they can do. The photos don't being to you, plus they're not going to know that you're in a photo until after it gets uploaded.
People also use to think putting hour real name on the internet was creepy. Little by little the privacy erosion has brought us where we are today - standing naked in front of a corporate monster profiting off our data.
Wow I never heard of that before, that's insane...
The worst thing is you can't "boycott" the app because even if you don't use it but your friends do, the pictures of you WILL be analyzed. Even if you explicitly refused their ToS...
Are these kind of things possible with WhatsApp? (on iOS specifically, and now that it even uses e2e) I don't know if I should trust them with Facebook being behind the wheel...
I'm not a hardcore JS dev, but it probably has to do with the speed of objects vs. arrays. In most languages, arrays are significantly faster (because they're basically one contiguous block of memory).
I'm finding this comment thread to be a great example of the idea that everyone has different and particular learning styles. 6 comments, 4 different git tutorials (not counting the original post.)
I recently found a newsfeed eradicator extension that hides the newsfeed whenever you visit Facebook but still let's you check groups, message, and see notifications. I've found it to be a pretty happy balance between continuing to use facebook as a communication tool and not letting it suck me in time-wise.
My assumption about basic income was always that at it's core, it provides the money for food and shelter. This reduces bureaucratic overhead in terms of trying to provide people those goods, and gives them the freedom to make their own choices and not have to work to survive, and the government is no longer forced to create the infrastructure to try to find ways to provide food and shelter. This may, however, require work in terms of providing affordable housing options to everyone, but I don't think you have to solve one problem first to solve the other.
Health Care and Education are a separate (but still related and important) set of problems. Both of those require greater infrastructure on the part of the government to provide effective solutions, so again this is a problem that also requires a lot of thought and effort, but providing basic income doesn't seem like it would preclude health care/education reform. Nor does it seem like solving health care and education reform would change the structure or overall effects of a basic income program; they're simply additional solutions that would certainly improve our quality of life and possibly the efficacy of the program.
OK, well this is a good thing for YC to fund an experiment to test.
If given basic income, do people spend money on food and shelter, and plan out a good life, or do they live day-to-day and remain a burden on society?
This is why I think education, for example, comes before basic income. Without education, you can easily imagine people remaining homeless despite the income.
Of course some people will succeed and some won't -- the question is the ratio.
Some rich people are scrupulous; some rich people waste their money. I don't see any reason to believe that poor people are any different. I think we can still help those people with education, etc. without wasting taxpayer dollars. But how much would be "wasted" is of course an open question.
I think it has more to do with society being class segregated, and the habits that could raise your class (or raise your chances of getting out anyways) are not the social norms in the lower classes.
There's a confirmation bias in that kind of logic, since people who start out poor and work their way into the middle class (or higher) don't "count" any more.
I think the keyword is significantly. If Uber tripled or quadrupled their prices, I think they'd be fairly vulnerable to regional competitors. Even an increase of 1.5x seems like it'd be hard to pull off.
Speaking anecdotally, I know for sure that I'd use a cheaper alternative to save $5 even if it took an extra 10 min.
i.e. show is bound to the value of showRight placement is read as "right" width is set to be the int 350.