Anyone on twitter could've told you that. When you're followed by "@hotttladie3" & "hotttladie453892", it's only reasonable to assume there is also an @hotttladie4 through @hotttladie452891.
The problem with having a user reporting based plan for acting against fake accounts in an environment where the psychological motivations of using the service, if not to disseminate news, or maintain a closet standup comedian habit, is affirmation. In almost every motivation for using the service, the user has an incentive to keep their numbers up, whether they are real or not. A huge part of the game is the number of followers.
Personally I'm just surprised that they've moved from advertising cam sites (which could conceivably act as a secondary, almost passive income) to quoting star wars novels while inflating numbers for people who pay for followers. That's the aspect that confuses me, and makes me feel vulnerable.
A puppy on it's back in a basket of flowers.
A teenage asian girl singing the national anthem.
A gymnast preparing to do a flatground set.
Several Japanese men in a room full of pipes pointing around and asking questions.
Two children sticking there tongues out at the camera and saying "Hi grandma!"
You're referring to people who do not have sufficient access to resources. Those people say they want jobs because they don't have access to resources, and they can't envision said access without the intermediary process of having to perform work at a job to obtain said resources. They view the two concepts: jobs and resources, as inextricably interwoven facets of a single process.
As someone with a job, with friends and acquaintances who all have jobs, and parents who have jobs, I feel like I can safely speak for all of them when I tell you right now: We do not want jobs. We want access to a fair share of the available resources.
Yeah, there is nothing in the world that brings people a deeper more fulfilling sense of purpose, and meaning to their lives than work. Ask someone with a family, an artist, or a political activist, and they will surely tell you, "I love being a Human, but I really don't feel whole without having to perform labor for the financial benefit of another party at the cost of my time and energy."
Maybe I'm the only person who reads this stuff who has actually done construction work, landscaping, painted houses, washed dishes, etc. while what they really wanted to do was to be studying mathematics and computer science, but as such a person, I find the "let's try to find a way around universal income in light of the coming 'automated utopia'" conversation to be extremely offensive. You say (and I'm paraphrasing for dramatic effect) that 'these poor people love to work, without work they wouldn't even be whole people' Not quite as offensive as "Let's liquidate the lower-class when we no longer need them to perform rote tasks to further our objectives." but close.
You all have heard that we can harness energy from the light of the sun and convert it into electricity[1] with the risk of contaminating the environment which sustains us[2] coming only from the production of the tools to harness that energy from light, right?
Aside from the context of space travel beyond where collecting this underutilized resource, "Light From Stars" is viable, why is this even a conversation?
You know I did pack my bags, bailed on Silicon Beach, (Silicon Beeeeyaaatch!!!) and moved to bum-fuck nowhere. It actually cost me a considerable amount of money to sew up all my affairs. (cancel contracts, get rid of a lease, make arrangements) It's incredibly cost-prohibitive to break a routine in an American city, and relocate. It took some clever bureaucracy hacks, negotiating a complex sea of contingencies, and ultimately a good deal of material sacrifice to make it happen. The 'rat race' is not exactly 'designed' at all. As an inadvertent consequence, it is not designed to allow one to leave it easily.
It seems that you view these services, which are luxuries, as options for the people that have to provide these services in order to survive in the modern American urban environment. They generally can't afford these luxuries. Nobodies blaming, or complaining about tech companies providing services. People are blaming tech companies and complaining about the effects of tech companies arbitraging value from economic systems that already existed, further increasing the concentration of wealth (which is ostensibly access to resources) among those who can already afford to invest in building the mechanisms to arbitrage said value. And, quite frankly, some of us are getting annoyed with people who defend companies that actually influence legislature on local and national levels to enable this arbitrage to the detriment of the citizenship of these regions, while shoving advertising, and news stories in our faces, labeling this arbitrage as the quintessential if not sole definition of human progress.
One of the innumerable problems with advertising is that you can't "unsee" it. For instance: can you unread this reply to your comment? To suggest that it is the responsibility of an individual to ignore advertising in their environment, is to suggest that it is their responsibility to not pay attention to their surroundings, or read any signs. I think it is a perfectly natural reaction to see something that you understand to be a sardonic misrepresentation of a reality, and respond negatively.
I had been working on a pitch for Uber for Wet Nurses but didn't realize my target demographic was actually 20's to 30's white males. Maybe I should crunch the numbers again.
Now to counteract the 'Seamless effect', we should build an Uber for Companionship & Human Contact, you know.. like an Uber for 'Dating'. We can reap a percentage of the income the companion makes from the date...
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turn...