That was probably done because comments also appear on one's Google+ page. In that context you want to see what video was commented on.
But it seems extremely clumsy not to implement a solution that takes into account the context in which the comment is shown. Just more evidence that the project was pushed through in a rush, without regard for consequences.
I agree. It's stunning to me that a bunch of executives and lawyers sat together and decided, we are going to take advantage of the infrastructure and workforce in the UK, but will avoid paying any taxes there, using these clever shenanigans. And because it saves money and is in the interest of the company, it's okay.
That most ordinary people would agree that this is the right approach tells volumes about the society we live in.
I "took off" for over a year, worked around the clock on my own projects, amassed a huge amount of new skills, and had absolutely no problem finding a new job afterwards.
It was almost eerie - nobody even cared if my projects were successful or how much money I made. They only wanted to know that I did have all the skills that I put on my resume, and (to a lesser degree) my motivation for doing what I did.
Working on your own stuff you learn ten times as fast as in a "regular" job. I highly recommend it.
I am fairly certain they still use "fake" submissions (and paid users) to great effect.
Recently a user "karmanaut" was exposed as systematically taking the highest-ranking comment of a previous picture submission and adding it to the picture when it was resubmitted (resubmissions on reddit are fairly common, yet they do make the frontpage again and again). It was clearly done with the help of a bot. The moderators initially deleted the thread that pointed to his shenanigans.
A lot of front page submissions originate from the same dozen-or-so people who are apparently on reddit all day long. I would not be surprised if - just like owners of YouTube channels - there are content creators in reddit that get paid as such.
Ugh. I wouldn't have thought that. And to think ten years ago people were worried about cookies... The bar for privacy on the internet has gotten pretty low.
A friend of mine publicly read "How to improve your sex drive". She's in a relationship....
Agreed. Ads are ubiquitous (I just tune them out), but clicking a link and being told "you can't read this unless you give us your personal info and let us tell all of your friends that you read this" is wrong on so many levels.
I think this sort of thing will add to the downfall of facebook. Non-savvy internet users love facebook, but it only takes one learning experience (such as seeing broadcast that you read a highly-embarrassing article) for people to become wary.
Yes but out in the wild, even with monkeys watching other monkeys, sex is a social activity; watching porn alone makes it a very non-social activity.
This discussion reminds me a bit of the "sugar/fructose" discussion the other day. Humans are built to crave sugary, high-calorie food. Modern society allows for an endless supply of sugar. Cue rampant obesity.
I think it's beneficial to question everything; to completely detach oneself from the hivemind. Just because everyone watches porn (or it provides short-term positive benefits) does not mean it's innately good, or could/should be consumed in endless quantities, or has no negative implications.
It depends how much stuff you have other than the bed. Renting a vehicle one-way is crazy expensive. So is flying with more than one or two suitcases.
My hunch is, driving the small truck ALMOST all the way with your stuff, then ditching it before you get there would be the most cost-effective approach.
If necessary, get a storage locker (way outside the city) for the first month (Public Storage has "first month free" offers) until you get settled in.
To me, the occasional two-day road trip is necessary to preserve my sanity. Even if it's based on a thinly veiled excuse.
While I think it's important not to waste time away on twitter, reddit, hackernews et al: if you start running a tally of how much $$$ every one of your waking hours is worth, you'll drive yourself crazy.
A related issue I'm having right now though - I only want to spend my productive hours creating and developing. I don't want to do the "social media expert" work as well (test-marketing and promoting my sites, etc.) I feel that my "developer hours" are worth considerably more than the non-development work, especially given that I'm not very good at the latter. I've been thinking how I could engage my unemployed friends to help me out with testing, promoting, etc. and make it a fair deal (based on future success/web statistics) but haven't gotten very far.
I don't know... Data in itself is not valuable, you have to be able to monetize it.
How much is it worth to know everything about a 20-something buried under a mountain of student loans, who is not inclined to buy expensive furniture, stereo systems, or cars anytime soon? Hundreds of dollars? Really? Add to that that the tech trendsetters and early adopters are not enthusiastic supporters of facebook anymore and seem ready to jump on the next big thing.
When I read the story yesterday about the company wishing to mine data how many people have sex in the bathroom after hooking up through the site, I figured this whole obsessive data collection thing has jumped the shark a bit.
Maybe it makes sense for the moment - as in the absence of revenues, user profiles attracts VC - but it does remind me a lot of the bubble in early 2000.
Exactly. Recently I asked a friend to check out a site I just uploaded, he sent me some nice compliments. Later I realized that on IE (which he uses) the layout was all off.
This was awesome... made me remember every single facepalm I experienced while learning jquery. :)
With the caveats from the previous comments, I'd recommend this to every web developer-in-training. Thanks for putting this together; this could save many people many hours.
According to various philosophies and religions, defining life in terms of "doing" is one of the fundamental errors, and it does have various negative implications if you think it through to its logical conclusion.
So, no, I don't think this is just "a personal hangup" of yours...
Last time I looked, Facebook photos are not protected by any security other than the fact that their .jpg link is difficult to guess. (I.e. anybody can view them who has the link.) I was very surprised when I noticed that. Makes sense, cost-wise, I guess; it would be very expensive to integrate their CDN with their security model somehow.
I'm not familiar with FamilyLeaf, but I do wonder what will happen if more people/apps start exploiting that fact and start sharing photo links outside the facebook framework. If a page featuring the photo gets crawled, the "private" photos will be out on the web for all to find and see.
<RANT>I wish more people were selective about what photos they post to facebook, given that the privacy of one's content is not "all that". An acquaintance of mine just posted hundreds of pictures of young girls that she coaches in their leotards, some of them really embarrassing. Argh...</RANT>
I actually think that "A" is beyond dispute. Your married partner cheats on you, divorces you, marries the biological father of the child, and you are still on the hook for child support? I can't imagine someone NOT thinking with every moral fiber of their being that this is wrong.
Regardless, I think my point is already self-evident in the answers. Which is: we accept without second thought that (A) our society is sexist and women are oppressed and objectified. So A -> B -> C: when a woman claims sexism, we all have to focus on eradicating that sexism immediately (i.e. reign men in). No thought is given to the possibility that the pendulum has possibly already swung too much in the opposite direction, and it is actually the men who are treated unfairly in most cases whenever gender issues come up. Just see e.g. the topic on reddit's front page this morning "I called the cops on my GF after an argument we had got violent, the cops come and arrest ME".
I think any discussion that is about treating both genders equally and fairly that does not take into account current anti-male inequality misses the point. We need to question ALL social conditioning to reach a point where everyone is treated fairly.
Can you give an example? In almost all states, if the wife gets pregnant by another man, the man is still on the hook for child support for the next 18+ years... even if she divorces him and marries her lover.
I can't think of an equivalent anti-female law with such devastating long-term impact on the woman.
I know this message might be off tangent for the HN board. But if we're discussing anti-female sexist culture and try to erase every incident of women being treated unfairly even in the slightest way, I think it should be allowed to point out that in today's culture, men are also often treated extremely unfairly... and you don't see scores of women jumping to their defense (like the men did in the "Lighten up" thread).
But it seems extremely clumsy not to implement a solution that takes into account the context in which the comment is shown. Just more evidence that the project was pushed through in a rush, without regard for consequences.