Techdirt is off for Memorial Day. We'll be back with regularly scheduled posting tomorrow!Hide

decrement’s Techdirt Profile

decrement

About decrement




decrement’s Comments comment rss

  • Aug 19th, 2014 @ 4:22pm

    Detecting Sarcasm

    Note that the US Secret Service is seeking development of social media analytics software capable of detecting sarcasm online.

    Leveraging Facebooks user base to develop the ability to detect Satire is a convenient stepping-stone toward this direction.

    It also feels a lot like rolling all Facebook accounts into a research project without the ability to opt-out.

    Source:
    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/us-secret-service-wants-software-to-detect-sarcasm-on-soc ial-media/

  • May 20th, 2014 @ 5:05pm

    (untitled comment)

    I am willing to pay extra for a dumb tv.

    By extra, I mean the standard pricing. If Smart TV's designed to scrape data from the home aren't coming with a deep discount on price, the true cost is being hidden.

  • Apr 30th, 2014 @ 1:34pm

    Title II (?)

    Can someone elaborate on the Telecommunications Act of 1996?

    According to Wikipedia Title I is "Telecommunication Services", not Title II as referenced in the article.

    Title II is defined as "Broadcast Services", which sounds a lot like the bundling of channel packages we see on cable tv. Bundling of website packages from isp's is not the direction I would like to see the internet move toward.

    The distinction of Title I or Title II has huge implications -- I'm pretty sure we want Title I.

  • Apr 2nd, 2014 @ 11:14am

    Results vs. splitting hairs

    There is a bit of genius behind Geoffrey Stone's approach.

    It is far too easy when being blasted by public and press opinion to simply circle the wagons and ignore the criticism. To simply resist the opposing viewpoint. To trivialize it.

    What is the ideal result one can hope for going forward? In my opinion that result looks like opening doors to tighten privacy laws and ending some of these unfettered metadata collection activities.

    By reinforcing to the employees at the NSA that they are doing a good job, and protecting the country, then placing blame outside the NSA George diffuses the personal nature of the argument. This allows employees to be more receptive to the message, and plants the seed that accepting change is not equated with a defeat.

    In terms of realizing a true significant modification of these programs, planting this seed is brilliant move. Continuing to water it may grow additional support for these ideas from within. Splitting hairs by demonizing the entire organization, as reprehensible as past actions might be, is a certain way to maximize resistance.

    I like the focus on "what is the desired outcome?" rather than reactionary outrage.

  • Jan 13th, 2014 @ 12:24pm

    (untitled comment)

    This opinion might be unpopular. I believe Mark Griffiths is correct to be unsettled, but is going down the wrong path with linking things to gambling.

    Candy Crush has been tuned perfectly to maximize micro-transactions. The game has an insidious way of leaving the player only one or two turns away from completing a level, then dangles opportunities to spend money or spam friends to continue.

    I consider the practice of dangling the carrot of level completion over children to be predatory. I would love to see pay-to-win micro-transactions reigned in on games marketed toward children.