Something to consider when offering such a platform is don't build an attractive nuisance. And the platform shouldn't engage in spammy nuisance behavior itself. Frequently, that seems to be in conflict with max monetization, which is why IPOs are the arrows pointing to the next step down the drain.
They all encourage the poor behavior or garbage content which they now seem to want to filter, or have been ordered to do so. They have done it through their own example. And yeah, most could have avoided a fair chunk of this by listening to people who have been dealing with digital fora since even before the damn internet. Although i have this idea that some of the people involved with creating such platforms were the trolls of older platforms.
Interesting, considering fake news is not supported here. However, there are plenty of liars who shout "fake news!" at facts, which is a problem when accusations elicit a visit from police or arrest with no recourse.
You will also be happy to know, then, that almost anyone brought before a court on criminal charges is convicted. Even the saiban-in reform experiment is highly controversial from what i have seen.
The thing with a municipal or regional broadband is that customers can vote with more than their wallets and voice complaints more effectively in multiple venues when it comes to bad service.
This is probably more interesting for corporations running their own VPN, like they should. Or does anyone do that anymore?
It's early, but: Dumbest wrong just-so story of the week?
A Brady violation doesn't really underplay anything. The fact that some people don't understand the weight of the term "parallel construction" doesn't make it an incorrect term. It is hardly an understatement.
I don't see anything wrong with "evidence laundering", it seems perfectly descriptive and fit to convey meaning and avoid repetition. I do, however, see a problem with the trend of juicing up terminology to bypass any logical consumption and reach straight for negative emotional reactions. (I'm not saying your descriptive term is in this category.) It gives the opposition ammunition to mock arguments employing such terms, sometimes with some reason, even if their general position is sheer bullshit.
I'm a fan of colorful and variegated communication used to better convey meaning. But it is senseless to discard original terms rather than use additional description, such as "evidence laundering", to describe them.
I don't suppose my thinking is particular to your comment, but it did elicit a train of thought that brought me here. It put me in mind of changing terms to manipulate people or fire up the like-minded, which sometimes works terrible magic, or loses any meaningful connection with the original intent, among other outcomes.
Again, i think your statements are accurate. Perhaps something there simply reminds me of other, unconnected things.
I'm sorry someone told you that this is a breaking news feed.
Seems to me that you need to read for comprehension rather than thinking that, every time you see two certain things mentioned together, you have some sort of clever gotcha.
You speak as if the groups mentioned in your last two paragraphs are somehow mutually exclusive.
Concepts: "More". "Less".
People need to dispense with the idea that all other people are wholly ignorant of facts.
I think a "view" requires 15 seconds of run time, but i wouldn't make any claims about the effect of that or anything.
That's true, but what about those who don't intend to be more or less full time youtube producers? It's more work to monetize other ways, and in some people might feel awkward (but not that many, apparently) with Patreon begging for slow or irregular work. I'm sure some just want a little help that adds up over time from ad monetization.
I don't know, i went back to blocking ads anyway, they are so repetitive and stupid. Youtube may end up feeling kind of silly, but it seems like people and corporations frequently do something even worse when they feel that way.
4000 hours watch time means that smaller channels are encouraged to output quantity content over quality content. That's already old hat, so it's not like lame tubers wouldn't ramp it up. It also forces non-famous tubers into content-dumping stuff they normally wouldn't, or begging for more views. I think there is a broad middle where people can make interesting content, but not at a high rate, and not with a ton of regular viewers. So yeah.
So yeah, here's the deal: Ima gonna sell ya my rights to this work, only i reserve the right to sue anyone who infringes on your copyright. Cool?
I wouldn't believe in the validity of such a transaction even if it weren't made up post facto at the last minute.
And really what is the plan with some of these infringement suits, generally? They can never recover anything like what it costs to go to court, let alone damage claims if they win. Is there some kind of tax write-off for this that they can also game? As some kind of example, it surely does not burn fear into the hearts of toddlers and old dead men.
_You will endeavor to inform yourself by inquiry of the character of the country._
You could just do government out in the open then, it's cheaper.
You really can't compare US for-profit schools and colleges (e.g., many are or became such egregious scams that they shut down)to systems other places. If you want to go by names, one may think MIT was some sort of scam tech trade high school.
I would agree with TheCarl that this is the wrong thing to pick on, for a quick laugh or with serious accusation, without evidence. I wonder if these clowns-at-law will be smart enough to rebut that (assuming they wouldn't avoid the point for other shady reasons, including that the quality of his schooling and success as a student can be wholly irrelevant to the quality of this software or his "expert testimony").
The Dems are too busy shitting on anyone who isn't a party insider to hear it.
I want to file a slew of patents covering "something something, but with blockchain technology".
_There is simply nothing between the two entities that represents a competitive situation._
But what if Vice Media maybe could have thought in the future about going into that market? You know, like maybe the Dr. Seuss estate might have done a Seuss/Star Trek mashup maybe someday maybe.