The social media firms are the ones scraping the data.

They only add protections to make sure they get paid for it.

Also, your rhythm and timings start from the moment of the Big Bang

Continuous Mozilla hit pieces coming out….

I wonder which company motivated only by greed and the fact that their entire business model is “obliterating your privacy” is behind them

Gotta pay the bills somehow, and I’m just happy they care about privacy.

I’ve done both, it’s just a rarity to have someone experienced enough in both to be able to cross the lines.

Those are your gems and they’ll stick around as long as you pay them decently.

Hard to find.

Because the problem is that you need

1. A developer
2. A systems guy
3. A social and great personality

The job is hard to hire for because those 3 in combo is rare. Many developers and systems guys have prickly personalities or specialise in their favourite part of it.

Devops spent have the option of prickly personalities because you have to deal with so many people outside your team that are prickly and that you have to sometimes give bad news to….

Eventually they’ll all be mad at you for SOMETHING…… and you have to let it slide. You have to take their anger and not take it personally…. That’s hard for most people, let alone tech workers that grew up idolising Linus torvalds, or Sheldon cooper and their “I’m so smart that I don’t need to be nice” attitudes.

As a devops manager that’s been both, it depends on the group. Ideally a devops group has a few former devs and a few former systems guys.

Honestly, the best devops teams have at least one guy that’s a liaison with IT who is primarily a systems guy but reports to both systems and devops. Why?

It gets you priority IT tickets and access while systems trusts him to do it right. He’s like the crux of every good devops team. He’s an IT hire paid for by the devops team budget as an offering in exchange for priority tickets.

But in general, you’re absolutely right.

With enough voltage, everything is a conductor.

It’s because they appear to be something they’re not.

They’re usually friendly and fun and do all sorts of employee retention activities like arranging go karting and such…

They seem like they’re there almost as union stewards, to try and help retain employees and ensure you’re treated well by management. This is not the case. They’re there to protect the company from lawsuits originated by you. This means that they’ll apply rules and such in ways that are not usually beneficial to you.

They’re actually really helpful if you have issues with a coworker! However, you need to remember that despite how friendly they seem, they’re not actually in your corner, they have their own agenda.

So the simple answer is that they aren’t bad at all, but it can feel bad if you thought they were your friend.

How would they afford next year’s stock buyback?

Well, that’s up to debate.

In war there are still rules of engagement and expectations about things like “child soldiers” and “civilian casualties” and “collective punishments” etc….

But also, how much to those rules actually stop people?

Which rules are worth breaking if they prevent open war and millions of deaths?

No idea. Some deep philosophising and rationalisations around all of it is required regardless of your stance

And also, the drone allows you to pick your target.

You don’t know who’s holding or near the walkie talkie.

I’m not for or against it, I don’t feel qualified to make a judgement, but I can see the differences.

Now do tucker

Agreed.

I disagree. SpaceX is rumoured to have hired an “Elon babysitter” and Gwynne Shotwell seems to know what she’s doing.

But musk sucks.

The good news is that he’s so busy with Twitter and Tesla that he’s left spaceX alone.

I think Elon has become (or perhaps always was) an ass, but somehow he knows how to hire some pretty smart people.

I’m the one getting snippy? Hahaha okay.

I read the article, I’m just commenting about the world around the article from a small step back, and I tried to help you see that.

Have a nice day.

Well I tried to show you what’s happening, I’m sorry you’re not seeing it, but I’m done. Have a nice day.

Maybe you’re missing the connection here.

Facebook is implementing features to prevent some types of advertising, as per the article.

Facebook allows the purchase of the exact same advertising, so long as you pay their fee.

It’s just a different flavour of the same shit.

These days I have to create a spam filter for my phone notifications, let alone emails.

WhatsApp is owned by Facebook and you can pay them for corporate accounts and advertising.

How dare they advertise without giving WhatsApp (aka Facebook) a cut of the profits!