Re: What a surprise @Geez Money
Yep, it's starting to look like the EU doesn't need us more than we need them. Sadly, a lot of the idiots who voted for Brexit firmly believe (now) that they voted for something they had never heard of in 2016.
42 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Apr 2017
"Ultimately though, the bread and butter of it is that FB are profiting (directly or otherwise) from displaying locally generated news content, at the cost of depriving the sources of that content of revenue."
How does driving more traffic to newspaper sites (by giving them free advertising!) deprive them of revenue? Surely that increases the value of their own advertising?
It's difficult to see why Facebook should pay a tax for effectively subsidising Australian companies.
Also, there isn't much 'content' in a snippet, it mostly just disambiguates the headline which allows visitors to read stories they want to see rather than having their time wasted on ones they don't.
There was solid majority against any sort of Brexit for most of the four years after 2016's non-binding, inconclusive, and corrupted referendum.
Strangely, our wonderful independent media (and spineless government mouthpiece, the BBC) failed to keep mentioning that every time some pompous twat insisted on claiming that Brexit was 'the will of the people'.
...but, once you are involved in doing something, is VR really more immersive than just using an ordinary screen?
Maybe immersiveness is more to do with what psychologists call flow experience.
To maintain that state, you need to see past the technology you are using. My impression of VR is that it's nowhere near fluid and transparent enough to avoid drawing attention itself and 'breaking the spell' by introducing distractions.
By 'referendum', you mean the non-binding opinion poll that is two and a half years out of date? The one that gave no clear mandate for anything?
Seems like a weak excuse for sacrificing the sovereignty and economic future of the UK. Particularly since it doen't even represent the views of the British people in 2018.
So it doesn't contain any actual smoke?
Nobody said or implied that it did.
It does contain a known carcinogen and various irritants.
I am amused by the self-righteousness and victim mentality of people who think that being too weak to give up smoking excuses being selfish.
PS: I found that the best method was to stop buying cigarettes!
If passive smoking can harm people, how is vaping not going to do? I find the vapour from these machines extremely irritating, much more so than actual tobacco smoke.
In a few years we may find out what the effect of super-heating a mixture of nicotine plus cheap synthetic flavourings is.
MS Office achieved a dominant position in its field because:
1) Microsoft used its inside knowledge of its own operating systems to give Office a performance advantage over competitors, and
2) Microsoft leveraged its monopoly of the OS market to exploit that advantage.
Microsoft still gets away with charging inflated prices for its software because of the advantage it gained from using its monopoly to stifle competitors.
I'm sure that affects thousands of times more people than could care about not using specific shopping comparison sites (because, let's face it, historically all shopping comparison sites were useless crap that nobody visited more than once.)