|
eSports Chaebol posted:I bet a lot of people would be uncomfortable if they realized that by default, YouTube creates a publicly-visible playlist of your liked videos, so if somebody say, clicks your name in the comments section of a video, they can see every video you've liked. I actually don't mind but it does seem kind of creepy that it's the silent default. *furiously unlikes BBW feeding ASMR midget videos*
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2016 22:11
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 17:39 |
|
|
I'm an old grandpa but I don't understand why you would hit the like button unless you want that info to be made public.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
nachos posted:I'm an old grandpa but I don't understand why you would hit the like button unless you want that info to be made public. To decrease the ~mindshare~ of Wrongthink videos by making them appear more unpopular (to people who like engaging with brands).
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
nachos posted:I'm an old grandpa but I don't understand why you would hit the like button unless you want that info to be made public. To anonymously show a person that there's one more person who thinks their video was worthwhile? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:To anonymously show a person that there's one more person who thinks their video was worthwhile? Yeah, this doesn't seem weird at all. I mean, I knew about youtube's default for liking videos and it doesn't bother me, but the idea that upvoting something is meant to be a public show of support is kind of odd to me. I tend to think about buttons like that as more of an anonymous positive or negative vote, even when I know that's not how it's being used.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Yeah, this doesn't seem weird at all. I mean, I knew about youtube's default for liking videos and it doesn't bother me, but the idea that upvoting something is meant to be a public show of support is kind of odd to me. I tend to think about buttons like that as more of an anonymous positive or negative vote, even when I know that's not how it's being used.  .
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
Toplowtech posted:The thing is the video is also promoted and more likely to show up in search if it's downvoted. Dislike votes basically have the same effects because Youtube is TIL that youtube recommended videos have a three dots menu where you can click "Not interested." previously I just clicked on the video and immediately disliked it. Sorry all the video makers out there whose like/dislike ratio is skewed because of me
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 07:27
|
|
|
Businesses are literally buying youtube downvotes if they feel insulted by bad reviews.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 12:34
|
|
|
Toplowtech posted:The thing is the video is also promoted and more likely to show up in search if it's downvoted. Dislike votes basically have the same effects because Youtube is It makes perfect sense. If a video gets really upvoted, it probably mean that it's good and people will want to see it. If a video gets really downvoted, it probably means that its' controversial and that people want to see it. The important thing is that you're fed videos that elicit an emotional response, whatever that response might be. The real horror is a video that gets neither, it left so little impact that no one even bothered to have an opinion. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
sarehu posted:I thought he funded Urbit at one point. He's still currently funding them, he also funds the idiots at MIRI, and is not-at-all-secretly in favor of enlightened despotism or whatever we're currently calling getting rid of the popular vote and hoping that techlords are able to lead the country as well as they lead their companies. He's a dude who got lucky and like lots of other people who win the lottery isn't making very good choices with his money.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
Peztopiary posted:He's still currently funding them, he also funds the idiots at MIRI, and is not-at-all-secretly in favor of enlightened despotism or whatever we're currently calling getting rid of the popular vote and hoping that techlords are able to lead the country as well as they lead their companies. He's a dude who got lucky and like lots of other people who win the lottery isn't making very good choices with his money. Why does rational human being (lol) Peter Thiel think Techmerica Ltd. will turn out more like SpaceX or Amazon (sorta functional though still mediocre at best for the 99%) rather than like Yahoo or pets.com?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Why does rational human being (lol) Peter Thiel think Techmerica Ltd. will turn out more like SpaceX or Amazon (sorta functional though still mediocre at best for the 99%) rather than like Yahoo or pets.com? He just thinks yahoo.gov is better than what we have. (I'm surprised you think Amazon is only mediocre except for the 1%.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Why does rational human being (lol) Peter Thiel think Techmerica Ltd. will turn out more like SpaceX or Amazon (sorta functional though still mediocre at best for the 99%) rather than like Yahoo or pets.com? Can you elaborate on this mediocrity of Amazon? This year they reported some solid profits (true, after years of no profits, followed by marginal profits) http://www.cnet.com/news/amazon-says-first-quarter-sales-and-profit-blew-out-expectations/ This is a serious question though; the Amazon model of "let's burn through our cash until nobody is left to compete with us" is fascinating to me. I found this long explanation of the Amazon model, but I haven't gone through the whole thing yet: http://ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2014/9/4/why-amazon-has-no-profits-and-why-it-works
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:Can you elaborate on this mediocrity of Amazon? This year they reported some solid profits (true, after years of no profits, followed by marginal profits) http://www.cnet.com/news/amazon-says-first-quarter-sales-and-profit-blew-out-expectations/ Mediocre because while everything is organised well from a business point of view, working in amazon warehouses sucks for most employees. Starving out competition isn't something new, starbucks did it by opening a fuckload of cheap coffee shops all over town and then closing half of them while hiking up prices once every other coffee shop was dead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 08:14
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Mediocre because while everything is organised well from a business point of view, working in amazon warehouses sucks for most employees. Im wondering what amazons version of monopolistic assholery is going to be. Would that sort of thing even work in e-retail? Maybe theyll go fully automated and fire all of their pickers packers or something
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
Surprise Giraffe posted:Im wondering what amazons version of monopolistic assholery is going to be. Would that sort of thing even work in e-retail? Maybe theyll go fully automated and fire all of their pickers packers or something I already can't think of an online retailer that doesn't have a brick & mortar equivalent (like Target, Home Depot, etc). If people only know Amazon, they're only going to shop at Amazon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Ehh Bezos has said he doesn't think amazons future growth will be in retail. At some point I think they'll provide supply chains to other business primarily.
Bar Ran Dun fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Aug 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
Amazon doesn't offer generics, so a lot of places at the lowest quality point are still cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
Aliquid posted:Amazon doesn't offer generics, so a lot of places at the lowest quality point are still cheaper. Is that really true anymore? They've started their own branded products (amusingly using data from their site to undercut competitors)
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Ehh Bezos has said he doesn't think amazons future growth will be in retail. At some I think they'll provide supply chains to other business primarily.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
Isn't Amazon still planning to open brick and mortar stores or did that get canned?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
Surprise Giraffe posted:Im wondering what amazons version of monopolistic assholery is going to be. Would that sort of thing even work in e-retail? Maybe theyll go fully automated and fire all of their pickers packers or something Combine the squeeze they currently put on their digital goods sellers (ebooks, apps, etc), and then combine it with the supplier manipulation that you get from Wal-Mart right now. That'll be Amazon in a few years.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
Sundae posted:Combine the squeeze they currently put on their digital goods sellers (ebooks, apps, etc), and then combine it with the supplier manipulation that you get from Wal-Mart right now. That'll be Amazon in a few years. Could you elaborate on this? I've only bought a single ebook from Amazon, so I'm not sure about what you mean. Same with the supplier manipulation. I have heard, in regards to suppliers, that Amazon does represent a threat because it forces them to sell much cheaper. So while a book at your local shop will be 35, Amazon will stock it at 30. Seems fairly accurate, as I've seen books sold directly from the author being more expensive than the ones from Amazon, despite being the exact same edition.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
Aliquid posted:Amazon doesn't offer generics, so a lot of places at the lowest quality point are still cheaper. Amazon Basics is their generic and they pretty deeply undercut the name brands.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:Same with the supplier manipulation. quote:The giant retailer's low prices often come with a high cost. Wal-Mart's relentless pressure can crush the companies it does business with and force them to send jobs overseas. Are we shopping our way straight to the unemployment line?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Mediocre because while everything is organised well from a business point of view, working in amazon warehouses sucks for most employees. Working in any warehouse sucks. The only difference with Amazon run ones is the efficiency with which they suck.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Amazon Basics is their generic and they pretty deeply undercut the name brands. welp
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:Don't forget AWS A tech kit towards that end.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:is it a secret? he pretty openly supports humanity plus and the singularity institute, ground zero for the so called dark enlightenment I am incapable of mentally separating the Dark Enlightenment and the Dark Carnival. loving STRONG AI!? HOW DOES IT WORK?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
Given that both are run by clowns, you may have something there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Why does rational human being (lol) Peter Thiel think Techmerica Ltd. will turn out more like SpaceX or Amazon (sorta functional though still mediocre at best for the 99%) rather than like Yahoo or pets.com? He doesn't care if America Inc. goes belly up as long as he's free to loot the remains free of governmental interference. He's also not a big fan of women voting, because  lead them to favor Big Government.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 11:42
|
|
|
Whoa, wait, ASMR midgets?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
Bleu posted:I am incapable of mentally separating the Dark Enlightenment and the Dark Carnival. loving STRONG AI!? HOW DOES IT WORK? Think of it like this: if you had to be stuck in an elevator with clown rap peeps or dudes who make Magic cards about their Nazi debate skills, you're taking the Jugallos any day.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
Peztopiary posted:He doesn't care if America Inc. goes belly up as long as he's free to loot the remains free of governmental interference. He's also not a big fan of women voting, because The third world / Kansas will reap the tertiary benefits of unrestrained technocapitalism, so that their VR interfaces will save them from the dreary shitholes they toil in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:Think of it like this: if you had to be stuck in an elevator with clown rap peeps or dudes who make Magic cards about their Nazi debate skills, you're taking the Jugallos any day. ICP pays their employees as agreed. Even when they're running a lovely backyard wrestling fed. That makes them better than most libertarians.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Chasiubao posted:Anyways, sorry for the derail. Content: tried telling my family to opt out of letting WhatsApp share their phone numbers with Facebook. Everyone's reaction was a huge meh. No one gives a poo poo about their privacy. Anonymity, not privacy. FB knows who they are but run (well, own) a service that prevents themselves from snooping, thus protecting user privacy, but not necessarily anonymity. It's a pet peeve of mine that people conflate them all the drat time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:Think of it like this: if you had to be stuck in an elevator with clown rap peeps or dudes who make Magic cards about their Nazi debate skills, you're taking the Jugallos any day. At least you can buy drugs from Juggalos, a DE fucker will just try and sell you Urbit licences or something
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Mediocre because while everything is organised well from a business point of view, working in amazon warehouses sucks for most employees. Not just the warehouses, it sucks for the white collars as well. I've had half a dozen friend & coworkers go through there as software engineers, none has lasted longer than 2 years. Described as irreparably dysfunctional, with a codebase constantly on the verge of collapse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Best friend worked at Amazon - it's a shitshow for morale up and down the entire company - well.... I guess Jeff and senior execs mu$t be happy ... As dem shares keep climbing....
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 17:39 |
|
|
Non Serviam posted:Could you elaborate on this? I've only bought a single ebook from Amazon, so I'm not sure about what you mean. Same with the supplier manipulation. I could go on forever on this topic. Going to keep it short because otherwise, three hours will pass and fifty pages of effortpost will appear. Primary sources here are my own experiences and the experiences of the writing community, plus articles and observations over the past few years. For the supplier manipulation, check that article someone posted above me about Wal-Mart's practices. It's pretty accurate. Same thing with Amazon once you get to any degree of scale, and doubly so if you don't have a B&M backup presence. The more you rely on Amazon, the more money you make them, and the more money you stand to lose from not playing ball, the more likely that they'll gently caress with you. On the e-book front, Amazon is constantly at war with both traditional publishers and self-publishers, trying to cut their share of the sales price as much as possible. They have everyone by the balls now that book stores are basically a thing of the past and every other ebook vendor decided they didn't like money. For most intents and purposes, self-publishers (who make up a huge portion of Amazon's book revenue now) don't actually have say in how much money they get in the end. Amazon's KU program pays them by pages read rather than cover price. Amazon has demonstrated, to anyone paying attention, that they will manipulate the payouts however they damned well please. They have also removed access to a lot of the information that used to be available to self-publishers so that they can't effectively be audited on any of their numbers. You can still sell through the default platform (where you set your price and get a fixed percentage royalty), but they manipulate your visibility in the store based on your participation in other programs. Meanwhile, on the trad-pub front: http://www.vanityfair.com/news/business/2014/12/amazon-hachette-ebook-publishing This plays out over and over again. Anyone pushes back on Amazon during annual contract renegotiations, and suddenly their books can't be purchased anymore. Buy buttons just disappear, new releases have 2-4 week lead times, etc. As the only game in town these days, Amazon has trad-pubs by the balls as well. To add another issue (one source: http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-war-against-publishers-like-hachette-2014-5), Amazon also charges trad-pub a "market development" fee of 5-7% on top of all the royalty splits, and often additional charges similar to the old co-op model from the very same bookstores they put out of business. (Want your book in the store? $. Want us to recommend it? $$. Want it to be up front and center where people see the cover clearly? $$$.) quote:... Brad Stone describes one campaign to pressure the most vulnerable publishers for better terms: internally, it was known as the Gazelle Project, after Bezos suggested that Amazon should approach these small publishers the way a cheetah would pursue a sickly gazelle. (Company lawyers later changed the name to the Small Publisher Negotiation Program.) quote:Here are a few of Amazon's more imaginative high-pressure strategies: Long story short, the less competition Amazon has with customers, the more awful they get to their suppliers, authors, publishers, etc. It's really not pretty right now how much they'll dick with you if they think they can and if they think you matter enough to dick with you. Sundae fucked around with this message at 05:04 on Sep 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 05:02
|
|