American social media platforms creating an environment where propaganda and misinformation flourish and refusing to take action against it has the same net effect as TikTok altering internal algorithm.
Targeted intent vs general apathy is a massive difference.
That could be. It sounds plausible. Do you have any studies?
What intelligence agency?
NCRI is a social media research group.
Lots of people think the US social media platforms do that. But none of the scientific studies have been able to show it.
The US companies are all purely driven by engagement, to maximize profit. The most effective source of that engagement, changes from person to person. But it’s most commonly what you might call “Rage Bait”.
Twiter’s recent bend toward the right, is primarily self selection of it’s users. As the left… left… the platform, the pool of available content shifted right; Causing even more to leave. Unless you have some paper I haven’t seen.
And Facebook selling data, is entirely different and unrelated. Nobody (no lawmakers) care about that.
Yah. Whatever happens, TikTok will NOT be leaving the US market.
Not quite. TikTok has been shown to tweak their algorithm against criticism of China. That’s the real reason for the concern. Their ability and willingness to purposefully manipulate people.
Again. Not a TikTok ban. A ByteDance ban.
If BytDance sells, TikTok stays.
Truly free markets suck. The inevitably become dominated by a small number of monopolies, who fuck over everyone else as hard as possible every day …
If we first got those numbers down to 2:10 and 1:10, we could then try to learn why women are reporting being stressed “a lot of the day” at twice the rate of men.
But they aren’t all made by slave labor. You only have to spend 3-5x as much. Not a problem if you buy %80 less clothes.
Perma-ban started being used because people began using Ban when meaning something temporary.
That makes sense. Thank you for giving an actual answer.
Dark humor is a lot like food.
Not everyone gets it.
Just stateing your claim again isn’t a valid argument.
It isn’t. Eventually the English language will die out. So will the sun.
There isn’t a predetermined end point with hunger. No timer. That’s the difference.
The thing is, nothing is permanent in an absolute sense. (Maybe logic, but that’s about it)
So in a world where everything changes, what does permanent mean? It can only mean reasonably mean, “without predetermined end.” Not that it won’t end, because everything does eventually.
So Temporary must be that which does have predetermined end time.
Since Provisional does not have a predetermined end, but does include an explicit indication of eventually ending, it is both permanent and temporary.
You made this thread to ask a question, got answered.
Not really. A couple of people tried to answer it. One did quite well. You and yours are all simply saying I’m wrong, and my question is invalid; Simply because for your entire life I imagine, Ban has always been used this way. But some 20 or 30 years ago, I can promise you (so can a few others here) it wasn’t that way.
Here is a little bit of muddiness. If there is no clearly defined end of something, is it permanent, or temporary? I would argue, since nearly everything changes and virtually nothing is permanent in an absolute sense; Permanent can only reasonably mean, no predetermined end time. Hunger has no defined amount of time. It may in fact last until death, making it quite permanent from the point of view of the individual experiencing it. So hunger in fact would, for the purpose of a definition, be permanent.
Thank you! Your thorough and thoughtful response is a breath of fresh air.
That’s not my claim. It’s also a dodge to my question.
But it got me thinking.
Provisional: for the present time but likely to change
No specified ending date or condition, but also temporary. That may be the closest to what you’re looking for.
The 2nd version (your first RAW) edit seems the most natural to me.
It has a slight green cast. Thought that may be accurate with trees overhead out of frame.
Most people will probably prefer the original JPEG, because it’s got lower black levels, and more color saturation. But it’s just a little over done for my taste. Somewhere between that and your first edit would be the sweet spot I think.
The auto WB just looks wrong. I think it’s overcompensating for the green cast, now it’s too pink.
At these scaled down resolutions, we can’t see the difference in noise reduction.
But at bright daylight ISO levels I doubt you need any. Maybe just a little color noise reduction if you’d like.