April 05, 2016
Sometimes fate has a sense of humor
Euro-Disney just had a freak accident. An employee was found dead in the Haunted House attraction. Reportedly he was working on lighting and got electrocuted.
Will this make customers begin to think that the "Haunted House" is really haunted?
Posted by: Steven Den Beste in Weird World at
07:30 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.
1
A certain subset, of course. The ones who believe crop circles, Nazca lines, and cow mutilations are evidence of aliens.
Posted by: ubu at April 05, 2016 12:59 PM (SlLGE)
2
(One of the best things in XCOM was that one kind of alien ship had a room in it where a cow was being mutilated. It was just background graphics, of course, but first time I saw that I nearly died laughing.)
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at April 05, 2016 02:38 PM (+rSRq)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
April 03, 2016
The march of technology
The stuff we're doing in high tech has been rendering revolutions, and the side effects of those revolutions will reverberate for centuries.
For 500 years, printing presses were uncommon, and thus the power of communications they enabled were limited to a few people. But that all changed about 20 years ago; and now nearly anyone can publish and distribute their thoughts, electronically, at negligible cost. That revolution has already wrought substantial changes and it's only going to get worse (or better, depending on your point of view).
One consequence of that is that the business model of dozens of corporations who relied on ownership of physical printing presses is rapidly becoming non-viable. Some of them have gone out of business already and the rest are trying to find ways to survive, even though most of them will not.
But it also means that the self-selected "gate keepers" of public discourse have totally lost control over the gate. Public discourse is no longer controlled by any kind of elite. And as a result, we live in interesting times.
And now for something completely different. A hundred years ago, aircraft because a significant weapon of war. By WWII the importance of aircraft became overwhelming. But building and operating a substantial air force was extremely expensive, involving huge capital investment and large numbers of men, all of which cost a great deal to maintain.
And maybe that's about to change, too. ISIS is reported to be developing an airforce based on drones, which are cheap, and readily available, and don't require a mammoth support infrastructure. Even if this report is not true, it's going to happen somewhere, by someone, and not necessarily just by a large terrorist organization.
It's possible that in ten years it will be just as cheap and common for private citizens to have their own airforce equivalents, the way we have the equivalent of printing presses now. How, for instance, do you maintain security over major buildings like the US Capitol when any crank can put a pipe bomb on a drone and send it in?
And not just major political targets. Will "pro-life" cranks start using drones to bomb abortion clinics? Will "gun control" advocates start making airstrikes against large gun stores and shooting ranges? When will we see a public official who is giving a speech get attacked by a drone? How do you fend that off? (Even if all it does is to disrupt the speech and panic the crowd, that may be enough for some attackers.)
How do you protect a big natgas storage facility against drones that don't care about barbed-wire fences?
And if it's a drone with a decent radio range, which is carrying a camera in addition to a bomb, then the attacker could be anywhere. How do you find them?
And how many will there be? This kind of attack could be launched for under $1000 by anyone with a grievance. (And there are a lot of grievances out there!)
I don't think this is going to cause as much change, or as widespread of change, as the internet did, but it's going to change a lot of things. For instance, it may become the norm for heads of state to make speeches by TV instead of in person. And just as the internet has changed the way campaigns are run, the fear of drone attack will change them too.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste in Weird World at
12:17 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 573 words, total size 4 kb.
1
I don't see drones adding that much to the terrorist arsenal that already isn't possible through other means.
If you can build a small drone and have access to the explosives to weaponize it, you can probably safely and more easily build a mortar and range it in with a couple of burner cellphones. The IRA has (or had) been using homemade mortars for quite some time, some of which had a payload of more than a hundred pounds of explosives. (Insert 81mm mortar demonstration in GATE here).
For the larger drones, a Predator drone is about the size of a smaller WW2 fighter (though considerably lighter). If you can find a fanatic and teach him to take off in a small plane fitted with explosives, you can probably mimic the combat effectiveness of a drone.
Posted by: Civilis at April 04, 2016 10:35 AM (UkqiM)
2
And for the pipe-bomb drone, model airplanes sufficient to carry that kind of payload have existed for decades. They require line-of-site to control, but that's not going to be a big deal in a city with lots of tourists, hotels, and foot traffic.
Posted by: Boviate at April 04, 2016 11:00 AM (XRvFv)
3
Somebody is also working on another countermeasure:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/01/15/watch-a-drone-catcher-net-a-rogue-drone/
That net-equipped drone would likely be enough to stop some basement-dwelling nutcase with a homemade pipebomb-drone. Meanwhile, there's not much that could be done to stop a government-sponsored terrorist drone attack, but there are a lot of other government-sponsored attacks that probably couldn't be stopped that are less risky than one using a drone.
Thinking about it, I suspect drones may me much more of a threat for the ability to disrupt events. Given that a certain breed of political activist loves to disrupt political events, and you don't need to worry about the risk of acquiring or making explosives (the riskiest part, I'd wager) if you're just being obnoxious with your drone, I'd think this is an obvious trend, and one our anti-drone net drone is perfect for. Google 'flying dildocopter' for what may be the original use of this tactic.
Posted by: Civilis at April 04, 2016 11:21 AM (UkqiM)
4
What I've been thinking of as a counter-measure is something that looks like a rocket launcher which actually is a microwave gun. It projects a multi-watt beam of microwaves which can be aimed at a drone, with intention of causing EMI in the electronics resulting in it going out of control and crashing.
The only real problem with my idea is that it would require a pretty impressive powerpack.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at April 04, 2016 12:50 PM (+rSRq)
5
Supercapacitors are available with power densities up to 15 KW/kg, so that power supply might not be an issue. But you'd better keep the side-lobes down, or you could cook people's eyeballs accidentally.
I'd like to think the gatekeepers are gone, but they're not. They've moved from exploiting an oligopoly position in printing presses, to exploiting an oligopoly position in software platforms. The new gatekeepers are Google, Facebook, and Twitter. The latter two have definately been caught engaging in systematic censorship of ideas they don't like, and google is suspected of dabbling in it.
Posted by: Brett Bellmore at April 04, 2016 01:01 PM (l55xw)
6
They'll pull them back off the market if they have to, like they did with kids' night-vision goggles a few years back.
Posted by: Tatterdemalian at April 04, 2016 03:42 PM (4njWT)
7
White noise radio jammers might be able to disable some drones within a given area (or at least make them more difficult to control). If you need to operate your own radio equipment in range of the jamming, you could have some pseudo-random schedule where frequency windows open in your jamming curtain. Of course, all of this assumes software defined radio capabilities that would make the FCCs' heads spin around.
In a discussion among me and some friends, it was brought up that for the cost of a single F-22 ($150 million), you could field an air force of 1000 Cessna 172s. The F-22 could shoot down any two of them, no contest, whereupon it has to go back to base to re-arm: A base that might not exist if enough of the Cessna 172s get through, and just explode on target. (Realistically, you could do all sorts of things with such mob-tactics). I think something similar to the same principle is going on here.
Air strategy is stuck on one hill, and there might be a significantly higher-number/lower-cost hill.
Posted by: EccentricOrbit at April 06, 2016 02:43 PM (GtPd7)
8
The Cessna may be cheap but the pilot isn't. Pilot training is ridiculously expensive, and American pilots don't like to think of themselves as being expendable.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at April 06, 2016 03:37 PM (+rSRq)
9
Sorry that wasn't clear: I was thinking more along the lines of something robotic: Cheap cruise missiles via jury rigged autopilot system or something.
Though some of our enemies probably wouldn't mind the human cost.
Posted by: EccentricOrbit at April 06, 2016 03:57 PM (GtPd7)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
March 22, 2016
Belgian bombing
It's bad and it's going to get worse. As always in a situation like this early reports are confused and contradictory; it'll take a couple of days before we can see an accurate picture. But what we already know is that this was big.
And as always in these cases, what most concerns lefties is anti-Muslim backlash. Their sympathy is with the perps, not the victims. It brings to mind this joke headline from a few years ago:
"Muslims Fear Reprisals for Tomorrow's Train Bombingâ€
It's amazing (no it isn't) and tragic (for sure) that this joke is still timely.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste in Weird World at
08:13 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 102 words, total size 1 kb.
March 13, 2016
I feel so safe!
"Bomb-sniffing dog discovers 2 Hellfire missiles bound for Portland". As in my Portland, the city in whose suburbs I live.
Marvelous. Were there others, shipped by other routes, which didn't get detected?
Posted by: Steven Den Beste in Weird World at
08:20 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.
1
"Pardon me, sir; is this your anti-tank weapon?"
"What?"
"You appear to have dropped a missile, sir; is this yours?"
Posted by: Ben at March 13, 2016 09:01 PM (DRaH+)
2
I would be surprised if it was truly intended to go to Portland as opposed to being diverted somewhere en route. Probably Europe as I've long had a suspicion that a mass muslim uprising would be the source of our next great European Adventure (along the lines and scale of the two previous Adventures from the early part of last century).
Posted by: StargazerA5 at March 14, 2016 11:00 AM (5YSpE)
3
At least they didn't end up shipped to
Cuba again.
I can see the dedicated TSA agents now:
Dog: *Woof*
Agent 1: "Woah! Check this out!"
Agent 2: "It had better be a bomb; we have too many packages to check."
Agent 1: "It's a Hellfire Missile!"
Agent 2: "Bad dog!"
Dog: *Whine*
Agent 1: "But he found a missile! He's a good boy!"
Agent 2: "He's a bomb-sniffing dog. It's not a bomb. Let's keep moving."
Agent 1: "But it's a dangerous item!"
Agent 2: "Orders are to look for bombs. This is a propelled weapon; ergo, it isn't a bomb, now, is it? You're new, you'll get used to it..."
Posted by: Civilis at March 14, 2016 12:07 PM (UkqiM)
4
I was reading about this somewhere else, and it got pointed out that a Hellfire isn't "man portable". It is in fact pretty complicated to launch. For one thing it requires a significant avionics package on the launch vehicle to designate a target.
It's not an ideal terrorist weapon. About the only thing a terrorist could do is disassemble it enough to get the warhead out and use that as a bomb -- but if that was the intention, why not do that before it got shipped?
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at March 14, 2016 12:14 PM (+rSRq)
5
Update at your link: they're warhead-less training missiles that the Lebanese army was returning to their manufacturer (in Portland, Maine).
And, according to the comments, "paperwork was provided", so it may just be that Serbia's TSA is as good as ours...
Posted by: Mikeski at March 14, 2016 04:13 PM (LIUK5)
6
If there was no warhead, how did the dog spot them? It was sniffing for explosives.
Sounds like a fuckup all around.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at March 14, 2016 05:12 PM (+rSRq)
7
You can't discount inaccurate initial reporting, especially coming from a distant country where English is not the primary language, but that latest conflicts with what was reported last night in significant ways. Most notably, the initial reports were that that missiles were hidden in false compartments, and that the shipping crates were, in fact, wooden coffins.
Posted by: David at March 14, 2016 05:30 PM (+TPAa)
8
Move along! Nothing to see here! Absolutely no terrorism involved!
Posted by: ubu at March 14, 2016 08:46 PM (GfCSm)
9
It would be nice if they'd say that once in a while when it's obviously true instead of obviously being bullshit.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at March 14, 2016 09:20 PM (+rSRq)
10
Even with the original reports I assumed that "wooden coffin" was a mistranslation. The word is cognate with "coffer" and comes from a Greek or Latin word that meant something like, well, "box". So there are presumably similar-looking words in other languages.
Posted by: Boviate at March 15, 2016 02:33 PM (XRvFv)
11
Not to mention that a pair of coffins wouldn't have enough room for two Hellfires and associated electronics, let alone hide them in a secret compartment.
Posted by: ubu at March 15, 2016 03:33 PM (GfCSm)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
March 12, 2016
Yeah, it's wrong but...
Sexual harassment is wrong, but I still gotta admire this guy:
The Seattle City Attorney's Office has charged a 90-year-old man with sexual assault from an incident inside a senior housing complex. ...
In January, 90-year-old Abraham Kang contacted her to donate a bath stool to any resident who might need it.
According to a report filed with Seattle police, Malone reported that Kang asked for a hug while in her apartment.
"I hesitated. But I let him and he grabbed me inappropriately,†Linda Malone said. "He put his hands on my bottom and pulled me to him."
Posted by: Steven Den Beste in Weird World at
10:56 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 102 words, total size 1 kb.
March 08, 2016
This probably proves something...
Jesus Christ on a Pogo Stick! The Wachowski Brothers are now
The Wachowski Sisters!
Posted by: Steven Den Beste in Weird World at
08:56 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 18 words, total size 1 kb.
1
They are still brothers. They may think they are sisters, but that is because they are insane.
Posted by: Mark A. Flacy at March 08, 2016 09:01 PM (ATlQg)
2
If you said that in the Metafilter thread I linked to, you'd be crucified.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at March 08, 2016 10:49 PM (+rSRq)
3
Actually, your comment would be deleted. For all their pretensions to being "open-minded" and valuing "diversity", they seem quick on the deletion trigger these days. I've had two comments deleted in the last week, and neither of them were abusive or involved any invective.
One was in an abortion thread (pro, of course) where I pointed out the similiarities between the anti-abortion movement and the anti-gun movement in terms of tactics. It lasted about ten minutes.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at March 08, 2016 11:15 PM (+rSRq)
4
I'm with Mark on this one.
Posted by: ubu at March 09, 2016 09:16 AM (SlLGE)
5
Don't get me wrong! I agree!
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at March 09, 2016 11:26 AM (+rSRq)
6
I agree with Steven that any such comment on Metafilter would either generate an excrement storm or merely be deleted.
Double-plus-badthink cannot be tolerated, you know.
In minor fairness to the Wachowski brothers, I don't think their insanity is to the point where they are completely dysfunctional. I assume that they are able to interact with more-or-less sane people without a lot of difficulty.
As I've mentioned to other people, every family can have a crazy uncle or two but if all of your relatives are insane then nothing good can come of it.
Posted by: Mark A. Flacy at March 09, 2016 07:25 PM (ATlQg)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 25, 2016
First World Problems
This is a headline in USAToday:
Police seek bald man in thefts of Rogaine, supplements
Posted by: Steven Den Beste in Weird World at
09:03 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 18 words, total size 1 kb.
Republican Fainting Couches
As Trump continues to win in the primary ballot box and in the caucus race, I am endlessly amused by the reaction of the Republican establishment, not to mention earnest outsiders. (I'm not a fan of earnestness even at the best of times.)
Starting today, we're getting a huge smear job. I saw one article which talked about how Trump didn't serve in the military during the Viet Nam War. Another one talked about how he did a lot of sleeping around when he was young (gasp!). These were by people in the establishment trying to make those knuckle dragging religious plebes turn against Trump -- and they won't work. The establishment is completely missing the point.
Trump's voters are not voting for him because of what he is. They're voting for him because of what he is not. He isn't part of the establishment, and he clearly doesn't like the establishment -- and a lot of voters feel the same way. Republican candidates each two years come out and talk the talk, and get elected, and then go to Washington and forget all that.
I wrote about that last September. The Republicans aren't really in opposition to the Democrats; on most things they want the same result. And the Republicans seem to value collegiality to an insane extent; the thing they're most worried about is angering the Democrats and the Democratic media (which is to say, most of it).
Middle American Republicans are tired of that shit, and the reason they're voting for Trump is because he's a bull in the china shop. The one thing he clearly doesn't give a damn about is collegiality.
Maybe his presidency would be bizarre. Maybe it might even be catastrophic (though it would be tough to be as catastrophic as Obama has been). But the one thing that is certain is that it will shatter the existing order. And that is what his voters are voting for. It's what they really care about.
So how do more main-stream candidates beat him? The first step is to recognize what it is he offers that the voters really want -- and that's exactly what none of them are willing to do, because they're part of the establishment trying for the latest time to sell the voters a bill of goods.
The (Republican) voters want a complete outsider, one not beholden to the existing power structure, one not afraid of it and willing to say things that make the insiders gasp and head for their fainting couches. That means that in this Republican campaign Senators and Governors are all doomed before they begin. The simple fact that they're already part of the existing power structure is enough to render them unacceptable to the people who are voting for Trump.
And every time someone in the existing power structure gasps and moans and tries to bring Trump down, Trump grins and his support grows. Because it's obviously a desperation move -- and it completely misses the target.
For instance: Trump has been doing the H1-B game in his resort in Florida. Gasp! Stunning! Hey, all you plebes! Look at this!
Well, the answer is Trump didn't make the rules, and he has a fiduciary duty to his stock holders to make his business as profitable as he can. If that means firing highly paid Americans and hiring foreign workers, then that's what the rules of the game say he's supposed to do. That's all it means.
It doesn't mean he's a hypocrite, which is what the scandal-mongers hope all the sloping foreheads will take from it.
The kind of people who are voting for Trump have spent years, decades even, being held in contempt by the existing order -- and now they're returning the favor. What they want is for the existing order to get destroyed. If there were a better candidate they thought capable and willing to do that, he'd be getting the votes. But Trump is the only one they believe in, so he's it.
And he's going to continue to be it, because the one thing the existing order (and all their hand-picked candidates) do not want is for the existing order to go away. Trump is going to win the candidacy -- and I believe he'll win the Presidency, too.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste in Weird World at
02:41 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 721 words, total size 4 kb.
1
His recent attempt to threaten the Ricketts family cost him at least one vote: mine. Not because Tom Ricketts owns the Cubs (his parents aren't involved at all with the team, save for being in the family trust), but because Trump tried to stifle their right to express their support for
someone other than him
I hear the Rickets family, who own the Chicago Cubs, are secretly spending $'s against me. They better be careful, they have a lot to hide!
I would rather my president not act like a petulant child. Besides, where would he stop? If he's willing to threaten the founder of TD Ameritrade (personal wealth: $1 billion), what would he do to someone like me? Other than make me disappear, that is?
Nope, while I'm not particularly interested in voting for ANY of the candidates (if some party felt like running an actual turnip for president, I'd have to at least give serious consideration to voting for it), I'd rather vote for someone not so obviously batguano insane.
Posted by: Wonderduck at February 25, 2016 05:20 PM (KiM/Y)
2
I read that to mean that he didn't object to them being against him; he objected to them being against him secretly.
Anyway, don't misinterpret this post of mine to indicate that I'm advocating voting for Trump. Rather, I'm trying to explain why he's winning, and why the attacks against him are making him stronger.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 25, 2016 06:20 PM (+rSRq)
3
The only way Trump will become president is if Bernie Sanders is the other party's nominee. Trump is not afraid of saying outrageous things, but after he repeated the Code Pink mantra that George W. Bush is a greater monster than Hitler - there is simply going to be too many Republicans who will not work to get him elected if he is the nominee. Having no ground game is not a winning strategy, no matter which party you are - and Trump has not demonstrated any interest in having a ground game.
Posted by: cxt217 at February 25, 2016 06:28 PM (O4dlr)
4
I think a Saunders-vs-Trump campaign would be awesome: an avowed socialist versus an uber-capitalist!
I also happen to think that Hillary is toast. She's going to be indicted soon, or there's going to be a major scandal about the fact that she isn't being indicted. There are also hints that her health has failed, and rumors that she's an alcoholic. For the time being all those things are being hidden but I don't believe they can be kept secret until after the election. Even if she gets the nomination, she's going to be seriously damaged goods. Her campaign comes down to "Vote for me because I'm a woman" and if she tries to take that against Trump, he'll crush her.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 25, 2016 06:47 PM (+rSRq)
5
Part of the reason I don't believe Hillary can do it is because this is looking like a rerun of Lurleen Wallace. And when it really comes down to it, I don't think the voters will accept that.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 25, 2016 06:49 PM (+rSRq)
6
While I have no love for Trump at all, I appreciate why he's getting the support he is. It really tears me up when I wind up in mind-numbed political argument defending Trump because the latest tear-down hit-piece was mostly or completely false. I wonder if the latest attempt will gain traction; I've seen an increasing number of stories attempting to link support of Trump (by Republicans of course, not the Democrats who are supporting him) to outright racism. I read one in the Times that included the claim that 20% of Trump supporters opposed the abolishment of slavery. (The question was apparently something like "You oppose the use of all executive orders, would you even oppose an executive order like the emancipation proclamation?"
And of course the Nazis and Klan are for him, but as I've pointed out to several people, the Nazis and Klan are, according to news stories, ALWAYS for the leading, right-leaning candidate. If Trump somehow falls behind Cruz, the Klan and the Nazis will support Cruz.
Posted by: Ben at February 25, 2016 06:54 PM (DRaH+)
7
he objected to them being against him secretly.
So why should that matter to anybody but the Ricketts? Though, to be blunt, if it was all that secret, I doubt that Trump would have found out about it.
Considering that the FEC and the NY Times
announced that they had donated $3 million to a SuperPAC
, it hardly required any heavy detective work to discover... just the ability to read.
Wait, you're right... that might make it a problem for him.
Posted by: Wonderduck at February 25, 2016 07:33 PM (KiM/Y)
8
Trump has also recently publicly favoring Obamacare, except he believes the wrong people are in charge. Having had to deal with Obamacare, I view with disfavor and distaste anyone who favors it. Also, where is his ground game?
Trump is the candidate that the GOP establishment deserves. He is not what the Republican Party (As a whole.) or the United States deserves or should get.
Posted by: cxt217 at February 25, 2016 08:10 PM (O4dlr)
9
This election is a startling display of how disfuntional our politics has become. Neither Hillary, Trump, or Sanders should ever even have been willing to step up, should have had no backing if they did, and should have immediately gone down with 1 or 2% poll ratings. The democrats have nobody that they can realistically present as centrist, so they lie and claim somebody like Obama is a centrist when in reality he was the most liberal nominee until Sanders.
On the Republican side, you can go all the way into squishy RINO territory, and still be viewed, or at least universally portrayed, as a far-right looney.
It is currently impossible to get the support of either party's mainstream wing and have any cross-over to the other party. And it looks like that's going to get us an election where our choices are an incompetent blow-hard, and someone that about half the nation believes should be in prison.
Posted by: David at February 25, 2016 08:16 PM (+TPAa)
10
David, the reason is that the establishments of both parties are routinely ignoring what the voters want. If they were listening, and paid attention, there wouldn't be a voter revolt like we're seeing.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 25, 2016 09:00 PM (+rSRq)
11
Sorry, I'm going to close this now.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 25, 2016 09:01 PM (+rSRq)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 22, 2016
Commercial suicide
I don't do "social media" stuff. The only reason I have a Facebook account was originally to allow me to make comments on Powerline, but these days also Instapundit and Hot Air.
I have a LiveJournal account but the only reason was so that I could leave comments on Pete's page there, back when he used it for anime. I think it's been years since I last looked at it and I'm not even sure what the URL is any more.
Facebook really, really would like me to do more, like have lots of "friends" but I'm trying not to get caught up in that. And if there's a Twitter account in my name, no one ever told me about it, and it isn't mine.
So it's been amusing to read about the latest social media tempest in a tea cup: Twitter is committing commercial suicide. Seems a few days ago they created a "Trust and Safety Council" and invited a whole bunch of non-conservative activists to join, including someone named Sarkeesian who is an SJW of the worst kind. And starting last weekend, it seems she went on a jihad to cleanse Twitter of everyone she hated, started with someone named Robert Stacy McCain. His main account was blocked; this morning his backup account was also blocked. When various people piped up in support, a lot of them had their accounts blacklisted in one or more ways. A lot of other people are piping up (Ace and Instapundit) and there's the beginning of a conservative boycott, which may grow.
Meanwhile, Twitter's stock price has been plummeting for the last couple of months, for what seems to be a pretty straightforward reason: there's no income. Money is going out but none is coming in. The business model is right out of the dotcom boom: look for millions of eyeballs and figure out later how to get money from them. Well, it's "later" and they still haven't figured out how.
But the first step seems to be to alienate about half their users. Not me, though, because I was never a user to begin with. And as long as Pixy doesn't succumb to political correctness, and there's no indication that he's susceptible to that, then this particular soap box is big enough for me. I've been in the spotlight and it wasn't very comfortable. I'm much happier over here in the twilight where not many people are paying attention. (But I'm grateful to you all who do, nonetheless.)
Hooray for idiots! Life would be a lot more boring without them.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste in Weird World at
03:47 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 431 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Twitter's problem isn't just no income, it's now no user growth too. Lots of new economy companies promise their investors that they will burn money getting users, then convert their user base into cash "eventually". For Twitter, they haven't managed to figure out the conversion process, and now they're not making any progress on expanding their user base either. Things are not looking good for them.
Posted by: Boviate at February 22, 2016 04:42 PM (XRvFv)
2
I'm convinced that the modern social media business model makes sense. It just doesn't make
financial sense.
The new business model is to build up a large customer base by being useful and reasonably impartial, and doing it at a loss to attract customers. Then, at some point, when you decide you have enough customers, you take your profit.
But, not in the form of money. In the form of political influence. You've got eyeballs, you feed them a skewed version of reality designed to effect how they vote. You've got customers who are of the opposite political persuasion, you screw with them, and extract from them the opportunity cost of switching to a different platform right in the middle of an election campaign.
Sure, your company tanks, customers eventually flee. But not before you've thrown an election.
The big investors in companies like Twitter don't object to this, because this is the profit they were looking for. They weren't buying future income, they were buying a chance to push politics in a direction they like.
Posted by: Brett Bellmore at February 22, 2016 04:47 PM (l55xw)
3
Except the foundation of Twitter's business is pictures of cats.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 22, 2016 06:03 PM (+rSRq)
4
Except the foundation of Twitter's business is pictures of cats.
Thus marginalizing dog people. Mr. Bellmore's case is airtight.
Posted by: The Brickmuppet at February 22, 2016 06:08 PM (AaBUm)
5
Thinking of it logically, Twitter management is probably shorting their own stock and think the price is still too high.
Posted by: BigFire at February 22, 2016 08:52 PM (LSx3v)
6
If they're playing that kind of game, they're likely to all end up in jail. (Not to mention sued into oblivion by other stock holders.)
Anyway, all inside trading is public information, by law. If a bunch of them were shorting the stock, it would be on the front page of the WSJ.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 22, 2016 09:18 PM (+rSRq)
7
How's this? They offer
paid accounts, like $5/month, and guarantee no censorship or blacklisting! They could call it the "Conservative Shakedown Special".
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 22, 2016 09:41 PM (+rSRq)
8
Skeptics of social media only need to discover how obscenely profitable Facebook is before their belief system is shaken to its core. Or perhaps not -- people's capacity of delusion is immense.
Posted by: Pete Zaitcev at February 22, 2016 11:13 PM (XOPVE)
9
Not only is Twitter committing commercial suicide (the absolute number of tweets has declined rapidly as well, meaning less participation as well as fewer users), but management is opening itself up to a lawsuit from Twitter's shareholders.
I've heard some sources probing about the possibility of a class action suit against management for pursuing policies designed to shrink their user base, and there may be some justification for this. Several prominent alt-right and conservatives have left or have been banned outright, and the purging will continue as long as the anti-speech Truth & Safety Council exists.
I've been trolling Twitter since 2012 and the best part of it was the silliness and insanity of the users. Now their TOS allow you to lodge a complaint against someone for "disagreeing with my opinion." There should be a couple of alternatives to Twitter cropping up soon, though. Mark Kern is working on one for League for Gamers, and Vox Day is working with a group to put his own together. I know Quitter already exists, but I hear that's also run by SJW types.
Posted by: wahsatchmo at February 23, 2016 07:59 AM (VFkGH)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 18, 2016
Catching up
Maetenloch has discovered Pixel Maritan.
It's possible he doesn't know the whole story behind it. Back at the beginning of time, there was a series of graphic novels about a character named Moetan. She was a magical girl, and had a crush on a high school boy. So she'd transform to her magical form and visit him, to help him study English.
That was the point of it all; was to help the readers to study English.
Well, Pixel Maritan was a satire of that series. To the extent that it had any goal besides being riotously funny, the goal was to teach the readers how to cuss like a Marine.
The basic story was that Maritan was a princess of the magical kingdom of Parris Island, where she worked as a Marine drill instructor. There were three other main characters: Army-tan was a recruit soldier under Maritan's tender care. J-tan represented the Japanese self defense force. And Navy-tan was an officer, always seen wearing dress whites and daintily drinking a cup of tea.
"-tan" is an ultra-cutesy version of -chan, and given Maritan's character its use is part of the satire because Maritan is not cute.
There were three volumes, and all of them had the same format. At any point, the left hand page was a comic, entirely in Japanese except the last word balloon which was in English. The right page, then, was a gloss explaining that last word balloon, which was invariably profane or obscene, with careful attention to the meaning and proper use of words like "fuck", "cocksucker" and so on.
In the first volume all the English lines were from the movie Full Metal Jacket, mostly from the gun sergeant. The other two books were a bit more varied but the basic format was the same in all of them.
My understanding is that it was a wild success. There was a drama CD released, and the voice actress who did Maritan visited the American base on Okinawa and was photographed there with American Marines, who seemed to really enjoy it all.
All in all, quite a run for what really has to be thought of as a one-joke pony.
UPDATE: I haven't read the books, and I really wonder how you fill three volumes out. After you've done Carlin's "six words", then what do you do? English isn't really a very rich language for cursing.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste in Weird World at
09:25 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 404 words, total size 3 kb.
Posted by: Mark A. Flacy at February 19, 2016 06:09 PM (ATlQg)
2
I used to have copies of these. There are a lot of quotes from Full Metal Jacket. Lot of colloquialisms too.
Posted by: Avatar_exADV at February 20, 2016 12:50 PM (v29Tn)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
62kb generated in CPU 0.0239, elapsed 0.1952 seconds.
45 queries taking 0.1814 seconds, 127 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.