Kara Swisher, writing for the New York Times:
Suddenly, everyone wants Sheryl Sandberg to lean out.
Kara Swisher, writing for the New York Times:
Suddenly, everyone wants Sheryl Sandberg to lean out.
An actual solution recognizes that this bullshit is inexcusable. It is making the web a cumulatively awful place to be. Behind closed doors, those in the advertising and marketing industry can be pretty lucid about how much they also hate surveillance scripts and how awful they find these methods, while simultaneously encouraging their use. Meanwhile, users are increasingly taking matters into their own hands — the use of ad blockers is rising across the board, many of which also block tracking scripts and other disrespectful behaviours. Users are making that choice.
They shouldn’t have to. Better choices should be made by web developers to not ship this bullshit in the first place. We wouldn’t tolerate such intrusive behaviour more generally; why are we expected to find it acceptable on the web?
An honest web is one in which the overwhelming majority of the code and assets downloaded to a user’s computer are used in a page’s visual presentation, with nearly all the remainder used to define the semantic structure and associated metadata on the page. Bullshit — in the form of CPU-sucking surveillance, unnecessarily-interruptive elements, and behaviours that nobody responsible for a website would themselves find appealing as a visitor — is unwelcome and intolerable.
Death to the bullshit web.
What is more interesting, though, is the story of Windows’ decline in Redmond, culminating with last week’s reorganization that, for the first time since 1980, left the company without a division devoted to personal computer operating systems (Windows was split, with the core engineering group placed under Azure, and the rest of the organization effectively under Office 365; there will still be Windows releases, but it is no longer a standalone business).
My week is already off to an amazing start with this article. I lived through this timeline; I was there and I was a part of it. What a time to be alive!
Whoa. I had a feeling that new Rolex GMT’s were going to be introduced this year at Baselworld 2018, but I had no idea Tudor would do the same.
For me, the Rolex GMT (particularly the 16710) occupies one-half of my watch holy grail. That is to say that this watch, combined with another, make up the center pieces and collecting goals of my watch obsession. I have one of those, which is an original Rolex Submariner date ceramic. Now the other might be replaced by the all new Tudor Black Bay GMT. I have been drawn to that two-tone, red / blue color combination ever since I became serious about watches. It started with my first “real” watch purchase: a Japanese domestic market Seiko SKX-009J1. The problem I have had is finding a quality Rolex 16710 on the secondary market at the right price. The 2nd hand and vintage watch markets have been out of control for the past few years. Which is a good thing! But every day, it prices us mere mortals out of the market one dollar at a time.
These 2 new GMT’s from Rolex and Tudor fix that to some degree. The Rolex, which cost prohibitive, is now going to have catalogue and somewhat limited dealer availability similar to the Rolex BLNR GMT (the Batman). There will be a strong grey-market presence too. While I think I prefer the matte bezel for the GMT, it’s now an option (albeit an expensive one) to buy a new and truly modern two-tone red / blue GMT with all of the watchmaking technology and manufacturing advances that make my Submariner one of the best and most watches in the world.
Enter the Tudor GMT. Low cost point? Check. Red / blue matte GMT bezel? Check. Rolex manufacturing & QC? Check. Size and wrist presence? Ruh-roh…
My problem with the modern Tudor line is the meaty-ness of the case. The Black Bay line and the Submariner *I believe* are the same thickness. The modern sub is significantly more thicker than the modern GMT. Yet Rolex skirts any wrist presence issue by having a case back that graduates the slope thickness from the center point to the edge of the watch case. Tudor does not do this. I was also interested in the Black Bay Chronograph last year, but was not immediately thrilled by it’s wrist presence. When the Tudor GMT is released later this year, I’ll need to properly put it through a few wrist checks at the dealer before I commit.
Your Facebook archives contain just about all of the pertinent information related to your account, including your photos, active sessions, chat history, IP addresses, facial recognition data, and which ads you clicked, just to name a few. That’s a ton of personal information that you should probably maintain access to. To download your archive, go to “Settings” and click “Download a copy of your Facebook data” at the bottom of General Account Settings, and then click “Start My Archive.”
I’ll have a follow on post with more of my thoughts on Facebook, as well as how I plan on limiting – and then deleting my account.
I have been an FBI Special Agent for over 21 years. I spent half of that time investigating Russian Organized Crime as a street agent and Supervisor in New York City. I have spent the second half of my career focusing on national security issues and protecting this country from terrorism. I served in some of the most challenging, demanding investigative and leadership roles in the FBI. And I was privileged to serve as Deputy Director during a particularly tough time.
For the last year and a half, my family and I have been the targets of an unrelenting assault on our reputation and my service to this country. Articles too numerous to count have leveled every sort of false, defamatory and degrading allegation against us. The President’s tweets have amplified and exacerbated it all. He called for my firing. He called for me to be stripped of my pension after more than 20 years of service. And all along we have said nothing, never wanting to distract from the mission of the FBI by addressing the lies told and repeated about us.
The investigation by the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) has to be understood in the context of the attacks on my credibility. The investigation flows from my attempt to explain the FBI’s involvement and my supervision of investigations involving Hillary Clinton. I was being portrayed in the media over and over as a political partisan, accused of closing down investigations under political pressure. The FBI was portrayed as caving under that pressure, and making decisions for political rather than law enforcement purposes. Nothing was further from the truth. In fact, this entire investigation stems from my efforts, fully authorized under FBI rules, to set the record straight on behalf of the Bureau, and to make clear that we were continuing an investigation that people in DOJ opposed.
The OIG investigation has focused on information I chose to share with a reporter through my public affairs officer and a legal counselor. As Deputy Director, I was one of only a few people who had the authority to do that. It was not a secret, it took place over several days, and others, including the Director, were aware of the interaction with the reporter. It was the type of exchange with the media that the Deputy Director oversees several times per week. In fact, it was the same type of work that I continued to do under Director Wray, at his request. The investigation subsequently focused on who I talked to, when I talked to them, and so forth. During these inquiries, I answered questions truthfully and as accurately as I could amidst the chaos that surrounded me. And when I thought my answers were misunderstood, I contacted investigators to correct them.
But looking at that in isolation completely misses the big picture. The big picture is a tale of what can happen when law enforcement is politicized, public servants are attacked, and people who are supposed to cherish and protect our institutions become instruments for damaging those institutions and people.
Here is the reality: I am being singled out and treated this way because of the role I played, the actions I took, and the events I witnessed in the aftermath of the firing of James Comey. The release of this report was accelerated only after my testimony to the House Intelligence Committee revealed that I would corroborate former Director Comey’s accounts of his discussions with the President. The OIG’s focus on me and this report became a part of an unprecedented effort by the Administration, driven by the President himself, to remove me from my position, destroy my reputation, and possibly strip me of a pension that I worked 21 years to earn. The accelerated release of the report, and the punitive actions taken in response, make sense only when viewed through this lens. Thursday’s comments from the White House are just the latest example of this.
This attack on my credibility is one part of a larger effort not just to slander me personally, but to taint the FBI, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals more generally. It is part of this Administration’s ongoing war on the FBI and the efforts of the Special Counsel investigation, which continue to this day. Their persistence in this campaign only highlights the importance of the Special Counsel’s work.
I have always prided myself on serving my country with distinction and integrity, and I always encouraged those around me to do the same. Just ask them. To have my career end in this way, and to be accused of lacking candor when at worst I was distracted in the midst of chaotic events, is incredibly disappointing and unfair. But it will not erase the important work I was privileged to be a part of, the results of which will in the end be revealed for the country to see.
I have unfailing faith in the men and women of the FBI and I am confident that their efforts to seek justice will not be deterred.