Facebook has removed the ability to make such narrow target groups.
He gives example that if your want to target a guy friend, you can create a group of 1 male and 19 female friends and then create ad targeting just males to get around it.
If you could the further filter your ad based on gender (as mentioned above), personal interests or other private data, you may be able to use your ad impressions to figure out things about an unsuspecting person.
I'd consider that a huge breach of my privacy.
I would hate this. If I imagine being him, this is like having to turn up to the office at 7am on a Saturday for a meeting. It's work. In analogy we're watching Mark Hamill get out of bed on a weekend, groan, drink some Pepto-Bismol and get his best shit-eating grin on his face.
"The main purpose of this book is to make a literary, biographical, and scientific argument for a compelling association, not to say actual overlap, between two temperaments- the artistic and the manic-depressive- and their relationship to the rhythms and cycles, or temperament, of the natural world. The emphasis will be on understanding the relationship between moods and imagination, the nature of moods- their variety, their contrary and opposition qualities, their flux, their extremes (causing, in some individuals, occasional episodes of 'madness')- and the importance of moods in igniting thought, changing perceptions, creating chaos, forcing order upon that chaos, and enabling transformation." (5)
Some of the persons mentioned: Byron, Tennyson, Melville, William and Henry James, Schumann, Coleridge, van Gogh, Hemingway, Virginia Wolf. I think she presents a compelling argument that extreme fluctuations in mood, when coupled with an enforced rational thinking process results in more interesting creative output. Granted, their lives may still suck.
Mark Hamill's career hasn't gone as well. He would be foolish to not embrace it, even if he hated it with a passion.
If he rolls a Yahtzee, you could make it pop up a message that says "Yippee Ki Yay, Roy!"
Because of my near-encyclopedia knowledge of 80s pop culture, I just had a bunch of ideas. Then again, who knows how many 80s celebrities are playing your game.
Also, even if there were user accounts, this is a one man shop, so it would be hard for me to build a firewall between myself and myself :)
Just wondering, as one one man shop, did you have to negotiate for rights to the Yahtzee name & mechanics?
But obviously he chose to tweet about it in the first place, so it presumably doesn't bother him much.
(translated from a cartoon by Dutch absurdist/cartoonist "Gummbah")
Maybe he didn't do the fun little easter egg for marketing, but for whatever reason he did it, he created the opportunities through hard work and cleverness.
This is nothing to do with einaregilsson as it is a _very cool_ easter egg, more just the comments on marketing.
Lots of people put lots of hard work into games people like. How many of them get a celebrity to play their game, let alone post on social media? There are plenty of games out there with thousands of users and 0 celebrities.
On top of that someone reached out to him and request they prank Mr Skywalker. Where is the initiative in that?
He was lucky to have a celeb play his game. He was lucky the celeb tweets about his game. He was lucky a friend of the celeb requested they prank him. He clearly capitalized on the opportunity and every nerd like myself loved this story because Star Wars + coding fun and now we are all checking out cardgames.io.
But to claim "this is how you do marketing" is a stretch for me.
In any case, I guess I'll get some extra traffic today, but at the end of the day it's a Yahtzee game, nothing exactly groundbreaking, so I don't think all the people that saw this post are going to start playing Yahtzee all the time ;)
You could look at cellular activity as luck. Or you could realize that creating the circumstances for "lucky" things to happen is very directed.
Sure, the very specific circumstances of the easter egg for Hamill were unique like rolling a specific sequence of yahtzee dice. But if a different celebrity had expressed joy of the game and the author had decided on a different easter egg for slightly different reasons, that would have been unique too. But the very creation of all of these opportunities to do unique things was not luck.
If you don't roll the yahtzee dice very often, you won't see many unique rolls. Roll them a lot and you'll see many "lucky" rolls.
Taken as an exact specific outcome, sure, it's improbable. But across all of the interesting outcomes it's far less improbable.
This reminds me of the argument from Creationists about how we couldn't have been exactly created as we are because the odds of our turning out exactly as we have are insurmountable.
They ignore the success bias of our current outcome and the possibility that many viable evolutionary paths could have led to stable life and even intelligent beings like ourselves.
Here, the game got minor bumps from Mark. After, it got 2 viral blasts and then all of the discussion around that.
Presumably the avatars are built by combining pre-made features.
A whole lot of actors would envy Mark Hamill's career as an actor, particularly now that he is making bank off the Star Wars sequels.
Also Tom Baker, for a short while, wrt Doctor Who.
Patrick Troughton had some issues as well though IIRC that was more the long filming schedule and fan attention outside of that while he was in the role (he found being in character that much mentally tiring) rather than typecasting (he left the role in part due to fear of that possibility, but I don't think it actuall was an issue for him in the end).
It seems to be quite common for actors to have a "dark thoughts" spot about their time in pivotal and/or long-running roles, though for a variety of different reasons, which tends to mellow or pass completely as their life and career moves further on.
Like Harrison Ford?
Maybe he's just older and wiser and now realizes life is what you make of it.
Further, it doesn't even have user accounts. What exactly is there to be curmudgeony about?
This is how SJWs operate. Don't do that.
We need to think about this non-issue and warn people about this non-issue and dissuade people or possibly even implement policies for this non issue just in case it ever becomes an actual issue!
No. I call bullshit.