> Point being, there's no room for compromise on the abortion issue from the left.
Did you mean left? There's lots of discussion on the left about what time limits should be set; or how many doctors you need to persuade; or what conditions could extend the time limits; etc. But from the right there's a blanket "no abortion, ever, for any reason", with fucking stupid comments like "First of all, from what I understand from doctors, that's really rare. If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let's assume that maybe that didn't work or something. I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child."
My actual point was that the left is uncompromising as well. There are certainly absolutists on the right.
The fact that you brought up a foam-at-the-mouth comment from a disgraced former politician seems like a point for the there's-too-much-partisanship-on-the-left-too column.
There is actually common ground on the abortion issue, perhaps counter-intuitively. There is overwhelming support for reducing abortion rates, for example. The American people would absolutely be OK with a compromise that includes education, increased access to birth control, and bans on abortions after, say, 8 months of gestation.
Listening to anti-abortionists you'd think the woman just found the pregnancy inconvenient, when the reality is that the woman is going through an intensely traumatic time and having to cope with the loss of a much wanted child.
I'd be reassured about algorithmic timelines if Twitter's attempts were not so terrible.
A year ago I started following Bob (an Internet famous personality.) Bob has made one post to twitter, and I've forgotten that I'm following him. Until one day Twitter puts a post from Ann - a friend of Bob that Bob follows - into my timeline. Ann and Bob post exclusively about eg Minecraft. I post and read exclusively about mental health treatment and stigma in the UK. I immediately unfollow Bob (because he never posts anything and I'm not interested in anything people he follows posts) and I dismiss the post and say that I didn't like it.
And Twitter will do this week after week after week. It'll post something to my timeline that my twitter account is clearly not interested in. (High end bicycles; alcohol ads; cars; etc etc).
I wouldn't mind if it was purely random - "hey, we're going to show you random shit and maybe you'll like some of it" is better than "hey, we think we know what you're interested in. We've spent time and money developing these algorithms. How about Pianos? Cod fishing? Teaspoons?"
Developing an algorithm is not the hard part. Adapting it to customer data and wishes, is.
If/when Twitter launches an algorithmic timeline, it is probably going to suck at first. Only by measuring huge volumes of user interaction with the feature, will they get enough data to make it work well.
I mean, look at this thread--people are praising Facebook's ease of use, but back when Facebook starting filtering their timelines, a) power users were super pissed, and b) a lot of random stuff showed up. For a long time there was a semi-hidden "show me all posts" option for the timeline, which power users turned on. That doesn't exist anymore, and most people don't miss it, because the filtering is good enough now.
There's not really one algorithm. There's a learning system that creates, on the fly, a billion custom algorithms--one per user.
Learning systems need two things to work well. They need a huge corpus of data, and they need clear guidance on the desired outcome. Twitter has a lot of tweets, but they won't really have clear guidance until people start actually using the feature.
I'm sure they're trying to collect some now, with their "while you were away" feature, and tracking interactions like you unfollowing Bob after seeing that tweet from Ann.
I've actually noticed this phenomenon quite a bit on Facebook in the past few years and it's part of the reason I've started withdrawing from the service. It makes me feel like I have no control over what's being displayed on my screen and that Facebook is just blasting my eyeballs with whatever is available in hopes that I will stay on the site longer, boost their metrics, and maybe click on an ad or two. (Thank God for uBlock)
Disclaimer: I've never been an active Twitter user and am probably too anti-social for my own good.
> Arguing that the CAPTCHA method itself has more benefit than cost completely destroys any future lawsuits.
The judge said that.
> > Moreover, users’ transcriptions increase the utility of other free Google services such as Google Maps or Google Books. Plaintiff has failed to allege how these numerous benefits outweigh the few seconds it takes to transcribe one word.