While the school is paying Thompson Reuters CLEAR for information about where their students supposedly live, CLEAR isn't limiting their data collection to just student families.

They are collecting information about everyone en masse and making up different problems they are "solving". Everyone in the US should realize that this is a story about themselves, not just some family in Chicago.

Bummer. I used to look at this news org favorably, but this product has tarnished their image significantly in my eyes.

I agree with your point, and am only responding to the last sentence.

Starring can be useful to the starer. They are just counted because it is countable. Whether you find the number meaningful remains up to you.

Besides, stars != installs, these days they're a popularity contest at the level of Facebook likes, not a measure of a project's success.

Let's wait for the explorers to return.

The software seems to get into more and more and communicate about what it's doing less and less. That's the crux.

Pondering... Noodling... Some other nonsense...

Is Github an application store? Is npm? apt? yum?

If not, why not? You need age verification before you even create an account.

Is `ls` an application? Is `cat`?

This thing is so broadly-written, the only thing saving you from needing to give you age to your toaster is that it's not a "general-purpose" computing device. Never mind that it can run DOOM...

Do you download `ls` from anything resembling an "app store"?

like apt? or ftp.example.com?

also: what's download? in embedded sphere, flashing a firmware is often reffered to as download. That's an industry standard term.

My partner has a 4a and no such issues. Are you talking about stock Android or something else,

Yeah - Stock Android! We are not in the states, but might have to investigate further if it works for others.

I recognize that screenshot. The office managers just wanted smilies in their Outlook email.

I'm not the commentor, but you could get different results from the same curl command depending on what the server wants to give you at the time. The bash script can make additional curl calls or set up jobs that occur at other times.

I'm sure both of you understand this. I'm guessing it's just semantics.

Right. My point is that you only run it once, so there's only that one chance for a compromise. If you got lucky and talked to the right server and it gave you a good script, which is overwhelmingly probable most of the time, you're in the clear. That doesn't mean it's wise, but the danger is limited. Whereas with these agents, every piece of data they're exposed to is potentially interpreted as instructions.

Wikipedia is Creative Commons. Someone could conceivably publish a dead tree version that goes through an editor / editorial process.

Imagine being an editor of Britannica. Without having domain knowledge into absolutely everything, you are forced to trust domain experts.

Wikipedia has a marked advantage when it comes to building that trust, as the articles have been written under public scrutiny and with a great deal of discussion.

What else are you looking for with "traditional editorial structures"? Consistency in quality and completeness, which Wikipedia lacks. However, whenever an article has lower standards, Wikipedia is happy to point that out to the reader, and allow further refinement. A more traditional encyclopedia would simply omit the article entirely.

I'm not really seeing what a traditional editorial structure would be gaining anyone, seems like it would just be a smaller encyclopedia.

Trusting domain experts is precisely what I like in Britannica. I want an environment where real domain experts are not drowned by a mob of midwits.

Arguably, you get more and better domain experts in Wikipedia. I have a set of Britannicas, it's severely lacking in citations and definitely out of date, no matter how new.

The question of article quality has been studied from the very beginning. Wikipedia almost always wins.

What's the point of these questions? Seems like, "what's the point of dissent if the cards are stacked against you?"

I would change that classification from "mere proposal" to "credible threat".

I'm honestly disappointed to see this flagged. What's the saying, "Even an SEO farm is right twice a day"?

Agreed. Bannon has substantial political influence, and they definitely know that. The parent's comments have a history of unnecessarily concern-trolling posts they don't like, instead of flagging them or moving on.