NSA works with Microsoft, Google, Facebook, etc. to collect all your data

[Krazy]

The dick pic bit had me in tears.

[Moss]

the Bieber interruption at 13:00...

[notorious bum]

First 10mins were surprisingly unproductive, especially the brief description of Julian Assange, praising of that hollywood shitpiece w/ Cumberbatch, etc.

[Tyrath]

That sounded like praising to you? Sounded to me like he was saying it was shit despite having Cumberbatch in it.

[chazzyphizzle]

he didnt even say the name of the movie LOL, it wasn't praise at all. simmer down

[Serra]

I mean, I think he was praising Cumberbatch, but if that's your takeaway from the whole thing, I think you might have bigger problems there..

[notorious bum]

It was mainly a rant about the exaggerated story that was sold about Assange being a selfish, arrogant asshole and the unsavory practice of leaking everything/hurting national security. I could've complained further about the tilt that foreign spying is good/insignificant. But, I'm not really ragging on Oliver here, just seeing the limitations of this particular episode, which undoubtedly has more to do with the limited time to cram info into a digestible format.

[notorious bum]

And I still crack a smile at the thought that arguably the most useful and informative television news comes in comedy/satire, which I'm critiquing as if it were a real news hour lol.


P.S. Fuck the Daily Show and CC for not crowning Bee or Jessica Williams the rightful spot as host. At least we got Wilmore.

[Waraji]

It was mainly a rant about the exaggerated story that was sold about Assange being a selfish, arrogant asshole and the unsavory practice of leaking everything/hurting national security. I could've complained further about the tilt that foreign spying is good/insignificant. But, I'm not really ragging on Oliver here, just seeing the limitations of this particular episode, which undoubtedly has more to do with the limited time to cram info into a digestible format.

It was hardly praise, it was a simple aside from a comment made from one of the people in the video testimonials. Someone says Snowden owned Wikileaks, he goes on a rant on how Snowden doesn't look like Assange, Assange being a "arrogant asshole" piece of bread with a wig that not even Cumberbatch could make look good. Long winded joke criticizing one persons likeliness to another.

[Serra]

I took it as Assange is such a douche that even someone as charming as Cumberbatch can present him in a redeeming light. So while it was more an attack on Assange, the praise was in the context.

As far as TDS though, Williams said she did not feel comfortable taking over (I can't remember if they asked her or she came out and said that in response to people saying it), and if I'm not mistaken, TBS(?) made Bee the offer for her new show pretty quickly.

[notorious bum]

Yeah, I was actually expecting Bee to be the one lined-up already.... that or Jason Jones(?)

[Niiro]

Ever since Colbert ended I haven't really watched TDS much either (Nightly really needs some tweaking before it's watchable imo) but Jason Jones did his last show a week or two ago.

Idk if he would have made a good host but he was the absolute best correspondent, I think it would have been a waste for him to play the straight man as the host, but I could imagine him doing character full-time like Colbert.

[Serra]

Yeah, I was actually expecting Bee to be the one lined-up already.... that or Jason Jones(?)

I think TBS made offers to them both like a week apart or something, both within a month of Stewart's announcement.

I don't know if this is a major change or not, but last night's Nightly only had three panelists. Seemed to work better and allow for more of a discussion between the guests and Wilmore.

[Dimmauk]

I assume it's going to start showing up everywhere tomorrow, so keep an eye open -- John Oliver covered the upcoming (inevitable) renewal of the Patriot Act and went to Russia to interview Edward Snowden. Wasn't anything mind-blowing, but it was pretty good.

Edit: Because I love you all, here's the video:

I've watched this twice and made my wife watch it. It's fantastic.

[notorious bum]

Jeb Bush said the best part of the Obama administration was his expansion of NSA surveillance. http://interc.pt/1QgGxoO

[myreality]

Edward Snowden looked like he was about to have an aneurysm at the beginning of the dick pic analogy.

[Ragnus]

http://www.information-age.com/techn...gainst-posting

Looks like Facebook logs everything you type. Even the stuff that you start to type out and delete without hitting post.

[#686578]

Yes, quite obviously Facebook does this. Not just because it's been reported on in the past but because of the features that are in your face. As you type your status and you write someones name or you copy and paste a link to a youtube video or to a picture on imgur or what have you a webpart pops up completing some sort of feature in reaction to the content of your still in writing post. How did people think this was happening without sending data to Facebook? That you just keep a list of your entire contact list in memory when you open the page just in case you decide to type someone's name? This was completely obvious to anyone. The "developer tools" mystically referred to there are just the same ones you can pop up in Firefox using F12. This article is clearly clickbait only appealing to people who are too technically inept to know what it's supposed to mean and mystified by tools they dont understand.

I'm not saying Facebook isnt egregiously abusing their userbase, because they are, I'm just saying everyone involved in this article (the author, the source, and the intended audience) are completely misleading or misled.

But just because what you're saying is being sent doesn't necessary mean they record it. It might or might not be. I probably wouldnt design a permanent record of that, but that's just me.

[Quicklet]

Unfortunately a lot of people really don't understand just how invasive modern computing is and how much potential for abuse exists. Data is a huge commodity in the modern world, primarily for advertising but obviously for other purposes as well, and most people don't realize the extent of data collection and retention.

Facebook is an evil enough company that if it takes somewhat alarmist clickbait to get people to start thinking more about data collection, I'm okay with the hyperbole. If we're going to be in this brave new world where secrets can only exist for a small subset of the populace, we should at least have a debate about it.

It's safe to say that any web form on a major website (and potentially any website, though this is most likely to pertain to commercial sites that rely heavily on advertising) that utilizes draft autosaving or autocompletion is going to log your in-progress writing and possibly mine that data for marketing purposes. You could probably even test this in gmail if you were so inclined. At this point in time, it's practically a given that any company that can harvest data from you (either for internal use or to sell to a third-party company) will do so in a maximal way.

[notorious bum]

Just don't do any of that cyber terrorist stuff online and you have nothing to worry about....

Obama just issued an executive order that grants him authority to sanction people or groups engaged in cyber activism, i.e. Wikileaks. https://www.districtsentinel.com/new...sts-wikileaks/