Ghostbanjo1949

You're going to make me cry remembering my days with gpm. Hands down the best music platform that was.

I had to look up astroturfing in this context, so hopefully I got this right. But isn't that just the actual commenting then? Obviously voting could get that comment moved closer to the top when done by the perps in this case but I think it would take the community to also be up voting the comment for it to rise to the top. I also don't think knowing who commented actually fixes this issue nor does it give more ability from an admin perspective to get rid of those comments if that was desired.

I could be missing something though.

What is the benefit here in this case? Basically why do we care who upvotes or downvotes something that it needs to be exposed?

I wasn't talking about good AdSense in this case, just the page you are redirected to if you are coming from one of their marked VPN IP addresses. Unless this has changed since the last time I attempted to go to Reddit with a VPN on. But that's the behavior I've witnessed.

Not a code change at all, just a filtering of the traffic from particular ip's and forwarding it to a different page which is all that reddit is doing as well.

When Chrome came out it was fairly light on resource usage and speedy because of that. Firefox was a resource hog at this time. Chrome now is a show resource hog and Firefox is much peppier overall in my opinion.

Jimmy Patterson!

Yes I would say that the brain bleeding is probably a physical installation issue, not frying the brain.

I think though you're reading more into my comments than are there. I've not said I'm for getting a chip in my brain nor anyone else's, including the primates. My comment was around the point that if you are going to argue or fight something, you need to be honest on how you do it. Your clear emotional response to this is keeping you from seeing that. Over sensationalizing or misrepresenting the facts doesn't help your stance. The truth here is that they really messed up at least a couple of times with the physical installation of the chips, that led to a degradation in the quality of life of the test subjects and eventually death. But not anything that would be like "frying" someone's brain. And that, those facts alone should give one pause before signing up for anything like this. Especially when you consider, no matter who or what company pursues this, this is bound to happen. Any new hardware or software fails during at least development let alone post release so it's not surprising at all these results occurred, considering what they are doing. I'd imagine if this chip functions as it should, the only people that would consider it, currently at least, would be those without any other option and their quality of life is already dismal due to their health issues.

No your misuse of the phrase does. If a person suffers a physical brain injury, as dramatic for instance as a metal rod getting shot into their brain leaving them disabled, you don't say their brain was fried. It's used primarily to describe chemical issues with the brain, such as a person who used a bit too many drugs and their brain is now impaired because of it. The primates in the article suffered issues caused by the physical installation of the chip, not from the functioning of the chip. Therefore not fried.

I don't think it's about nitpicking it's about being honest.

Oh haha, yeah that makes more sense