I don't really follow the used market that much, but I'm thinking the is the best answer if you've got a good budget to work with and the other post saying the Pentax K1000 is better if you don't.
One potential advantage is the ability to use old Nikon lenses on newer digital cameras, but that's of limited utility when trying to use old manual focus lenses on modern bodies that aren't really designed for them.
The manual lenses are actually better on modern mirrorless cameras than on older dslr ones, because those had viewfinders that made focusing manually rather hard, while the mirrorless bodies have good focus aids.
And the idea that criticizing censorship when private organizations do it is “whining” is quite odd. Not everything bad is illegal. Lots of people criticized the Hollywood Production Codes as bad censorship, even though it was voluntary. Except back then it was liberals complaining that the Hollywood companies that controlled distribution were using their power to entrench conservative ideas and suppress liberal ones: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/05/17/cens-m17.html
No one ever stopped people from making the films, they only disallowed the distribution and showings via their operations. The Gov, banning a film (porn)was censorship by the Gov and thus was struck down by the Warren court. But you know that right?
They obviously can choose what content they choose to host and display. That is their right as long as it is not discriminatory or in violation of US law. While that is the literal definition of censorship, the issue is not about a free market is it? Nope. Is about the Right whining that their hate is not allowed to be amplified, hence they call it censorship. They, not me, are the ones stating that this is a free speech issue. I state it is not. Explicitly not.
Its a really simple concept. I am surprised you dont understand.
Actually, the title refers to it as "bias" rather than "censorship". "free market" is a larger concept than "bias", although you can be biased while still operating within the context of a free market. Still, censorship doesn't have anything to do with the government, although the U.S. explicitly forbids government censorship.
If we really start considering media, a lot of taxpayer money worldwide went to broadband Internet infrastructure, so Twitter and friends do not play on a completely private field either.
Understood, its your prerogative and your choice. I feel that inference is not derogatory nor offensive, and I would rather be banned that be required to coddle those who are incapable of receiving or digesting criticism or engaging in difficult dialog.
I come here for the intelligent and interesting discussions. Often times these are the types of discussions that are difficult for people as they contain ideas that challenge one's sense of self and place are the most uncomfortable. But without those challenges, people will never grow. Trees are strongest where the forces of nature are not buffered. People are as well.
> Trees are strongest where the forces of nature are not buffered. People are as well.
That may be true of trees and people but it is not true of internet communities. I think you're making a category error. The confrontational style you're talking about requires smaller, more cohesive environments to generate interesting outcomes. On a large, anonymous, open internet forum like HN, it just produces repetitive flamewar, then brain death, then heat death. Since the idea of HN is to be interesting (to the extent possible), we have no choice but to moderate this. I wish it were different—it would be a lot less work.
Usually when someone posts the sort of argument that you did, I have found that it's possible to persuade them to follow the site guidelines once they understand that everything we do follows from trying to optimize for interestingness (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). It's not about enforcing some tedious moral code. If you decide you buy that and want to use HN as intended in the future, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and let us know.
And yet, they keep spending money... This is a problem. The fact that they offer no service, no communication, so resolutions and yet buyers are still dumping 100's of thousands a month because, they dont have any other options...
Can you name any other business that could function like this? Health care is the only ones that come to mind...
The fact that they offer no service, no communication, so resolutions
The irony is that one of the ways these big ad tech companies promoted themselves as being better than traditional advertising was because they were supposed to be so transparent compared to the old model where you had to go through an ad salesman and then measure your results in sales.
At least when you have an ad salesman, you have someone to complain to. And their boss, if need be.
The worst part is that there is no market what-so-ever for FB or Google ads. The prices are not set by competition, or the market, they are set by the seller. They decide that something's baseline price is $10 per X, not the market. The market has no choice but adjust their ROI based not on actual market conditions, but on the whim of the seller.
And to top it off, almost all digital ads are money losers for the buyer. Its the few that work that get backed into their ROI calculations. Which are essentially a tax added to the purchase price of anything marketed and sold via these channels.
A little out of left field but here is my opinion on why we are here.
None of this is possible without the perverted media market that view based advertising has created. The entire political landscape has grown to this mess because of "Click Bait" style ad metrics.
Every single news outlet, media outlet and otherwise has been corrupted and perverted to seek instant gratification and has lowered their editorial bar so low that they'll say, show, do anything that gets more attention. Because attention brings them more ad $.
Without the money flowing from ads via these false metrics, none of these media outlets could exist let alone thrive. And they, are the reason America is so divided. Sensationalism is what is driving the discourse, not intelligence or reason. The power brokers know this and the leverage it very, very well.
We have created a US where information is the ball, and our lives and the policy that governs us, is the sport.
Its relevant - albeit a little out of the purview, because without the rise of sensationalist based media creating the distractions, none of this is possible.
The lies, the distractions, the propaganda, the amplification of issues that simply-do-not exist, allows the power brokers the opportunity to do these types of things without the oversight and regulation that the Constitution and history used to have in place to contain such acts.
Its no different than a magical or illusionist using distraction and human behaviors against the audience so that they can paint a picture of what ever they choose. Or the infinite number of psych tricks used to fool people into giving up their money....
If the media was still beholden to facts and held actual integrity, and were not instead chasing a false metric that benefited them, the power brokers could not get away with these types of acts.
It goes deeper but the checks and balances of our Republic are no longer in place because we whored out our Congress and allowed the Foxes to buy their way to the front of the henhouse...
What in this article, specifically, is a lie, distraction, propaganda or amplification of an issue that doesn't exist?
Voter suppression is real. It alters election results; look at the Georgia governor's race in 2018 for a recent egregious example. The US is continuing a proud tradition of disenfranchisement — from only giving voting rights to white men at the country's inception, to poll taxes, Jim Crow laws, felon disenfranchisement, gerrymandering, voter IDs.
This is an important issue, and I can't fathom dismissing an article about it as "sensationalism".
I am not. My point is that the reason we are here, that this repression even exists, is due to the media marketplace. Without it, this kind of blatant repression isn’t possible. It is here because of decades of propaganda and distraction by the right that has allowed then to take advantage of I’ll informed people who have become enemies of their neighbors and democracy itself.
I don't buy it. Like I said, the US has systemically disenfranchised voters from inception through the present. One of our two major political parties is explicitly invested in continuing that practice, and the other is only nominally opposed.
This is not a recent invention, and it's not due to the media. It's built right into the foundation of our country.
One has to understand the root of the cause if you wish to treat the illness. It is no secret that the removal of the Fairness Doctrine paired with the deregulation of media and the removal of Congress's oversight and license requirements helped fuel the right wing media rise over the last 15years. Pair that with the rise of internet based style ad measurement and audience feedback, and you create a media tailor made for propaganda where you reward sensationalism.
Attention is the currency of media.
You dont actually believe that the Right is able to thwart decades of decency and abidance to a common good based on solely on will do you?
They do it by lying and thus enraging people into believing that the other guy is coming for them...that the other guy is evil. That is how you control a so-called democracy, you divide and distract and create a sideshow while you do the dirty work, sometimes in the open (like this) or mostly in the back, like the judiciary packing.
I just ask that you dig deeper and look for the root cause, not he symptoms. Only when we realize the cause can we make the appropriate changes and restore health.
The root cause is that our country is a hegemony founded by rich slave owners. The “decades of decency and abidance to a common good” is a myth that erases the ongoing plight of marginalized people, spun by those who want to keep that status quo. We have always been a violent and oppressive nation — the caste system is enshrined in our national DNA, and we have never in our 250 year existence truly reckoned with it.
If only the issue were as shallow as the media dividing us! I’ll make the same request of you: that you direct your gaze a little further back to discover what’s truly going on here.
If you think the retraction of voting rights is due to the actions of men some 300 years ago, I dont really have much to say... You might as well go back a few thousand years. However, if you're interested in the actual cause and effects of real, tangible actions and real legislation by living souls. People whose goals were to repress votes to change outcomes, I suggest you study the last 30 years of American media and how the Right morphed the rules to their benefit.
"Retraction" is a weird word to use. The issue isn't that we're going backwards — voter turnout has generally increased over this country's lifetime [1] — but it's that we're enfranchising people at a relatively slow and demographically disproportionate rate. If you pick 30 years ago as your starting point, you'll miss the start of the war on drugs, white flight and redlining, Jim Crow — all "real, tangible actions and real legislation by living souls, people whose goals were to repress votes to change outcomes".
Right wing media constructing an alternate reality is worrying, of course. But it's myopic to intentionally ignore the mantle of disenfranchisement and oppression that recent politicians have picked up. Their ideas didn't come from nowhere, you know.
In other words: The lines are a result of the Right using media to create distractions and issues that allow them to get away with these types of repressive acts. Without their propaganda machines working in sync, enraging their audiences with false fears, (non-existent voter fraud for example), they cannot do get away with these things. Its classic distraction, just played out over a decade, instead of a few minutes.
The lines are one example of this because they have leveraged their media to make people HATE the other side enough to literally cut of their noses to spite their faces.
People should know that regardless of how they consume TV, , their viewing habits are logged, tracked and ultimately sold. Cable, satellite, IPTV, web, mobile etc. Its all being gathered and parsed by dozens, if not hundreds of entities. The only exception is over the air...
So getting upset at Samsung and plugging in a Chromecast or AppleTV or ROKU or whatever, is silly. They're all tracking you everywhere.
But there isnt a lot of demand from a lot sources. So the ads are not nearly as tailored as digital. But they can be. And eventually they'll be as creepy as the banners you are served after browsing thingamajigs. For now, you'll likely just get served Direct Response scatter and the same branded ad over and over...
Social media is fast food. Cheap, easy, filling, tasty and very, very, very unhealthy. Eating it once in a while is fine, but eat it every day and you'll get sick.
You /s but I've found that I can consume HN content with roughly equal level of unhealthy interest that I consume reddit content
That is to say, sometimes when I'm not particularly engaged with whatever else I should be doing on the computer, HN becomes my primary "addiction" and I find myself opening tabs and scrolling through content without particularly intending to
If hacker news was food, to me it would be a sandwich, something you can eat while relaxing, or in a hurry, not too flavorful, and not too nutritious, but certainly the lesser evil of food-media.
Without FoxNews and Limbaugh, this isnt possible. So why do they want Americans to die? Why do they want them fighting each other?
That's the real issue and one that I am sad to say far too many HN posters are working on and against daily...
Advertising and content engagement. These two things and their unfettered pursuits have destroyed America. When the only thing that matters is the pursuit of money, based on false metrics and false promises, we die. And yes, we're watching America die.
The personal data industry is truly disgusting but the really funny thing is that most of the data is actually worthless. Its collected only because it can be. Not because its valuable or worthwhile. These companies are basically hoarders. Hoarders that rummage through your trash and spy on you from afar. They are awful, the business is awful and is a viable case of "just because you can, should you?"
Indeed it's totally worthless data, like what are you going to do, dissect people into groups that you could heavily target and try to sell them gizmos or swing an election? Pfft, not worth the effort. There are no companies or state actors are into that kind of thing.
Individual data is useless, but big data is worth gold. It can show you exactly where your target audiance is, and what they're common interests are. That's super valuable information if you want to start ad campaigns.
It has worth, only not the way you mean. It may (or may not) lead to better sales through ads, but it leads to more and more expensive ad sales and some very wealthy companies.
By far the most egregious overreach of Federal authority in recent memory. Noting about this is reasonable. Its 100% the act of a desperate and weak minded despot who knows nothing about technology but acts out of ignorance and pettiness. A truly illegal and Anti-American act.
Please don't post political flamewar rants to HN, regardless of how right you are or feel you are. It leads to more predictable and usually nastier discussion.
Treating foreign businesses on equal footing to domestic ones is a recent phenomena. Historically the US has leveraged trade policy to block foreign enterprise through the use of tariffs during periods of instability ( reconstruction ) and to protect early industries ( Pennsylvania steel industry in the mid-1800s ).
In the event that a country lacks a comparative advantage sufficient to balance trade and maintain local employment and economic growth; Then some degree of trade restriction is useful to ensure both stability and future growth. At 15-20% local unemployment, losing the perceived future growth engine(s) of the economy to foreign competition would not be politically acceptable to a majority of Americans.
How this plays out in the digital age is interesting. Tariffs are largely ineffective due to the nature of services. China has successfully grown a domestic tech industry from 0 - FANG equivalent by blocking all foreign competitors. It will be interesting if the EU seeks a similar strategy to grow its tech sector.
Just because some Magistrate Judge declares this a First Amendment violation does not mean it will stand up.
My guess is it goes to a Federal Judge who overturns it.
Presidents are allowed wide latitude in National Security matters.
I expect the sanctioning of WeChat will happen eventually.
I agree with where you're coming from, but really the underlying feeling is basically a rational response to the growing problem of surveillance capitalism. The rest of the world has just been a frog slowly boiling while USG siphons more and more of their citizens' information, but now there is a significant non-US player.
The right response would be something like a US GDPR, allowing US persons to opt out of surveillance foreign and domestic. But that would upset the Silicon Valley gravy train, so instead we get a ham-fisted response that deflects concern onto a tiny slice of the overall problem.
It's definitely executive overreach, but looking at how reasonable it is is the wrong approach. Trump regularly makes overreaching, token executive actions because they excite his base and distract the media from a larger scandal.
If you read the Executive Order (https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-or...)
you'll see that this is yet another aspect of Trump's overall policy of confronting China's growing influence. You may disagree with that policy but I think it is a mistake to attribute these actions to "ignorance and pettiness".
In this case its hard not to... These two entities, not the thousands of other Chinese and foreign entities that do business in our country, are being targeted by what is effectively an authoritarian action. There is no national security issue here, at least none that has been disclosed nor processed by our national security teams or Congressional members. Instead, it - like most of Trump's actions, are done for personal gain and spite. And as a result is the most overreaching act by any POTUS in modern history.
I think it is a fools errand to try to rank executive overreach, but how would you compare this to Obama’s drone strike policy and targeted killings including American citizens?
