This isn’t about the email marketers. I think you’ve got it in your head that this one guy is a scummy email marketer when he’s really just trying to let people who have opted in to getting email from him know when he has more stuff for sale.
Believe it or not, there are other uses for email lists that aren’t spam.
How is Amazon preventing customers from signing up? How even could they?
When Amazon scrapes the seller’s website for listing information and then circumvents the seller’s own storefront, they’re not giving the customer the information that (1) the seller has a website at all, or (2) the seller has a mailing list. This means that the customer will just never find out that information without looking for it, despite clearly being interested in the seller’s work (as they’re purchasing from the seller). It’s Amazon inserting themselves into the process so that they can skim some money off the top at best, or extort the seller for access to their customers at worst. And all of this while the seller has created the mailing list specifically to prevent such corporate malfeasance.
What he is saying is that he doesn’t get the customers email from the sale, to which he’d start to send marketing emails.
“customers never get to interact with my website, they have no ability to sign up for my mailing list. They have no idea who I am as an artist or what I stand for,” Montes-Tarazas said."
That’s not what he said.
You know, what pretty much every company does when you buy something.
Pretty much every big company, yes. Small businesses are pretty careful with that sort of thing, though, because unless they want to be dependent upon Facebook or Instagram or whatever for their entire lives, they have to not make their customers upset.
“Not being exposed to me, the ‘artist’” is a perfectly valid reason, and one I would agree with. But the mailing list excuse rings hollow to me.
“customers never get to interact with my website, they have no ability to sign up for my mailing list. They have no idea who I am as an artist or what I stand for,” Montes-Tarazas said."
they have no ability to sign up for my mailing list
Democracy dies in darkness, and the oligarch running the Post bought it so that he could turn off the lights.
“Mailing list” is not “marketing.” It’s all opt-in. Montes-Tarazas wants his customers to be able to interact with him directly, without going through a big tech monopoly that can pull the rug from underneath him or demand a ransom at any time.
just another capitalist
He’s working within the system that he lives in, and doing it ethically.
Oh, absolutely–but back then it was just normal, ordinary platform decay, not the sparkling AI hellscape of today.
Office has been Microsoft 365 for five years now. They added “Copilot” to the name at some point last year, but it’s been M365 for a while.
Quite a bummer. We’ll just have to go with “one-quarter impulse.”
Absolutely no argument from me there.
Thank you, you’re very kind.
By volume of harm, yes. But by character? I’m not so sure. Trump does whatever he wants, and doesn’t realize that what he does is awful. He often has to be reminded to hide his crimes. But Epstein knew that what he was doing made him one of the worst people to have ever existed, and did it anyway; even hiding it all away on an island to keep it under wraps. His was a calculated evil. Trump is just a selfish agent of chaos by comparison.
I guess what I’m saying is that Trump doesn’t seem smart enough to have character as bad as Epstein did.
I don’t disagree that some articles could use better information hierarchy. Headings could make that experience way better. But to say that the info shouldn’t be there at all is short-sighted and ignores the point of an encyclopedia.
That’s what the info boxes on the side of the article are for. They’re the simplified, just-the-facts version. If you want to know more, you read the whole article, or look for the section that contains the info you need.
Speaking as a software engineer, that’s always the goal! In all actuality, though, if the program knew what happened, it could probably self-correct. When you’re getting stack traces, it’s the computer saying, “I dunno, I can’t make head nor tail of this mess, and if I keep going something’s going to break, so YOU figure it out.” It’s not intentionally obfuscated, it’s telling you exactly what the problem is from its perspective.
If I gave you directions to meet me at a place you weren’t familiar with, but I gave you the wrong directions, when you called me you wouldn’t be like, “hey, just so you know, I turned left on 5th Street when I should’ve turned right.” If you knew that, you’d just go back to 5th and turn the other way. You’d call me and say, “so I have no idea where I am. Your directions say to turn left here, but if I do that I’ll literally walk into the ocean and I’m pretty sure I see sharks in the water. There’s a statue of a sea horse on my right, and I passed a Shake Shack about two blocks back.”
That’s what a stack trace is. It’s supposed to be a message to the developer, not to the user. The developer should get the stack trace and either fix the problem that led to that issue in the first place, or add better error handling so that when it fails the program can tell you in more plain language what to do.
That’s a good one. I was thinking, stop trying to make it seem like you’re helping agents improve, and just go with something like “HOLD THE LINE.”
I mean, it’s an odious slogan for an odious government org, but at least it’s better than suggesting the opposite of their stated mission.
Wait-- their slogan is “go beyond?” That’s so parodic I can’t believe it’s true…
… WHAT.
NOPE, IT’S TRUE.
How is this government so completely and entirely inept?
Fair point. “Epstein” and “Eichmann” even start with the same letter and have the same number of syllables.
He’s going to be a byword for “an unfathomably evil guy” soon, if he isn’t already. I would’ve thought “Trump” would be the 21st Century’s version of “Hitler,” but it honestly might turn out to be “Epstein.”
Ah, there’s room enough in the lexicon for both. All three, even.
Musk is well-known for bringing a project to a close way late and way over-budget. He’s the king of overpromising and undelivering. After a couple years of “next quarter, I promise!” they’ll be wishing they’d bought the bulldozer.
That would be…what, an ampliviation scheme? (since it’s longer than the original word)
A4y, t2s i0s n1t p10y r6e a1d t3s m2h l4r t0o c5e.