• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Last week, Utah Attorney General Sean D. Reyes joined 23 different states in a letter to Pornhub’s mum or dad company with concerns over content featuring underaged children. As just lately reported, an worker for the company was captured on video by an undercover journalist discussing Pornhub’s moderation practices, the place he admitted a "loophole." When uploading content to the positioning, customers are required to submit a photograph ID but are usually not required to indicate their face within the uploaded materials. The worker admitted there is no method to affirm the particular person importing the photo ID is the same particular person within the content. He replied, "Of course," when asked if rapists and human traffickers use this loophole to add content of their victims to become profitable. As you're conscious, various Federal and state legal guidelines forbid the creation and distribution of CSAM (Child Sexual Abuse Material.) We're concerned that Aylo and its subsidiary Pornhub, and possibly different subsidiaries, could also be proliferating the manufacturing and dissemination of CSAM via the ‘loophole’ identified by your employee. Please provide us with an evidence of this ‘loophole;’ whether Aylo and its subsidiaries do, in truth, permit content creators and performers to obscure their faces in uploaded content; and, if so, whether Aylo is taking measures to change this policy to make sure that no kids or other victims are being abused for profit on any of its platforms.

Inventions that were ahead of their time can assist us to know whether or not we're truly able to dwell on the earth we're making. Speculative fiction followers know which you could create a complete world out of only a handful of objects. A lightsaber can start to explain a complete galaxy far, far away; a handheld communicator, phaser, and tablet can depict a star-trekking utopia; a black monolith can stand in for a whole alien civilization. World-constructing isn’t about creating imaginary worlds from scratch - accounting for their every detail - but hinting at them by highlighting mere sides that represent a coherent reality beneath them. If that reality is convincing, then the world is inhabitable by the imagination and its stories are endearing to the heart. Creating objects in the actual world is sort of exactly the same; that’s why invention is a threat. After we create something new - truly, categorically, conceptually new - we place a wager on the stability of support it can have on this planet in which it emerges and the ability it should remake that world.

When a product fails because it was "ahead of its time," that normally means that its makers succeeded at world-constructing, not invention. It may very well be argued that Jean-Louis Gassée, not Jony Ive, invented the tablet pc, though his Newton MessagePad failed soon after it launch in 1993 and is now mostly forgotten. In hindsight, it’s simple to see why Ive’s pad succeeded where Gassée’s didn't: twenty years of technological improvement provided better hardware, screens, batteries, software, and connectivity. And although anyone fascinated about a pill had probably been prepared for one since even earlier than the MessagePad thanks to the Star Trek universe being full of PADDs, the one factor that basically prepared the world for the pill pc was the mobile phone. In 1993, hardly anyone had a mobile phone. By 2010, 5 billion folks used them. A world during which over 70% of its population is already accustomed to cellular computing is one ready for a bridge system between a small cell display and a large stationary one.

The Newton MessagePad, in fact, isn’t alone. So many products and technologies which are commonplace right now made their debuts in products that didn’t truly succeed. Not because they weren’t good ideas, but because the world wasn’t quite prepared and so they weren’t highly effective sufficient to make it so. The Nintendo Power Glove anticipated gestural interfaces and controls nearly 15 years before Minority Report told us all to expect them… ’re nonetheless not there. Microsoft’s Zune wasn’t the primary portable MP3 participant, of course; that distinction goes to the fully unknown MPMan F10, released in 1997. It additionally wasn’t the primary actually good or actually successful one; the iPod actually should get the credit score for that. But, it did risk its identity on a monthly subscription music service that the MP3 hoarders it was sold to only weren’t ready for. Google Glass was launched in 2013 and died a humiliating however fast death after a widely known tech bro wore it in the shower, reminding the world that face-mounted computer systems are made for a reality a lot creepier than any of us want.

But almost a decade later, every major tech firm is both making a face computer or is rumored to be making one. Times change. Things change. People change. The World Changes. In that order, after which again and again. There are, after all, many older examples. Much older ones, in truth, just like the actual first car - powered by steam - created by Nicolas-Joseph Cugnot over a century before the first fuel powered car car introduced by Karl Friedrich Benz. Benjamin Franklin coined the term "battery" in 1749, but it wasn’t till half a century later that Alessandro Volta constructed one. And, it seems that the fundamentals of batteries had been understood and in use over 2,000 years in the past! But my favorite one is the PicturePhone. The basic thought of transmitting picture and audio over wire dates back to the 1870s (lengthy earlier than any of us had been warned by The Jetsons that video telephones would power us into a falseness that anticipated our perfectly curated Zoom backgrounds by many a long time). In 1927, Herbert Hoover (not yet President) made the primary public video call from Washington, D.C.