HES wrote:I don't care if they sell my facebook information, because it's all useless.
On the contrary. It's probably useless to an individual, but that's not where the problem lies. Rather, the network of who you know, who you interact with, and in what ways, is a good indicator of how to influence you without your being aware of it. This is useful for Amazon, Century21, the New York Times, and potential employers.
Amazon could change the prices of its books for each person, individually, tailored to what it would be best for them for you to read.
Century21 could "build better neighborhoods" (and make more sales) by showing likeminded people properties in the same areas.
The New York Times could write their articles with each paragraph (or even each sentence) in several versions, and present a customized version of the article to you, under the same URL, without your being aware of it. When your friend goes to the same article, they get different text.
And of course employers could use the social graph to decide who to interview.That
is the downside. Not whether somebody two countries away finds my name.
As to posting old Ongs... I don't see why. The entire collection is out there. In fact, it's in here!
per old papal decree: When in Paso Robles some time ago, I took some pix of rather friendly squirpies... I tried to get closeups but they were so friendly and they usually got so close they were out of frame. Here's one of the better ones.
[size=85]edit: playing with the attachment thing. Here's what I figured out:
If you upload an attachment, place it inline, preview it, right click on the image to get the URL, put that URL inside img tags, you'll put the image where you want it, and there will be a redundant attachment. If you delete the attachment (from the post), the attachment
remains on xkcd, the URL remains valid, and the image inside img tags remains visible and quotable,
disappears from xkcd.eta: The image itself disappeared. Now I'll try re-attaching a different squirpy (from the same trip), but not click place it inline. (It still shows up inline, but since it has a different file number, I have to change the file number in my img tag to get it to show up.
It's what I did here. Let me know if this did not work.
My next experiment will be to use the file URL from the attachment in this post as
the attachment for another post. If that works, then the "redundant spoilers" can all be stuffed in one massive archive post, and need not appear as redundancies in the actual post that uses it.