PwC to pay $25 million to settle money laundering report allegations – StumbleUpon. So crime does pay. A bank launders 100 Billion dollars and only has to pay $250 million. Seems like putting that bank out of business might be a better choice in addition to the maximum amount they have in profit. Thanks PWC!
Peek Inside a Professional Carding Shop â€” Krebs on Security. I am just amazed at how little enforcement there is that allow these sites to operate so openly. Why are card companies allowed to indirectly support crime?
Equifax, Other Credit Bureaus Acknowledge Data Breach – StumbleUpon. This kind of stuff is going to happen more in the future. When you are out of work and struggling to survive, it seems understandable that those who have are targeted. I’m not saying that crime is acceptable or ever encouraged, but it is understandable.
Interesting isn’t it? People are so entrenched in their positions. What does it matter to convince someone that your belief is better than theirs? Is being one kind of person better than being another kind of person? I used to think when I was younger that what I believed was the most reasonable and rational. As I have grown and learned, a wide variety of things are positive and helpful.
Let’s take for example if you had used Mac when you were young and hated it. Great. So you are a hard core PC fan. Even better. One day you buy an iPhone or iPad and you decide to give the Mac a chance. You still don’t like it. Does it matter? Does anyone who believe in the Mac somehow lessen your value as a PC user?
I don’t understand why people feel threatened by those who believe differently than them. Unless you are on trial for a crime you didn’t commit, why explain your choices? People believe what they want to believe. What you do when you defend or explain is really say “Well I don’t really feel secure in my choice so I need to justify it to you.” If you don’t feel secure in your decision don’t make it. If you don’t want to take responsibility for your choices don’t make any choices.
I have both a PC and a Mac. I have enjoyed both of them. I don’t feel any better or worse for spending money on either one. I find myself enjoying what I can do with the tool, not the fact of the name brand(more details why this is true here). Everything that seems a positive is sometimes a negative. What sometimes is a negative is often a positive. There is so much grey in the world why spend the energy over stuff that doesn’t matter?
The world has so many needs. Doesn’t it seem a little selfish to argue who’s got the best toys?
Infotainment – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Sometimes I watch silly TV shows. Lately I’ve been watching Buck Rodgers on Netflix at a friend’s house. One of the actors is Gilbert Gerard, who was married to Connie Sellecca. That name looked familiar so I went to her wiki page. After Connie’s divorce of Mr. Gerard she married John Tesh. The profile said he was a pianist/infotainer and I had no idea what that meant. Looking at that wiki page I found the link above. Then it hit me, most blogs including mine are probably infotainment.
For several years I used to work for a small town newspaper with a circulation of maybe 20,000 subscribers. They never told me, I just am guessing. I used to write-up human interest stories about things I was interested in. I was often assigned serious news stories like crimes and legal matters. It was a great experience. Sometimes my stories hit “a little too close to home” but that is another story. We weren’t the Washington Post but we did a decent job given the economics of the environment. The reason I share this is that I quickly learned from my editor what was serious and what was fluff. He always told me “Serious journalism makes people uncomfortable. Fluff makes them feel good.”
I used to work for a magazine in my past. It was a great experience as well. I miss the coworkers that I had there. One of the problems however of magazines is that in the past they used to be able to monopolize information. Without the internet the average person didn’t have a cost-effective way to gather the information they needed. The fall of magazines has several factors, but that’s not germane here. I think the main reason that magazines are failing is that they changed from a substantive to an infotainment model.
Take Readers Digest for example. In 2009 they declared bankruptcy. This is a magazine that had millions of readers, and I think a 70 year history. I grew up reading it. Why and how did they lose their customer base? Even last year major publishers continue to not meet their rate base. Which is a very big deal because they have to return money to advertisers and it is a sign they are loosing readers. Here is part of the reason of their failure. Overwhelming abusing and disrespecting their customers. The biggest failure of RD was that the purpose of condensing culture served no use in the Internet age.
Blogs/Social networks/Facebook offer the ability to customize entertainment in a way never before possible. What might have united people by gatekeepers before, seems controlling and manipulative. It seems to me that long-term the most popular Internet places will give people choices, not limit them. Facebook for example gives people choices in a way they never had before. While it is limiting, most people are not motivated enough to test its limitations.
To me, the current state of the Internet seems much like the early days of TV. From what I understand, the early TV shows were radio/vaudeville like I Love Lucy and Gunsmoke. Perhaps the intellectual equivalent to MySpace and FaceBook. It was only later that things like PBS and NPR appeared. I believe that when people get tired of LOLcats, photoshopped photos and porn (sometimes the same), they might look at serious things.
Life is about balance. Nothing is wrong with entertainment, but just like cookies, infotainment is a sometimes activity.
*Click here for more details about his food preferences. Now I’m going to eat his second favorite cookie.