• Profile logout login

#conspiracytheories#popular

Gawker

Share Cancel
   
Upload an image | Add an image URL
×

logging in
  • FAQ. Include # before tag:
  • #tips,
  • #stalker,
  • #opencaption,
  • #internalmemos,
  • etc.

New York, 9:48 AM
Thu Dec 17
60 posts in the last 24 hours

Team

Tip Your Editors:

Tipline: 646-214-8138

Editor-in-Chief:
Gabriel Snyder |

West Coast Editor:
Richard Rushfield |

Contributing Editors:

Valleywag:
Ryan Tate |

Media:
Hamilton Nolan |

Politics:
Alex Pareene |

Investigations:
John Cook |

Entertainment:
Brian Moylan |

Nights:
Adrian Chen |
Azaria Jagger |
Ravi Somaiya |

Weekends:
Foster Kamer |

Video Editor:
Richard Blakeley |

SUBSCRIBE TO Gawker RSS

New: Breaking news and daily top stories via email
4260 Subscribers
Gawker
  • Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

    Dsmvwl  Admin  Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×
    Image of SidAndFinancy SidAndFinancy
    12/15/09

    In reply to How Did the Bush White House Generate 234,042 Emails Per Day?
    The email probably covers the Executive Office of the President, not just the White House staff. EOP is closer to 2,000 employees.
     Reply
    SidAndFinancy was starred SidAndFinancy was unstarred
    Image of skylerdavidi skylerdavidi
    12/15/09

    In reply to How Did the Bush White House Generate 234,042 Emails Per Day?
    I'll tell you how.

    They probably counted each "email" as one email message per recipient. Meaning, one message sent by Scooter Libby to 30 recipients would count as 30 emails.

    Now figure that one of those recipients responded to the entire thread; you now have 60 such emails.

    If each of the 30 people on the thread sent an average of 10 messages throughout the life of the thread, that would result in a total count of 9,000 of these "emails" (300 messages sent to 30 recipients).

    Now, with the statistic of 180 staffers, you could have 6 similar, distinct groups of 30 people. If each group had a similar type of email thread, that brings you to 54,000 emails.

    And if each of these thread groups are busy emailing all day, which presidential staffs probably are (despite any probable lack of competence), there could reasonably be 5-10 of these types of threads going on any given day, if not more, within each group. If each group had just 5 of these threads described above, that would result in a total count of 270,000 emails.
     Reply
    Adrian Chen approved this comment skylerdavidi was starred skylerdavidi was unstarred
    Image of RollsRoyceRevenge RollsRoyceRevenge
    12/15/09

    In reply to How Did the Bush White House Generate 234,042 Emails Per Day?
    Dear BUSH Administration

    Would you LIKE a LARGER penis?

    Yes you would.

    we KNOW you would.

    Use our product!!1!!!!11111!1!!

    CONDI will be happy.
     Reply
    RollsRoyceRevenge was starred RollsRoyceRevenge was unstarred
    Image of i'm a bottle i'm a bottle
    12/15/09

    In reply to How Did the Bush White House Generate 234,042 Emails Per Day?
    When I was in college, back in the early '00s, I dated a certain law grad who constantly e-mailed me from her Blackberry (I e-mailed from my university account). Our e-mail exchanges went: "Hey," then, "What," "Proust?" and "No," then finally, "Whatever." I'm sure that's what most of these e-mails will be like...numerous, no content, zero thinking, completely homone-driven, except with torture.
     Reply
    i'm a bottle was starred i'm a bottle was unstarred
    Image of Airvault Airvault
    12/15/09

    @i'm a bottle: Something like this:
    - "Hey Dick."
    - "Yeah Don?"
    - "Torture."
    - "Yeah Don."
    - "Dogs?"
    - "No Don."
    - "Bamboo shoots?"
    - "No Don."
    - "Ladies undergarments?"
    - "No Don."
    - "Then what?"
    - "Water-boarding."
    - "Oh..."
    - "Yeah."
    - "Bitch."
     Reply
    Airvault was starred Airvault was unstarred
    Image of Claire Buoyant Claire Buoyant
    12/15/09

    @i'm a bottle: Um, isn't IM a better medium for these types of exchanges?
     Reply
    Claire Buoyant was starred Claire Buoyant was unstarred
    Image of i'm a bottle i'm a bottle
    12/15/09

    @Claire Buoyant: They blocked all the chat programs from her office. What was I supposed to do? I was in love.
     Reply
    i'm a bottle was starred i'm a bottle was unstarred
    Image of i'm a bottle i'm a bottle
    12/15/09

    @Airvault: 234,042 can add up right quick.
     Reply
    Edited by i'm a bottle at 12/15/09 12:38 AM i'm a bottle was starred i'm a bottle was unstarred
    Image of onebadclam onebadclam
    12/15/09

    In reply to How Did the Bush White House Generate 234,042 Emails Per Day?
    Lolcats. Nothing but Lolcats.
     Reply
    onebadclam was starred onebadclam was unstarred
    Image of raincoaster raincoaster
    12/15/09

    In reply to How Did the Bush White House Generate 234,042 Emails Per Day?
    Yep, forwarded "FUNNY!!!1!" emails and an awful lot of "I gave you my bank details, but the money transfer hasn't shown up yet. Was Nigeria's internet down?"
     Reply
    raincoaster was starred raincoaster was unstarred
    Image of Lucky Lucky
    12/15/09

    @raincoaster: I'm sure a lot of them responded to the offers for natural male enhancement as well.
     Reply
    Lucky was starred Lucky was unstarred
    Image of Claire Buoyant Claire Buoyant
    12/15/09

    @raincoaster: Yahoo Groups. Some groups can generate huge amounts of emails. I've had to turn off notifications from a few myself because the incoming volume became unmanageable.
     Reply
    Claire Buoyant was starred Claire Buoyant was unstarred
    Image of raincoaster raincoaster
    12/15/09

    @Claire Buoyant: Now THERE's a metaphor.
     Reply
    raincoaster was starred raincoaster was unstarred
    Image of hotpinklovesofa hotpinklovesofa
    12/03/09

    In reply to Facebook's New 'Privacy' Scheme Smells Like an Anti-Privacy Plot
    I never got on board with Facebook or any of the other ones but I can say it's officially over when my mother, who can barely use the computer, is on there now with a bunch of friends. I just found this out this morning when I got one of those automatic e-mail friend requests from her account. Yawn. If I need you to know something I've got e-mail, text and phone, otherwise, I'll keep my privacy thanks. I do like Twitter, although I just use it to follow people/groups.
     Reply
    hotpinklovesofa was starred hotpinklovesofa was unstarred
    Image of Shadowlayer Shadowlayer
    12/03/09

    In reply to Facebook's New 'Privacy' Scheme Smells Like an Anti-Privacy Plot
    Guess Zuck wants to outsource "girls of FB exposed" to the entire world...

    But seriously, why is he so obssesed with trying to be twitter? specially considering FB is closer to what a real business should be.
     Reply
    Shadowlayer was starred Shadowlayer was unstarred
    Image of Penscribe Penscribe
    12/02/09

    In reply to Facebook's New 'Privacy' Scheme Smells Like an Anti-Privacy Plot
    Considering you can join a network and block users from viewing your profile, I don't understand why Facebook is doing away with the option due to "privacy" concerns. I think you're on to something, Ryan.
     Reply
    Penscribe was starred Penscribe was unstarred
    Image of Urbania Urbania
    12/02/09

    In reply to Facebook's New 'Privacy' Scheme Smells Like an Anti-Privacy Plot
    Keeping up with revisions to FB privacy settings : My second full-time job.
     Reply
    Urbania was starred Urbania was unstarred
    Image of daveyjonesisdead daveyjonesisdead
    12/02/09

    In reply to Facebook's New 'Privacy' Scheme Smells Like an Anti-Privacy Plot
    I log onto Facebook, I see that a distant friend from grade school has been busy in Farmville, I log off of Facebook. If you can build a business model on that, god bless you.
     Reply
    daveyjonesisdead was starred daveyjonesisdead was unstarred
    Image of sparkyl sparkyl
    12/02/09

    @daveyjonesisdead: Don't foget Farkle and Mafia Wars. God people, get a life! Hide, hide, hide, hide.
     Reply
    sparkyl was starred sparkyl was unstarred
    Image of tongue-tied tongue-tied
    12/02/09

    @daveyjonesisdead: They make money by aggregating and selling data about users. Mostly for marketing, market research, that sort of thing, although it doesn't necessarily end there. They may make some money from those stupid, annoying ads, but I doubt that's the biggest element of their revenue stream.
     Reply
    If_I_Had_a_Poodle promoted this comment tongue-tied was starred tongue-tied was unstarred
    Image of If_I_Had_a_Poodle If_I_Had_a_Poodle
    12/02/09

    @tongue-tied: Word. Don't play the games.
     Reply
    If_I_Had_a_Poodle was starred If_I_Had_a_Poodle was unstarred
    Image of Cynner Cynner
    12/02/09

    In reply to Facebook's New 'Privacy' Scheme Smells Like an Anti-Privacy Plot
    How about they just make FB work without all the "oops, an error has occurred..."

    How about being able to view photo's in a group that someone posted that are of interest to you, and being able to hit the BACK button and return to the originating point -- NOT the beginning of the news feed.

    How about making some upgrades to the network so that during busy times of the day when all the 40-somethings log in to check what's happening in the world that the NETWORK actually has enough gas to display pages?

    Oh wait, we need to change security aspects first before blasting even more nonsense and information out to everyone on our existing systems.
     Reply
    Hiroine Protagonist promoted this comment Cynner was starred Cynner was unstarred
    Image of Inescapable Picnic Inescapable Picnic
    12/02/09

    In reply to Facebook's New 'Privacy' Scheme Smells Like an Anti-Privacy Plot
    How exactly does Facebook make more money by convincing people to make the data world-readable? It just exposes it to shitty social screen-scrapers who compete with Facebook to sell ads. This conspiracy theory has no motive.
     Reply
    Michael Bauser promoted this comment Inescapable Picnic was starred Inescapable Picnic was unstarred
    Image of Michael Bauser Michael Bauser
    12/03/09

    @Inescapable Picnic: Supposedly, it's about "realtime search." Twitter has convinced a lot of tech "experts" that the ability to see what milllions of people with too much time on their hands are tweeting about is a valuable tool for measuring public opinion and finding out what's popular.

    And by "useful," they mean "monetizable," although the only people who've made any money off the idea would be the start-ups that create Twitter search engines and sell them to bigger companies.

    Facebook wants a piece of that imaginary market. If they trick users into making all of their status updates and shared links/videos/whatevers public info, Facebook will have a mass of alleged zeitgeist they can sell to corporations. Facebook doesn't really care if some Joe Schmoe in Peoria can read your status updates; they care if Nike, Pepsi, and General Motors can.
     Reply
    Michael Bauser was starred Michael Bauser was unstarred
    Image of Inescapable Picnic Inescapable Picnic
    12/03/09

    @Michael Bauser: If it's public, corporations don't need to pay for it. They just dip into the API like anyone else. All Facebook gets is the top branding as the biggest pool with the most popular free-swim. In fact, where once Pepsi could only get at me by paying Facebook for targeted advertising based on my unseen profile info, Pepsi could instead walk away with my data and not pay anything, and market directly to me.
     Reply
    Inescapable Picnic was starred Inescapable Picnic was unstarred
    Image of Trai_Dep Trai_Dep
    12/02/09

    In reply to Facebook's New 'Privacy' Scheme Smells Like an Anti-Privacy Plot
    What I'd like to see in FB, and which would be great for members, is being able to create groups that are stand-alone networks. So, say, my Lushes group can see and post amongst each other picts, updates and comments that Family can't (and vice-versa). Each network would see a flow of information, but not other groups' info flows.
    And, the ability to add one person to multiple groups (work, school or friends, school and friends, work and school..., say).
    Right now, my only option is to block ALL trinkets to a specific group, which leaves suspicious gaps on my page (Really, Mom, you DON'T want to see me doing my half-naked Jiggy Dance on the Go-Go stage at 4AM, even though you think you do).

    It's such a common sense way to do things that I suspect that FB doesn't do this on purpose, all the more to propagate personal data. Which might be better for their IPO, but lousy for their long-term success since Moms (and potential bosses) are instead completely locked out.

    I suspect that, like Regional settings, FB doesn't like its members to be selective with who sees what, and rather than delivering what users want, works against it. No successful company has enjoyed long-term success (without breaking Anti-Trust law).
     Reply
    Trai_Dep was starred Trai_Dep was unstarred
    Image of iplaudius iplaudius
    12/02/09

    In reply to Facebook's New 'Privacy' Scheme Smells Like an Anti-Privacy Plot
    Regional-network privacy is meaningless. Anything you can share with all of New York you can share with the world.

    If you like regions as a way to group your friends, you can create Lists representing different regions. Since Facebook allows friends to be assigned to more than one List, you can even have overlapping regions (for example, city and state membership; or, multiple cities for friends who move around).
     Reply
    iplaudius was starred iplaudius was unstarred
    Image of tigolbitties tigolbitties
    12/02/09

    @iplaudius: but i have to make it! it was so convenient when say - attending a wedding in houston - to search (which took fucking forever since regions got hidden in the bowels of FB) for my friends who were there!
     Reply
    tigolbitties was starred tigolbitties was unstarred
    Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

Login

Enter your username and password.

Please enter a username.
Please enter your password.
logging in
Login via Facebook | Sign Up | Forgot Password?

Reset Password

Please enter your email address to have your password reset.

Please enter your email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
requesting password reset

Register

Registering will give you a user profile and the ability to add other users as friends. To become a commenter, however, you need to audition.

Want to know more? Consult the Comment FAQ and legal terms.

Please enter a username.
Please enter a password.
Please confirm your password.
Passwords are not identical.
Please enter a valid email address.
registration sent, waiting for reply

Submit Your Comment

You don't need to login to comment. Just enter your email address below.

See how your address will be displayed in the Comment FAQ.

Please enter a valid email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
logging in

Login with your Facebook or Gawker account.

Sign up here.



  • Archives
  • About
  • Advertising
  • Legal
  • Help
  • Report a Bug
  • FAQ
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.