Jump to content

TheWorldNewsOrg

NSA Chief ‘Perplexed’ That Twitter Won’t Share Key Data

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

TheWorldNewsOrg -
admin -
2
527

Top Posters


Recommended Posts


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By admin
      Twitter has posted a draft deepfake policy. For now, its plan is to place a notice next to tweetfakes, warn users before sharing, or add information explaining “why various sources believe the media is synthetic or manipulated.” Twitter’s asking the public to provide feedback. 
    • By admin
      Forums, like email, is one of those "killer applications" that made the Internet so powerful. Social media came along and it appeared that forums would be pushed aside as "old technology" like IRC chat etc...
      Using the more modern forums though, such as this one, is a different experience than the forums 1.0 of the past.
      Videos can now easily be embedded with just a click (just like Facebook and Twitter) and there are even more options for editing text than possible on FB currently.
      Images are very easily shareable now on forums compared to previous years.
      I will posit that social media made forum 1.0 technology to innovate and keep up. 
      Going forward people may soon remember how refreshing categories and topics can be versus the firehose of information people typically get on a FB newsfeed which their algorithims select what you see. (think big brother 2.0)
      There is also the possibility of allowing people to talk about things they don't want thier real names attached to. The USA was started in part due to "anonymous free speech". At times it is necessary. Granted, Twitter offers this already but forums had this 25 years ago and still do.
      Forums like this one are also innovating with ideas on how to learn more from social media's success with such things as status updates etc...
      Will we someday see the resurgence of massive forums where information is exchanged without a nauseating newsfeed?
      Enjoy!
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      SOCIAL NETWORKS WALK a fine line between being a useful tool and a crippling addiction. Whether you want your free time back or don’t like your information scattered about on the internet, you may be considering deactivating some accounts. Wanting to delete your account is one thing, but actually being able to hit the delete button is another story. Social media outlets make money off of you and your information, so it shouldn’t come as a surprise that they don’t want to let you go. Because of this, the biggest networks have made it overly complicated to delete your account. But if you are set on getting rid of them, here’s what you’ll have to do.
      Facebook
      You’ve had your Facebook account for about a decade, and in that time you’ve posted a little too much personal information. Maybe you’re just sick of all the baby pictures and slightly offensive status updates your friends are sharing. You’ve had enough.
      If you’ve ever deactivated your account, you may have noticed that everything goes back to normal the next time you log in, as if nothing has happened. That’s because deactivating your Facebook account is not the same as deleting it. When you deactivate your account, you are just hiding your information from searches and your Facebook friends. Although nothing is visible on the site, your account information remains intact on Facebook’s servers, eagerly awaiting your return.
      Even so, deactivating your account is still a complex process. Go into your settings and click General. At the bottom, you'll find Manage your Account. From there, click on "Deactivate your account" and type in your password. Before you're completely off the hook, Facebook shows you photos of all the "friends" you'll miss ("Callie will miss you", "Phoebe will miss you", "Ben will miss you") followed by a survey asking you to detail your reasons for leaving. Get through that, click Deactivate, and you're good to go.
      Now, to permanently delete your account, you'll need to learn where the delete option resides. The easiest way to find it is by clicking the "Quick Help" icon in the top-right corner, then the "Search" icon. When you see the search field, type “delete account.” You'll see a list of search results. Click on "How do I permanently delete my account?" and Facebook will give you the obscure instructions to “log into your account and let us know.” In this case, “let us know” is code for “delete my account,” so click on that link. From here, the final steps are clear: Enter your password and solve the security captcha, and your request to permanently delete your account is underway.
      Yes, you read that right—it's just a request. Facebook delays the deletion process for a few days after you submit your request, and will cancel your request if you log into your account during that time period. You know, just in case you change your mind. It's crucial that you don't visit Facebook during this waiting period. Delete the app from your phone.
      If you want to delete your account but don't want to lose all your account information, download all your crucial data first. The information you can download includes everything from the photos and statuses you post, to the ads you’ve clicked and the IP addresses you’ve used. The list of what’s included is extensive, but you can view it in its entirety here. Also, due to the nature of this data, you’ll want to keep it in a safe place.
      To download your account, go into Settings> General Account Settings > Download a copy of your Facebook dataand then click “Start My Archive.” When your download is ready, Facebook will send you an email with a link to download. For added security, this link will expire after a few days, so download it quickly.
      Instagram
      Even though it’s such a mobile-first service, Instagram doesn’t let you delete your account through the app. Instead, you’ll have to log into your Instagram account via the web in order to delete it.
      Like Facebook, navigating through Instagram’s settings will only give you the option to temporarily disable your account. Disabling your account will hide your profile, photos, likes, and comments from the platform. Find the disable option by clicking the person icon in the top right corner and selecting Edit Profile. At the bottom of the page, you’ll see the option to temporarily disable your account.
      If you want to get rid of it for good, you’ll have to enter “https://instagram.com/accounts/remove/request/permanent/” into your browser's address bar. Once you’re on that page, enter in your password and click “Permanently delete my account.”
      In the past, Instagram users have reported that they are prompted to enter their phone number when deleting their account. Luckily, it seems like this is no longer necessary.
      Twitter
      It takes a lot of time and effort to maintain a well-curated Twitter account, but the good news is that deleting your account doesn’t require as much work.
      Before you delete your Twitter account, you may want to download your archive. This will include all your tweets in a chronological order, which is great if you want to relive your first tweet, or see all those unanswered tweets you sent to celebrities. To download your archive, click your profile icon, go to Settings, then click on “Request your archive.” It’ll take some time for Twitter to get your archive ready, but when it is, you’ll be sent an email with a download link that will give you a .zip file.
      Once you have your downloaded copy, you can proceed with deleting your account. Log in to your Twitter, go into your account settings, then scroll to the bottom and click “Deactivate my account.” After that, you’ll be prompted to enter your password, and once you do so your account will be deactivated.
      Keep in mind that your data isn’t actually deleted for another 30 days. This window gives you the opportunity to revive your account if you choose. Once the 30 day period is up, Twitter will begin deleting your account. According to the company's Privacy Policy, this could take a few weeks.
      Snapchat
      Maybe you’re sick of seeing who’s besties with who according to the app’s Friend Emoji guide. Maybe you’re one of many Snapchat users converting to Instagram, despite Snapchat’s radically different function. In any case, if you decide to delete your Snapchat account, here’s how.
      Open the app and click on your profile icon in the top left corner. From there, go to Settings in the top-right corner. Go down to Support, which is found under More Information, and you’ll be lead to a search engine. Enter “Delete my account” and you'll see the instructions as a search result. It’s pretty straightforward from there. Like Twitter, Snapchat allows you 30 days to reactivate your account before it’s deleted forever.
      The Rest
      While there are a lot of social media sites out there, few are as sticky as the ones mentioned above. If you are looking to delete any of your numerous accounts, the best places to start are in your user settings, or on the company’s support/FAQ page. From there you’ll be able to find the necessary path to deleting your account. Shortcuts for these web forms can be found here for LinkedIn, Google+, and Pinterest.
      https://www.wired.com/story/how-to-delete-your-facebook-instagram-twitter-snapchat/
    • By The Librarian
      Twitter staff have been caught on camera revealing that the company has direct access to - and monetises - some of its users most private information. Hidden-camera conversations with Twitter engineers were conducted by the undercover journalism group 'Project Veritas'.
    • By admin
      A Twitter employee and other reliable sources have confirmed that the social media giant is quietly censoring accounts using what's called Shadow Banning, (also called Ghost Banning, Stealth Banning, or Hell Banning) which is a method to prevent users' posts from showing up on others' timelines, all the while the person being censored usually doesn't notice. It's the Memory Hole from George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, which is why many are tweeting the hashtag
    • By TheWorldNewsOrg
      Massive Ransomware Attack Hits 99 Countries!



      World News
    • By TheWorldNewsOrg
      With it's recent move to handle customer service via Twitter... this brings up the above question.
      I have wondered for a long time why Apple has never entered the social media game. Maybe they wanted to let it play out first? Maybe they wanted to watch the continued demise of Google +?

      I have been saying for over a year that I expect Apple will buy Twitter and will even more tightly integrate it into it's OS's.
      What do you think? Why have they stayed out for so long?
       
  • Forum Statistics

    61,689
    Total Topics
    114,597
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,511
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Rosjes128
    Newest Member
    Rosjes128
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • For 2010 to 2019, it was 213 times for those years. But this includes the superspike for the 100 year anniversary when both 2013 and 2014 included 121 between them, representing more than half of the decade in just those two years. If those two years had been normal years, the total would have been just 213-121+9+9=110. 2013 and 2014 included the preparation and finale of a big push for a 1914 centennial. And maybe it's just me, but I have a feeling that it fell kind of flat. There was another of these "anniversaries" (70th) that was built up in 1983 and 1984, where that decade's yearly average was doubled in '83 and tripled in '84 -- very similar to what happened in 2013 and 2014 when that average was quadrupled in 2013 and then septupled in 2014. (BTW, if you made a chart that broke this into 5 year intervals, a trend would seem much more obvious.) Still, I don't think it's being slowly phased out. I think that it gets mentioned less as it seems less important, and less practical to our current issues. It is no longer a field service "draw" based on the generation that would not die out as it would have been in 1983/4 when the generation meant something else. Once something has lost some of its importance, someone will start reconsidering whether it was ever that important at all, and this might encourage a reconsideration of the Gentile Times doctrine into a simpler, more Biblical teaching. (Just my opinion of course.) My sentiments exactly! I noticed. I was speaking about giving evidence. You should have. It would provide even more evidence for what I was saying. You are the only one I know who repeatedly tries to call me an "expert." I have never claimed this about myself. I just happen to have had several assignments that gave me an opportunity to read all of Russell's writings in the Bethel Library between about 1977 and 1982. And I have enjoyed reading further and refreshing my memory on some of this now that almost everything Russell wrote is so easily accessible online, and checkable against my physical library that contains most (but not all) of Russell's writings.
    • You are right. I was equating the importance not so much in the number of times it is mentioned, but that it is mentioned at all! I just tried to create a graph, but alas, since I've never done one either in word or excel, I failed miserably. I got the horizontal axis right, but I just can't find how to create the vertical axis and how to change the data (numbers) for the vertical axis so I completely messed up. In any case, the chart would show that since 1950 Watchtowers, the mention of 1914 has a sharp downward trend. During 1950 to 1959, it was mentioned 891 times, and during 2000-2009 it was mentioned 216 times. I don't have data for the years 2010 to 2019. So comparatively there is a big difference, but it still seems like too many mentions, if we are thinking along the lines of it slowly being phased out. In my opinion anyway....  
    • I just woke up startled, from my afternoon nap. I had a really scary nightmare, about the Presidential Impeachment effort now going on. I dreamed I was a Democrat Congressman, and in the dream I thought I was possessed by a demon that controlled me like a puppet. And in fighting that double whammy of being a Democrat Congressman, and a demon, I was trying to fight the evil that possessed me. I thought "Could it be that we are just whiney bullies, completely divorced from reality, trying to railroad and frame a man for crimes that do not even exist, but are merely policy differences between adversaries?" I thought "Could it be that this is just a vendetta, for his unspeakable crime of making us and all out friends look like complete fools, in predicting Hillary would win in a landslide of historic proportions?" I thought "Could it be that our hatred for this man, and his continuous string of accomplishing what he promised to do in his campaign is making us hate him even more, giving us NOTHING to run on in 2020?" I thought " Could it be that this unfair sham of a trial to get him impeached is merely to mortally wound him so he will lose the 2020 Presidential Election, especially since every one of our candidates are either senile, or bat-crap crazy .... or both?" And then I came to the unconsious realization ( ... as I was in fact dreaming ...) that "NAAAAH! ... merely a spot of indigestion."        
    • Nice try! Nothing has changed with word manipulation. Face it, its was you, JTR, TTH, Anna that get people banned. But here we go, I prove you wrong, and now you're using it as an excuse to ban. So, let's not contradict yourself, why people get banned because of spamming. It doesn't have anything to do with being rude or anything else. It has to do with people here not wanting to be proved wrong. I don't wish to give anything. I just don't like manipulating other peoples words to come out with a false claim. I could go even further about Russell's spoken words. Put you're the researcher and ranking expert here. Your supposed to know all that already.
    • You are going to have to do some serious explaining, to justify that statement, as it makes no sense at all. Further, if Thor is the reaction you get when eating a Thanksgiving Day meal, you need to take some Athpirin.
    • Watch out, you just admitted that it was you who got people banned from this forum. And up until now, I'm sure no one had any idea that it was you getting yourself banned all those times. 🙄 You said: "Russell didn't care for the Pyramid scheme" and now it appears you wish to give, as evidence, the fact that Russell wasn't sure if the Pyramid indicated anything for the year 1910. If you read what Russell said, however, he claimed that the Pyramid perfectly supported 1874, 1878, 1881 and 1914. He had several times predicted related events timed to about 1910, but he could not distinctly find them in the Pyramid, as he claimed to have found for other dates. Even in 1911, just months after this 1910 question was answered, Russell said in the March 15, 1911 Watch Tower: "No doubt all of our readers have read STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES, Vol. III, the last chapter of which describes the Pyramid and sets forth much of the wonderful symbolic teachings shown in its construction. It shows the Pyramid to be in exact harmony with the Bible. Indeed, some, after reading this volume, have referred to the Great Pyramid as 'The Bible in Stone.'" Just because Russell didn't care for how well the scheme supported 1910, doesn't mean he didn't care about how it was in EXACT harmony, he claimed, with 1874, 1878, 1881 and 1914. The 1917 Finished Mystery book bragged about how Russell's chronology was written before he ever saw the Pyramid, and before he even saw any of Edgar's abundant evidences of the accuracy of Bible chronology in the Pyramid. In 1920 Rutherford went to see it, and the Watch Tower in Dec 15 reported that all the other pyramids were built under the direction of Satan except "the Great Pyramid, which was built under the Lord's supervision." In the June 15 1922 Watch Tower Rutherford published that the "present-truth chronology . . . the correspondency of dozens of measurements proves that the same God designated both pyramid and plan. . ." By 1924, it was claimed of course in the May 21, 1924 Golden Age that the Pyramid, the "Scientific Bible" verified the importance of 1874, 1914 and 1925. (This addition of the 1925 date is actually kind of hilarious if you have carefully read Charles Piazzi Smyth and Joseph Seiss, and see how Russell had re-used their material.) Also in 1924, The Way to Paradise, showed the Pyramid with the caption "GOD'S PLAN WRITTEN IN STONE." Here, it was conjectured that Shem probably built it. Russell had conjectured it was Melchizedek. This was repeated in 1925, and as late as 1926, the Watch Tower said that "advanced Bible Students believe that the Great Pyramid at Gizeh is the witness to the Lord in the Land of Egypt mentioned by the Prophet. (Isa. 19:19)" It was not until 1928 that it became a monument built "under the direction of Satan the Devil." It was now Satan's Bible and no longer "Jehovah's Witness" in stone. This was one of the reasons for the controversy when Rutherford insisted that this false information in Volume III, continue to be sold and advertised in 1929, 1930, 1931, 1932, etc. And still made available for sale by the Society even in the 1940's. Special deluxe editions of the Studies in the Scriptures were still mentioned in the Kingdom Ministry as late as July 1967.
    • I get exactly what you mean, kinda like these?  "Families are free to report abuse to the authorities"  "leave it in Jehova's hands" "click on jw.orb" "the answers are on the website" "That's for Jehova to decide"  "we don't shun former members"  "we only had the library card"        
  • Popular Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.