|
Super Lloyd wrote: bubble
Maybe it wants you to go to a new bubble, which gives it more revenue 
|
|
|
|
|
the algorithm is affected by kind of self fulfilling prophecies of its own?
one can perform following experiment:
1) clear the cache/history, etc, and do not login into google, so that one start from fresh.
2) do browsing for certain amount of time.
3) then one is trapped into a certain set of contents being suggested and one's world view available is narrowed down ...
4) goto 1 or break
one find that the said set of contents one end up being fed to in each iteration are not quit consistent with the previous ones, which means that the algorithm is not finding the "truth" ... instead it is defining a "reality" for the viewer
|
|
|
|
|
They accessed your webcam and the Youtube AI detected a rat in the kitchen!
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, damn! 
|
|
|
|
|
They activated your webcam and saw your kitchen.
"Rock journalism is people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk for people who can't read." Frank Zappa 1980
|
|
|
|
|
Hahaha.. that's the best explanation!
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: We all know how the Youtube (more or less) work by now...
It reinforces your bubble by targeting you with more of what you are already watching!
...and this is why I don't want targeted advertising.
"Wouldn't you rather see ads for things you're interested in?"
My immediate reaction to the implications of that is, "HELL no". I abhor the idea of getting profiled so marketers can try to sell me stuff. If I want something, I'll look it up myself, thank you very much. Don't try to "cater to my needs", I find it condescending. You're taking me for a fool and I know you have an ulterior motive.
No, I don't get along with marketing and sales people.
|
|
|
|
|
So ... yesterday I upgraded my desktop to 2004 from 1909.
And this morning, I reverted to 1909 because it refused to have anything to do with my NAS...
Anyway, it was suggested that it might work with the NAS if I used IP addressing (\\192.168.0.11\... static for the NAS) instead of named servers (\\SGNAS\...)
So I figured I'd install it on my Surface and try it.
That wasn't a quick process, but finally it's installed.
And it accesses the NAS with no changes needed. Go figure.
So I thought I'd try the fix on the desktop, and reinstalled the 2004 update.
And a few hours later ... it's talking to the NAS with no changes.
Now I'm confused! 
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft: Doing their best to not do their best.
|
|
|
|
|
Just updated my test environment (4 hours ...) to W10/2004. Apart of some Dongle driver issues no problem so far.
It does not solve my Problem, but it answers my question
Chemists have exactly one rule: there are only exceptions
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
If it's anything like what I've been seeing, the problem won't show up all the time. But if it does, that's been my solution.
I still have no idea what triggers it however. Sometimes I can go for weeks without any problem of that nature.
|
|
|
|
|
Believe it was an effort well paid of at the end, so confusion is all good. 
|
|
|
|
|
Have you included the node name in C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts or are you relying on some discovery tool / network caching? If the former, then I have no idea; if the later could it be that using the IP address caused something to pick up the node name? Do you use /persist on 'net use'?
(I'm not on 2004, yet, and have everything in \etc\hosts but still tend to use the IP address)
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: yesterday I upgraded my desktop to 2004 from 1909.
And now you have to start it with a crank?
|
|
|
|
|
When I recognized the very poor speed of our internet connection I contacted the provider. They checked and confirmed something is strange... Their idea was to send a technician, but I intervented and told them to wait with this.
First I thought it is a pending update, but while checking what process does consume the net I found it is svchost and more surprising the process consumed all upload (and not download) bandwidth.
a.) Checked which process does use the net and recognized it is svchost.
b.) Went through all possible services which are related to network and found it is DoSvc (in german it is the service "Übermittlungsoptimierung") which seems to distribute the windows updates to our neighbors.
c.) Stopped the service and everything is fine now
Any similar experiences out there?
Thank you in advance
It does not solve my Problem, but it answers my question
Chemists have exactly one rule: there are only exceptions
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe it's synching to the cloud (by default).
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
Would be a possibility. But we are very conservative in these things and do not use cloud services (at least not consciously  ). Another argument against this is that the network load lasted for hours and we really don't have that much data to share.
It does not solve my Problem, but it answers my question
Chemists have exactly one rule: there are only exceptions
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
0x01AA wrote: Went through all possible services which are related to network and found it is DoSvc (in german it is the service "Übermittlungsoptimierung") which seems to distribute the windows updates
Nice find, thanks for sharing! 
|
|
|
|
|
You are very welcome. Unfortunately I still cannot name the service in English 
Google tells me it is a common problem but for me it is very surprising that MS "does use" my internet connection to share updates 
It does not solve my Problem, but it answers my question
Chemists have exactly one rule: there are only exceptions
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
0x01AA wrote: b.) Went through all possible services which are related to network and found it is DoSvc (in german it is the service "Übermittlungsoptimierung") which seems to distribute the windows updates to our neighbors.
That rang a bell.
Under Settings, Update and Security, Delivery Optimization, there's an "Allow downloads from other PCs", with 2 options:
a) PCs on my local network
b) PCs on my local network, and PCs on the internet
The latter just seems like a bad idea.
There's an Advanced options link that seems to indicate you can limit bandwidth usage.
My neighbors can download their updates from Microsoft, and not me, thank you very much. This sounds like a feature designed to save Microsoft some bandwidth, not my neighbors', and certainly not my own.
The Activity Monitor link is also rather interesting. It does look like at least one of my PCs has been sharing updates with others inside my LAN. Which is kinda pointless as I have everything going through a WSUS instance.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, but on the other hand it (can) make sense at least for a "home network". Only one pc downloads the updates and distribute them in the "home network" _but of course not_ to the internet.
Anyway, in my case the thing is my laptop does only take update from the company network and her's seems to be evaluated to share them over the internet (similar things happend long time ago when skype used clients to manage a p2p)
(sorry for my hard to understand English )
[Edit]
Read again your message more carefully. You are right in every point 
It does not solve my Problem, but it answers my question
Chemists have exactly one rule: there are only exceptions
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
didn't cause any problems for me performance wise, but I had a few months of crazy upload stats on my router when that setting accidentally was enabled on one of my systems.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your feedback.
It does not solve my Problem, but it answers my question
Chemists have exactly one rule: there are only exceptions
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I just made an appointment to meet a jeweller tomorrow, to discuss repairs to Herself's engagement ring.
And I signed off by saying "I'll see you then, and bring my own mask and gloves!"
Six months ago, I'd have been met by the police, not the jeweller - but today, I get an expression of relief and a LOL ...
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Talking about rings, I heard a story about the song "Ring of fire", I checked Wikipedia and surely it says:
Quote: In 2004, Merle Kilgore, who shared writing credit for the song with June Carter, proposed licensing the song for a hemorrhoid cream commercial. When performing the song live, Kilgore would often "mock dedicate" the song to the "makers of Preparation H".[9] However, June's heirs were not of a like mind, and they refused to allow the song to be licensed for the ad.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
