Twitter | Search | |
Simon Fraser
Internet builder since 1998. Computer-friendly since 1982. Dog-friendly since 1970. Mostly harmless. VP Mktg,
6,832
Tweets
231
Following
30,248
Followers
Tweets
Simon Fraser Dec 9
Replying to @janelle_jporter
Because it’s a forum for emotionally-charged discussion, not open discussion. Also, I love my Vans. Best sneakers ever.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 9
Replying to @SteveAnthony
The African Queen
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 8
Replying to @Timodc
Yeah, you’re one of those terrorists who’s too soft. You plant roadside piñatas.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 8
Replying to @SteveKingIA
Hey, maybe you should take a biology class.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
The argument is not about effects. It's about necessity. Did you bother to read the article? And do you know the meaning of the word necessity?
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Get rid of air, everybody dies. Get rid of water, everybody dies. Get rid of food, everybody dies. Get rid of shelter, billions die. Get rid of cellphones, less people walk into each other on the sidewalk.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
So you’re batching cellphones in with air, water, food and shelter, huh? But I’m obtuse?? Hahahahaha.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GSarafan @SethAbramson
I’m not saying he still does. But he used to. Notice the screenshots used in the article, likely selected by the author to make him seem more like a nutjob.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GCDlAZ
Yeah that’s right. I’m playing a game. The goal of the game is to illustrate how someone has conflated 2 words that have completely different meanings.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GCDlAZ
*to
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GCDlAZ
Point the word "useless" in that tweet.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GCDlAZ
Now you're exaggerating my words. Where did I say they were useless?
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GCDlAZ
I think that's a false assumption. If the world needs to talk to you, it will wait until you're available. If the world can't wait to talk to you, then it doesn't need to talk to you.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GCDlAZ
I have wifi at home. I have wifi at work. I have wifi in most social environments where I'm not going to be conducting sensitive business. You are absolutely correct that geographic location plays a role. And most of the population of North America lives in cities.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GCDlAZ
Do it. Post "RT if you hate cancer". Then sit back and watch the effectiveness of your Twitter following in conducting a poll.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GCDlAZ
It won't get any RTs. Because it's a flawed test. You only have 67 followers. No guarantee any of them will actually see the post. You could post "RT if you hate cancer" and you'd only get 2 or 3 RTs. Does that mean only 2 or 3 people in the world hate cancer? LOL
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GCDlAZ
Should I point out the lack of a meaningful test group this post will receive when it's posted to a Twitter feed with only 67 followers?
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GCDlAZ @WIRED
The argument that cellphones are necessary is as fallacious as the argument that the right to privacy is rescinded just by owning one.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GCDlAZ @WIRED
"I personally do not" "That's just how the world has evolved." That's how *your* world has evolved because you chose a cellphone. No one is forcing you to have a cellphone. You chose it. Just like I chose VOIP and all I need is wifi, of which there is no shortage.
Reply Retweet Like
Simon Fraser Dec 7
Replying to @GCDlAZ @WIRED
Okay. The op-ed wasn’t about you. It was about tasks that the authors claim require a cellphone. But they don’t.
Reply Retweet Like