Let’s not forget possibility number 3, that someone lied to him that we are doing it. How would he ever know?

It probably depends on how personalized the ads are. It should come as no surprise that targeted ads have been a thing as long as ads have existed. Coke ads during family shows, alcohol ads (you’ll be cool if you use our product) on MTV, etc.

There are already a number of algorithms to deliver one ad for a product over another, based on likely demographics. Streaming has greatly increased this, since specific demographic details are immediately and directly available when the ad is shown. I won’t get the same as on Hulu that you get.

As for generating ads on-the-fly, that seems unlikely. Few ads are fully generated at all, let alone in response to demographics or the specific viewer(s).

There are also risks when deploying ads without vetting. Some of these viewers will be dressed as Nazis, and will happily share the video to everyone.

reassemble

I’m sure that was autocorrect, but it feels awfully portentous.

Even then it can be dangerous. People move around, and people talk. The people burned can show up again later in so many different ways, in both official and unofficial capacities. I currently work near (different teams, same org) several of my former co-workers, purely by coincidence.

It wouldn’t be a career-ender if I’d screwed them over in the past, but it does make things easier that they have positive experiences with me.

AKA “The Nixon”

Do you have a source on that? It sounds evil enough for IBM, but logistically too problematic to be worthwhile.

The story I’d heard was not that it’s a transcription error, but closer to a pun. Readers would be familiar with the term for a ship’s rope, and the minor linguistic shift highlighted the absurdity of such an idea.

Interesting though about translations to other languages. I’ll have to dig further on the subject.

Republicans (and people in general, TBH) don’t make the same mistake twice.

They make it 6 or 7 times, at least.