Big Names of Digital Nothing. - The Legacy

Facebook Tumor

1 A

	...
Interesting points on "Digital Culture", nobody wants to listen nor read them, it is a point on "Digital Strategy", who really cares on what others forces someone to query or navigate, culture cames from "free willy", an individual desire that someone can try to drive on some direction that is not the correct, "it is interesting" that for practice or curricula someone use "youtube" to keep on record his historical developments on speech, but "asking to be listened or seem" is quite far from reality. Another interesting topic is "who gives a shit?" on "tips"? Trending now a stupid guide on nothing, "sounds like mind disturbance on combinatorial analysis", we don't want to judge nor censor, but "pointer devices teaches where to click on a screen", unlless you are bling (lol the music is fun "Children of the Damned") the use of a tool is "navigate through the screen" doesn't seems to be complicate, "nor need all that worries about youtube agenda", not that is not important but, seems to be quite conspiratory, "how many times you need to be mention google plus or youtube" to not suffer discrimination from "the guys who want to think" that is "interesting some company agenda?". We know that youtube works, but who gives a shit? Look that shit, a television actor wants to "mythify" or "cloudify" the reputation of a company that tried and indeed was well succeed to develop a "ponzi scheme", quite similar to Facebook on influence some investors to use a product that by it self does not follows "Web Principles", diversity, query and orthogonal navigation. "Like" I am a WEB-Site and want to concentrate the content in the name of the stupidity, let's use all here, "because we are cool and hot", see that "cool is not hot" and "streams drops" aren't web design. But world is a democracy of choice, that "seems some googlers are trying to forget", maybe want to work on Facebook? stay there managing a "Ponzi Investment". Reading the article, "plug services", the argument is to consider the competitor a "pluggable service", it is a competitor, it is orthogonal, maybe "doesn't plug well", a service that doesn't fit the desired requirement, "mister anything" is not being sincere on his arguments because masquared the investor interest on saying that "it is a need you plug some third part services" that does not fit your goals. It is a chain of services that "increases the overall cost of an digital entrepreneurship". A WEB that "women" and "greens" tries to "mine the progress", because had an appolyptical approach on report readings, let decisions for the "interest opposed to scientific view", "it is a reality", some point on future "world resources will end", because was not designed to be an ethernal provider, it is not now, nor on next decades, but "there are persons that insist on such arrangement of events" to ask for money on their sacred mission of well living without effort.

...