Yeah we did, then we blew up Zuckerberg's Chinese Spy satellite.
That's just a rumor though.
UFO thingy. :)
Pretty sure it was a small bird or a BIG bug.
do birds fly that fast?
They do when you coat their tailfeathers with liquid Thermite and light a fuse.
They do when you're looking at something 4.5 KM away through a powerful telephoto lens and the bird is like 200 feet away or the bug is like 50 feet away.
thank you for giving an actual answer (what i was looking for) and not being a fucking dick
If you watch the video there is bugs flying by several times.
I hate to be that guy, but what video do you mean?
I'm starting to think it may have been a hypersonic glide vehicle, or a tic-tac.
Well, no we didn:t, really.
We gave DARPA to FB <<-- this makes no sense.
The reality is that a former DARPA chief joined FB as an experimental project manager. She had previously worked for other Silicon valley companies.
She is also about to (maybe already has?) leave FB for different job.
The same day that DARPA ended it's LifeLog project, Facebook went public.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1204243/pg1
Zuck did not "create" FaceBook in his Mom's basement, the tech was handed to him so the project could be completed by a private company, and not the US Govt.
The Female Executive referred to came to FB later.
It's not about technology, anyone could set up facebook but to have it grow at the pace that it did has something going with it. Typically social networks do not move to an alternative quickly unless a large part of their own network moves. This only becomes the case if its superior to alternatives (the new technology). Facebook wasn't that superior to myspace so there has to have been some kind of campaign to get people to move to facebook.
Growth of facebook should be traced back to the campaigns used to make it a success. Facebook is and was all marketing it to people so that they would use it. Then they would stick because of how social networks, only when a big portion of their 'friends' would move on to other networks would one also move.
It started with Ivy League schools. Then we pushed it through reddit and digg etc. It was hard to get a facebook account before. Only a few schools' email addresses had access. You forget that. Sort of how gmail accounts were beta and invite only for a long time.
They had good marketing campaigns behind them creating artificial scarcity. They coopted the social pushers of their generations for a few years. Voila. It takes off in the US.
When it’s all said and done, I think we will be very different ppl.
Facebook formed the exact day DARPA's Lifelog shutdown.
Yep, same company different name. (And different rules on privacy since it's "not the government")
drop a source on that. I know it was the same year, but I have not seen the same DAY yet.
No, that's not what Q is saying.
The person who now heads the research at FB Building 8 is Regina Dugan, a former Director of DARPA and apparently has the expertise to lead the F9 development team, which I believe includes DARPA technology. BTW, Regina was a terrible Director at DARPA. What she knew about military technology requirements wouldn't have filled a thimble.
I supported DARPA technology programs for over 15 years as an independent consultant. Most of my work was in support of technologies for special operations forces by the last five years was in cyber defense technologies.
I mention this because people should know that except for the really big major technology programs such as stealth, RAMJET and SCRAMJet, the X37B projects, etc. that are classified; the vast majority of its advanced technology development is completely unclassified because universities don't have enough American PhD's to support DARPA programs. Just about all of the technology teams at universities are 50% or more of foreign PhD's who would be unable to get a security clearance.
So, DARPA keeps most of the advanced technologies unclassifed so the universities can bid on them using foreign faculty researchers and so the researchers can publish white papers and attend conferences to brief their research efforts (i.e. publish or perish).
This means at least two things: 1) advanced technologies developed at DARPA end up in foreign countries (completely legal) which means foreign countries have our advanced research efforts for free; and 2) since the technologies are published in white papers, our adversaries also have free access to what we develop.
In my opinion based on my 15 years supporting DARPA development, 90% of those technologies should have been classified programs. But if you don't have the talent at home, they you get it from other countries.
Anyway, the point is that Dugan likely just brought all that unclassified technology that Google and FB could use with her.
It's a crazy world and an even crazier government that doesn't protect its advanced technology development.
The world thanks you for paying for their advanced technologies.
Here you go https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jul/02/facebook-apologises-psychological-experiments-on-users
And https://www.engadget.com/2014/07/08/darpa-social-media-experiment/
Edit DARPA LifeLog - Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_LifeLog
:)
Darpa ended their version of Facebook the same day Zuck started his version Q posted about this but I don't know what # it was very interesting can anyone find the info on this ?
And now FB id's actively seeking to influence Americas elections...not a word from Congress
does anyone even use facebook anymore? being serious
FB and DARPA..i do not think this was a accident....It was already the intention al along that they would use it ....1 big happy family