Pages: 1 ... 146 147 [148] 149 150 ... 331   Go Down

Author Topic: Trump II  (Read 915330 times)

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2940 on: May 28, 2017, 11:37:36 am »

Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2941 on: May 28, 2017, 11:47:37 am »

... Business makes it OK to arm a group you consider the most dangerous?  In particular the origin of the most devastating attacks?

Again, not sure if you deliberately pretend that you do not see the difference or you genuinely do not understand it. I also provided several other reasons, besides business (e.g., Iran), but you latch onto just one. You are now putting me in a position to appear to defend a country and society/ideology that I despise on many levels, but here it goes:

There is a difference between a government and (some of) its people. There are Americans that fight alongside ISIS or commit terrorist acts on their behalf. Do we blame American government for that? SA clearly denounces terrorism (at least officially):

"Saudi Arabia declares Muslim Brotherhood 'terrorist group'"

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26487092

Quote
This is the strongest warning so far to Saudis fighting with extremist groups in Syria.
The Saudis clearly now fear similar blowback from having encouraged jihadist rebels there as they faced a decade ago when militants returning home attacked domestic targets.
The statement also bans an exhaustive list of activities - including meetings, funding and online communication - that could be seen as supporting such groups.

We do not know for sure if SA is saying one thing and secretly doing something else. We do know they are actively peddling wahhabi teachings, with its medieval (original) interpretations of the Muslim faith, the same one that serves as a justification for ISIS. Their defense might be the difference between words and actions, i.e., they are encouraging wahhabi faith, not wahhabi terrorism. Just like here, where you are free to say whatever you want, but not free to act on it.

In other words, dealing with SA is a complex and complicated balancing act. By the way, that goes way beyond Trump, through both Dem and Reps administrations, for decades.




Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2942 on: May 28, 2017, 11:52:30 am »

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/methodology/

Ah, "methodology"! Sounds so scientific and objective. Let's see what their first sentence says (emphasis mine):

Quote
When determining bias there isn’t any true scientific formula that is 100% objective.  There are objective measures that can be calculated, but ultimately there will be some degree of subjective judgement to determine these.

Enough said. At least they admit it. You don't.

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2943 on: May 28, 2017, 01:32:34 pm »

... it was honestly just a shortening that would typically happen here (Australia).  Actually, Slob, Slobbo, or Dan, would all be pretty normal here.

I'll go with Slobo from now on, and again my sincere apologies...

No problem, thanks.

I often use Dan with Starbuck baristas, so that they don't butcher it writing in on the cup, or trying to pronounce aloud. Something like this:  :)

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2944 on: May 28, 2017, 01:46:26 pm »

Ah, "methodology"! Sounds so scientific and objective. Let's see what their first sentence says (emphasis mine):

Enough said. At least they admit it. You don't.

If only you could read further than what you erroneously think confirms your own bias, you'd see how silly your remark is. Not 100% objective means that some news can have some bias in one aspect of the metrics used, and no bias, or in another direction, for another metric. On average (which is why they score on a number of criteria, like political bias, how factual the information is, and if the media if they provide links to credible, verifiable sources) the result will be, just that, an average, based on objective criteria.  They apply an equal weighting on the importance of the scoring parameters for determining bias, one could also use other weightings or more parameters which would also give objective results.

So either you are (convincingly) pretending that you do not understand statistics, or you are really that ignorant.

While I can appreciate your architecture photography, I'm truly disappointed in your unconstructive trollish conduct in these matters, but feel free to go on, we live in a free world.

And to get back to the subject of the thread, despite your attempt to derail it, here's some more news from a least biased source

Senate intelligence panel requests Trump campaign documents: Washington Post
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-documents-idUSKBN18M2QF

and at the same time:

In shakeup, Trump to set up 'war room' to repel attacks over Russia probe
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-warroom-idUSKBN18M2FU

And,

Trump hits out at 'fake news' following Kushner reports
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-kushner-idUSKBN18O0G0

""It is my opinion that many of the leaks coming out of the White House are fabricated lies made up by the #FakeNews media," Trump wrote in a series of Twitter posts on Sunday.

Shortly after the tweets, Trump's Homeland Security Secretary, John Kelly, made the rounds of Sunday television news shows to praise any so-called back channel communications, especially with Russia, as "a good thing."

The White House faces mounting questions about potential ties between Russia and Trump's presidential campaign, which are also the subject of criminal and congressional investigations. Trump officials were preparing to establish a "war room" to address an issue that has begun to dominate his young presidency."


So, either it's fake news, or it is a good thing. It can't be both, can it? Well, I suppose that with Trump anything's possible.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6229
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2945 on: May 28, 2017, 02:09:01 pm »

I knew someone is is going to come back with that. These are not search engines. I do not do search on them. They are news aggregators.

And how do you think they aggregate? They use algorithms. Just like the search engines...how do you think they find what to show you? Do you honestly think they serve up the exact same set of stories for everybody? I know for a fact they everything you google about anything is a major fact in what the algorithms serve to me in google news. So how do I know this? I've got friends who work for google who have explained the basics of google algorithms. The algorithms all produce echo chambers...that's what they are designed todo and they do it too well.

You may delude yourself into believing you are getting unfiltered news, you're not.

The only way to get a randomized selection of news is to have a bunch of news sites and randomly visit them in no particular order or reason.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2946 on: May 28, 2017, 02:35:04 pm »

And how do you think they aggregate? They use algorithms. Just like the search engines...how do you think they find what to show you? Do you honestly think they serve up the exact same set of stories for everybody? ...

Asked and answered:

Quote
When I want to read about something, there is a list of articles to chose from, containing all the diverse sources. So I might check what Fox said and what HuffPost said about the same news.

I am not reading just Google news. Are you saying that Bing (which I do not use for searches) knows what I am googling? Or Apple news? And even if they did, and exchanged info among them, it is totally irrelevant, as long as I am presented with various sources for the same news.

For instance, the two stories attached in the screenshot below have, collectively, 12 sources. If you click on the "See realtime coverage" and then on "See all 2633 articles" there are...well, 2633 articles to choose from. Among the 12 on the front page, there are:

-The Hill
-WaPo
-CNN
-ABC News
-NYT
-Salt Lake Tribune
-BBC News (which I check as a separate web link as well)
-The Independent
-Axios
-euronews

If your theory is true, and Google et al "know" my political leanings, then Google would show me Fox, Braitbart, etc. (not showing at all in this case), and hide CNN, NYT, WaPo, etc.

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2947 on: May 28, 2017, 02:44:23 pm »

... I'm truly disappointed in your unconstructive trollish conduct in these matters...

Sorry that my views do not coincide with yours. Apparently, that makes them, by default, ignorant and misguided.

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2948 on: May 28, 2017, 02:50:39 pm »

Sorry that my views do not coincide with yours. Apparently, that makes them, by default, ignorant and misguided.

If you say so.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6229
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2949 on: May 28, 2017, 03:00:19 pm »

If your theory is true, and Google et al "know" my political leanings, then Google would show me Fox, Braitbart, etc. (not showing at all in this case), and hide CNN, NYT, WaPo, etc.

You completely misunderstand what the algorithms are doing...google et al couldn't care less what your political leanings are. They only care you click on their URL so you can be counted as a viewer so they can charge for advertising. The do log when and how often your IP address visits and what urls you click through to. That factor is used in the algorithm in determining what sources to feed you. If you repeatedly click through to a source more often you'll see that source more often.

So you may think you are not being led but you are...
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2950 on: May 28, 2017, 03:18:54 pm »

You completely misunderstand what the algorithms are doing...google et al couldn't care less what your political leanings are. They only care you click on their URL so you can be counted as a viewer so they can charge for advertising. The do log when and how often your IP address visits and what urls you click through to. That factor is used in the algorithm in determining what sources to feed you. If you repeatedly click through to a source more often you'll see that source more often.

So you may think you are not being led but you are...

And additionally, that information can be sold to companies like Cambridge Analytica, which will then aid paying customers with influencing the choices that people make at election time.

"SCL Group calls itself a "global election management agency"[12] known for involvement "in military disinformation campaigns to social media branding and voter targeting".[6] SCL’s involvement in the political world has been primarily in the developing world where it has been used by the military and politicians to study and manipulate public opinion and political will."

Did Cambridge Analytica influence the Brexit vote and the US election?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/04/nigel-oakes-cambridge-analytica-what-role-brexit-trump

Scary stuff, where money buys votes, while the people think they decide themselves. It's beyond Orwellian.

Cheers,
Bart

P.S. And Reuters have also been reporting on 'Cambridge Analytica' before:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-trump-australia-data-idUSKBN1710M2
« Last Edit: May 28, 2017, 03:23:25 pm by BartvanderWolf »
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2951 on: May 28, 2017, 03:53:07 pm »

Which would make you two the only two guys in the universe who are blissfully spared from the media and voting manipulation, right? You are the chosen ones, keepers of the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2952 on: May 28, 2017, 04:12:52 pm »

... Trump's Homeland Security Secretary, John Kelly, made the rounds of Sunday television news shows to praise any so-called back channel communications, especially with Russia, as "a good thing."...

About that:

Quote
Nixon in mid-1969 directed his national security adviser, Henry A. Kissinger, to establish a secret channel of communication with representatives of the North Vietnamese government in order to accelerate movement toward a settlement... commencing a process that would result twenty-seven months later in the signing of an accord ending U.S. military involvement in Southeast Asia.

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2953 on: May 28, 2017, 04:14:12 pm »

Which would make you two the only two guys in the universe who are blissfully spared from the media and voting manipulation, right? You are the chosen ones, keepers of the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Nobody is spared. Some are just more aware than others. Which is why it's also such a bad move of the FCC to repeal Net Neutrality.

U.S. FCC chairman plans fast-track repeal of net neutrality: sources
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-internet-idUSKBN1790AP

"The chairman of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission is moving quickly to replace the Obama administration's landmark net neutrality rules and wants internet service providers to voluntarily agree to maintain an open internet, three sources briefed on the meeting said Thursday.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, a Republican appointed by President Donald Trump, met on Tuesday with major telecommunications trade groups to discuss his preliminary plan to reverse the rules, the sources said.

The FCC declined to comment but Pai previously said he is committed to ensuring an open internet but feels net neutrality was a mistake.

The rules approved by the FCC under Democratic President Barack Obama in early 2015 prohibited broadband providers from giving or selling access to speedy internet, essentially a "fast lane", to certain internet services over others. As part of that change, the FCC reclassified internet service providers much like utilities."


Without such rules, (to put it simply) ISPs can decide to favor certain data providers, and give faster connections for 'selected' (paying) data providers.

Net neutrality going down in flames as FCC votes to kill Title II rules
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/05/net-neutrality-goes-down-in-flames-as-fcc-votes-to-kill-title-ii-rules/


Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2954 on: May 28, 2017, 04:20:25 pm »

About that:

Apples and oranges, different channels? One was a government channel by the national security adviser, the other appears to be designed together with the Russians to keep the US government out of the democratic checks and balances loop.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6229
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2955 on: May 28, 2017, 04:21:39 pm »

Which would make you two the only two guys in the universe who are blissfully spared from the media and voting manipulation, right? You are the chosen ones, keepers of the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Naw, of course not...but I am aware of the forces out there and do my best to keep an open mind and solicit various points of view and engage in vigorious debate.

And speaking of truth, at least I still hold that truth has importance and value...something it's clear Trump supporters have given up...in painfull point of fact, Trump supporters are immune to the truth.

Outbreak of Dunning Kruger Disease spreads to all 50 states


[edited to fix link above]
« Last Edit: May 28, 2017, 04:59:02 pm by Schewe »
Logged

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6229
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2956 on: May 28, 2017, 05:39:40 pm »

Nobody is spared. Some are just more aware than others.

Then there's this...

How Facebook's tentacles reach further than you think

Quote
Facebook's collection of data makes it one of the most influential organisations in the world. Share Lab wanted to look "under the bonnet" at the tech giant's algorithms and connections to better understand the social structure and power relations within the company.
A couple of years ago, Vladan Joler and his brainy friends in Belgrade began investigating the inner workings of one of the world's most powerful corporations.

The team, which includes experts in cyber-forensic analysis and data visualisation, had already looked into what he calls "different forms of invisible infrastructures" behind Serbia's internet service providers.

But Mr Joler and his friends, now working under a project called Share Lab, had their sights set on a bigger target.

"If Facebook were a country, it would be bigger than China," says Mr Joler, whose day job is as a professor at Serbia's Novi Sad University.
He reels off the familiar, but still staggering, numbers: the barely teenage Silicon Valley firm stores some 300 petabytes of data, boasts almost two billion users, and raked in almost $28bn (£22bn) in revenues in 2016 alone.

And yet, Mr Joler argues, we know next to nothing about what goes on under the bonnet - despite the fact that we, as users, are providing most of the fuel - for free.

"All of us, when we are uploading something, when we are tagging people, when we are commenting, we are basically working for Facebook," he says.


Part of a huge flow chart mapping the influence and connections of Mark Zuckerberg


Share Lab presents its information in minutely detailed tables and flow charts

Quote
The scale of Facebook's reach can be stated in raw numbers - but Share Lab's maps make it visceral, in a way that drawing parallels cannot.

"We haven't really got appropriate historical analogies for the tech giants," explains Dr Powles. Their powers, she continues, extend "far beyond" the likes of the East India Company and monopolies of old, such as Standard Oil.

And while many may consider the objectives of Mark Zuckerberg's empire to be rather benign, its outcomes are not always so.
Facebook, argues Dr Powles, "plays to our base psychological impulses" by valuing popularity above all else.

Not that she expects Share Lab's research to lead to a mass Facebook exodus, or a dramatic increase in the scrutiny of tech titans.
"What is most striking is the sense of resignation, the impotence of regulation, the lack of options, the public apathy," says Dr Powles. "What an extraordinary situation for an entity that has power over information - there is no greater power really."

It is this extraordinary dominance that the Share Lab team set out to illustrate.

But Mr Joler is quick to point out that even their grand maps cannot provide an accurate picture of the social media giant's capabilities.

There is no guarantee, for example, that there are not many other algorithms at work that are still heavily guarded trade secrets.

Eeeeeek! Unplug the computer :~)
Logged

Farmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2848
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2957 on: May 28, 2017, 06:00:20 pm »

Again, not sure if you deliberately pretend that you do not see the difference or you genuinely do not understand it. I also provided several other reasons, besides business (e.g., Iran), but you latch onto just one. You are now putting me in a position to appear to defend a country and society/ideology that I despise on many levels, but here it goes:

There is a difference between a government and (some of) its people. There are Americans that fight alongside ISIS or commit terrorist acts on their behalf. Do we blame American government for that? SA clearly denounces terrorism (at least officially):

"Saudi Arabia declares Muslim Brotherhood 'terrorist group'"

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26487092

We do not know for sure if SA is saying one thing and secretly doing something else. We do know they are actively peddling wahhabi teachings, with its medieval (original) interpretations of the Muslim faith, the same one that serves as a justification for ISIS. Their defense might be the difference between words and actions, i.e., they are encouraging wahhabi faith, not wahhabi terrorism. Just like here, where you are free to say whatever you want, but not free to act on it.

In other words, dealing with SA is a complex and complicated balancing act. By the way, that goes way beyond Trump, through both Dem and Reps administrations, for decades.

I totally agree with what you're saying above, but how do you reconcile that with the simplistic support of just banning all Muslims or calling the whole religion bad (unless you want to call all religions bad, in which case different discussion)?
Logged
Phil Brown

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6229
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2958 on: May 28, 2017, 06:14:27 pm »

A follow up from Macron...



Macron says his white-knuckle handshake with Trump was a 'moment of truth'

Quote
PARIS (AP) — French President Emmanuel Macron says his now famous white-knuckle handshake showdown with U.S. counterpart Donald Trump was "a moment of truth" — designed to show that he's no pushover.

Macron told a Sunday newspaper in France that "my handshake with him, it wasn't innocent."

Macron added: "One must show that you won't make small concessions, even symbolic ones, but also not over-publicize things, either."



:~)
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Trump II
« Reply #2959 on: May 28, 2017, 07:09:16 pm »

... the simplistic support of just banning all Muslims or calling the whole religion bad (unless you want to call all religions bad, in which case different discussion)?

First, I do consider all religions bad, some more than others, depending on historical context. For the rest, I am not sure what/who you had in mind. Me or...? For the record, I do not call for banning all Muslims or saying the whole religion is bad.

I have acquaintances of very different religious backgrounds. In the attached picture from a Christmas (!) gathering, people next to me are: a Syrian doctor, wife, a Syrian hi-tech entrepreneur, wife, Lebanese Catholic, married to a Georgian Orthodox Christian, a Jew psychologist and her doctor husband, a Brit converted to Judaism. They've all (Muslims) been here for more than 20-30 years, drink wine with us, women do not wear hijab, etc. They left on their own volition (a concept known as "self-selection" - i.e., people who selected themselves to come because they value the system and culture they are coming to, not because someone forced them to).
Pages: 1 ... 146 147 [148] 149 150 ... 331   Go Up