Slashdot Mirror

Use Linux

No can do. Didn't you get the memo? We're only using American-made products from now on.

#AmericaFirst

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

https://www.whitehouse.gov/ame...

The environment is deteriorating, and the population is growing, at a rate that will never allow India to actually go from "emerging economy" to modern economy. They can be an industrial nation, but not what we would consider a modern one, with all the benefits. There's just too many people, too high a growth rate, and a huge baby boom in the making which will result in even more poverty, because most of those people having kids don't have even an outdoor toilet to shit in.

They already have 18% of the human race living on just over 2% of the land. They will pass China as the most populous country in the world in 2022 - that's 5 years. And unlike China, they will continue to increase in population.

It's simple math - the rest of the world cannot create enough consumer demand to lift the rest of the globe out of poverty. You want to increase your market share, you have to lower your selling price - and your profits, ensuring you stay poor. And there are far too many other countries with over-abundant labour ready to take your place the moment you raise your prices.

And next, throw in robotics and AI, and it really won't matter how cheap you go, the machines can always go lower.

They will solve their problem the same way humans have always solved this problem in the past - famine, war, disease, death. Nothing new under the sun there, and it's stupid to deny it, and the associated risks for everyone else.

-I don't care what you believe.

-Citation provided.
-since race is an artificial construct anyway, it's as good a word as any to describe bigotry against a distinct cultural ethnic group a more concise term is coined
-debatable; migration rights are largely seen as a basic human right. and they still have rights under the constitution, particularly in the area of due process, the constitution being a document that describes not just the relation between the government and citizen, but more accurately the government and any person subject to its authority.

-torture is a war crime
-so is retaliatory executions, even the uber-conservative and generally delusional Washington times agrees
-so is the targeting of families

-your views on women, looks, and what constitutes hypocrisy don't even merit a response. but I will say, you should start by looking up the definition of hypocrisy

-citation already provided

-Yes he is, though I can see how its hard for you to see, when you willfully ignore and dismiss everything he's done, as you have in the above mentioned topics.

https://www.washingtonpost.com... This is illegal as well.

I've heard that phrase almost continually for at least the last 8 years. Heck, denying that particular phrase was THE central theme of the Obama campaign back in 2008, and it didn't even slow the meme down. So how come you only complain about it when a Republican is sworn in?

Yes, just think about what terrible things the Clinton Foundation did, like: Raised $313 million for R&D into new vaccines and medicines; Helped provide better maternal and child survival care to more than 110 million people, and; Provided treatment for more than 36 million people with tropical diseases. Even worse, it spent 88% of its 2014 outlays directly on programs (rather than overhead) and that it only has to spend $2 to raise $100. A performance that poor gives it a solid "A" rating from charity watchdogs. We're all clearly better off without groups like this funneling money from rich donors to help poor people in underdeveloped countries around the world. Source: http://fortune.com/2016/08/27/...

Exactly, that's why you support the Trump foundation, obviously. I mean, alright, so the foundation itself admits it's basically a scam to be a slush fund for its owners, and yes, it did buy that one painting for what was pretty obviously a transfer of cash, and alright, the owner refuses to release his tax return so we could check, but hey! At least it's not named Clinton, and that's what matters.
...
Even if that one actually does do verifiable charitable work.

DeVos alone as education secretary is enough to make up for any slack in other picks. She may actually be able to help fix the dire state of public education.

***FACEPALM***

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://www.theatlantic.com/edu...
https://theintercept.com/2017/...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...

If you're among the 1-percenters' offspring whose parents either went to these elite institutions or can afford to donate something substantial to get you in, why is it surprising that elite schools have more well-off students?

No more than it is "surprising" that the wealthy live much longer than the poor, another statistic that is in need of dramatic adjustment. Bring back 91% marginal tax brackets while providing universal health care and education.

There's basically 4 factors that determine where you end up in life -- how smart or successful your parents are, how wealthy they are, how much raw potential you have, and usually a whole lot of dumb luck.

The "dumb luck" is to be born to a rich set of parents. The poster children for this example is George W. and Neil Bush. The one kept getting handed multimillion dollar businesses to run into the ground, and the other "just happened" to have a couple of women knock his his hotel room door, looking to have sex with him.

Poor kids who do everything right dont do better than rich kids who do everything wrong

I remind you that it is the issue of PREFERENTIAL disenfranchisement.
Some blacks do have those acceptable ID's. But the terms for getting or holding such ID are shaped by keeping the black vote down
As the judge in the North Carolina ID case noted, the Voter ID and early voting restrictions were strategically designed to minimize voting by blacks

suck on it racist thugs!

You mentioned "next 4 years" as if that were a Trump thing, but you've got it backwards.

Nope, it's forwards, the reality.

Trump appears to be completely pro-consumer in his dealings with corporations; or in other words, a "populist" leader.

Trump appears. That's the correct choice of words. He appears. Actually is.

Recently he came out against the anti-consumer policies of big pharma, and intends to put pressure on them to reduce consumer costs overall.

You mean he randomly babbled a pointless bit of words that mean nothing, and you bought it.

He's met with several companies and suggested that there will be a tariff on off-shored work, with the result that several companies are pledging to keep work in America.

You mean he's met with several companies and offered to hand them taxpayer dollars if they pretend to have work in the country.

He's also convinced Boeing to reduce costs, which isn't a consumer benefit per-se, but it saves the government from being fleeced by Boeing a little.

You mean he randomly spouted his mouth off (again, this is a habit of his), and complained about something that wasn't even real.

It really appears that he's serious about making things better for the people.

Based on what? His complete lack of authenticity and genuineness in his speeches and mannerisms?

He's done a small amount before being elected, and appears to be trying to keep that campaign promise.

When the article about minimum H1B salaries of $100K, people were saying "well, he got one thing right".

Give him a chance.

He might actually make things better.

Nope. He has to change. Stop blathering, stop lambasting, stop acting like a tantrum toddler.

You know, start growing up and acting adult. Not being an asshole.

As I post there are 373 comments, so I apologise if I missed anyone else pointing out the remarkably impressive feat of Ivey's "assistant" Cheng Yin Sun spending hundreds of (possibly up to a thousand) hours training herself over four years to recognise minute variations on the backs of cards which she could detect when the cards were rotated.

If that isn't news for nerds, I don't know what would qualify!

It also means that while she's nowhere near as famous as Ivey, in this enterprise she wasn't a mere "assistant", much more something like an equal partner: despite at least one comment above referring to Ivey having trained himself to recognize by spotting inconsistencies in the card markings, on the facts as reported (I read both the Washington Post article and the judgment linked to in the summary (fwiw I entirely agree with the judge and his reasons for making the judgment he did), *and* I read a New York Times magazine article linked to by the Washington Post article), the only person who could recognise the differences when cards had been rotated was Cheng Yin Sun.

In fact, if the New York Times magazine article is accurate, Sun (the NYT article calls her Cheung Yin Sun, but Cheng Yin Sun as in the judgment seems more likely to be correct) first did this with other people at several casinos, and then *she* recruited Phil Ivey:
"Over the coming week, Sun and her highly organized group used the same strategy to beat more Las Vegas casinos, including Treasure Island and Caesars Palace. They made a trip to Foxwoods Resort Casino in Mashantucket, Conn. Eventually Sun recruited the celebrity poker pro Phil Ivey, who is also known as a high-stakes gambler at craps and baccarat."

Washington Post ... Sun had spent, according to the New York Times magazine, hundreds of hours memorizing tiny flaws in purple Gemaco Borgata playing cards. ... She purchased souvenir playing cards from the Borgata, identical to the ones used on the casino floor save for holes punched in the center. She discovered that patterns on card backs, designed to be symmetrical, were not perfectly so. Sun trained herself to identify aberrations along the left or right margins of the card backs, no wider than 1/32 of an inch, the Times reported. ("Sun's mental acumen in distinguishing the minute differences in the patterns on the back of the playing cards is remarkable," Hillman noted.) So prepared, she helped Ivey on his way to millions.

The technique Ivey and Sun used was called edge-sorting. Sun was allowed to peek at the card before the dealer flipped it over. In Mandarin, she would ask the dealer to rotate the most valuable cards in the baccarat deck -- the sixes through nines -- 180 degrees as they were flipped. The automatic shuffler could randomize the cards, but would not alter their rotation. "Baccarat is a casino game well known for unique and superstitious rituals," Hillman noted in an October opinion. "Thus, Sun telling the dealer to turn a card in a certain way did not raise any red flags for Borgata." With the deck sorted, it was possible for Sun to identify which cards had been rotated. The pair therefore knew the values of the cards while they were being dealt, before completing bets. Ivey adjusted his bets, and once the pair edge-sorted the entire deck, he increased his bids to the maximum allowed. ...

New York Times magazine ... Sun visited several Las Vegas casino gift shops and bough

As I post there are 373 comments, so I apologise if I missed anyone else pointing out the remarkably impressive feat of Ivey's "assistant" Cheng Yin Sun spending hundreds of (possibly up to a thousand) hours training herself over four years to recognise minute variations on the backs of cards which she could detect when the cards were rotated.

If that isn't news for nerds, I don't know what would qualify!

It also means that while she's nowhere near as famous as Ivey, in this enterprise she wasn't a mere "assistant", much more something like an equal partner: despite at least one comment above referring to Ivey having trained himself to recognize by spotting inconsistencies in the card markings, on the facts as reported (I read both the Washington Post article and the judgment linked to in the summary (fwiw I entirely agree with the judge and his reasons for making the judgment he did), *and* I read a New York Times magazine article linked to by the Washington Post article), the only person who could recognise the differences when cards had been rotated was Cheng Yin Sun.

In fact, if the New York Times magazine article is accurate, Sun (the NYT article calls her Cheung Yin Sun, but Cheng Yin Sun as in the judgment seems more likely to be correct) first did this with other people at several casinos, and then *she* recruited Phil Ivey:
"Over the coming week, Sun and her highly organized group used the same strategy to beat more Las Vegas casinos, including Treasure Island and Caesars Palace. They made a trip to Foxwoods Resort Casino in Mashantucket, Conn. Eventually Sun recruited the celebrity poker pro Phil Ivey, who is also known as a high-stakes gambler at craps and baccarat."

Washington Post ... Sun had spent, according to the New York Times magazine, hundreds of hours memorizing tiny flaws in purple Gemaco Borgata playing cards. ... She purchased souvenir playing cards from the Borgata, identical to the ones used on the casino floor save for holes punched in the center. She discovered that patterns on card backs, designed to be symmetrical, were not perfectly so. Sun trained herself to identify aberrations along the left or right margins of the card backs, no wider than 1/32 of an inch, the Times reported. ("Sun's mental acumen in distinguishing the minute differences in the patterns on the back of the playing cards is remarkable," Hillman noted.) So prepared, she helped Ivey on his way to millions.

The technique Ivey and Sun used was called edge-sorting. Sun was allowed to peek at the card before the dealer flipped it over. In Mandarin, she would ask the dealer to rotate the most valuable cards in the baccarat deck -- the sixes through nines -- 180 degrees as they were flipped. The automatic shuffler could randomize the cards, but would not alter their rotation. "Baccarat is a casino game well known for unique and superstitious rituals," Hillman noted in an October opinion. "Thus, Sun telling the dealer to turn a card in a certain way did not raise any red flags for Borgata." With the deck sorted, it was possible for Sun to identify which cards had been rotated. The pair therefore knew the values of the cards while they were being dealt, before completing bets. Ivey adjusted his bets, and once the pair edge-sorted the entire deck, he increased his bids to the maximum allowed. ...

New York Times magazine ... Sun visited several Las Vegas casino gift shops and bough

This is more likely a response to Russia's actions during the election.

So, NOW Obama reacts to Russian hacking?

What about when the Russians hacked the White House itself? Obama did nothing.

What about when China hacked the entire OPM database of cleared government workers? Obama did nothing.

What about when Russia had penetrated the entire State Department network? Obama did nothing. (So given Obama's fecklessness, Hillary actually did have a reason to run a separate email system - but she didn't run it securely and it was probably hacked by everyone: Hillary Clinton’s Email Was Probably Hacked, Experts Say)

Obama did nothing until Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's loss.

p>"Thus historian Vincent J. Cannato concluded in September 2006, "With time, Giuliani's legacy will be based on more than just 9/11. He left a city immeasurably better off — safer, more prosperous, more confident — than the one he had inherited eight years earlier, even with the smoldering ruins of the World Trade Center at its heart. Debates about his accomplishments will continue, but the significance of his mayoralty is hard to deny."

You might be correct, in that Giuliani was not hired because of competence, but you are completely incorrect implying that Giuliani is wholly without competance.

I did not imply anything. I was very clear: Giuliani might or might not have been a good governor, but he has zero competence in cyber security and computers in general.

I do work on IT and security. That does not qualify me to design a bridge.

Robert Graham explained it succinctly: http://blog.erratasec.com/2017... .

The real story here is that Giuliani is now a goddamn cybersecurity advisor, not that this personal site is crap. The guy was hired not because of competence but because he spent the entire campaign kissing Trump's ass.

"Thus historian Vincent J. Cannato concluded in September 2006, "With time, Giuliani's legacy will be based on more than just 9/11. He left a city immeasurably better off — safer, more prosperous, more confident — than the one he had inherited eight years earlier, even with the smoldering ruins of the World Trade Center at its heart. Debates about his accomplishments will continue, but the significance of his mayoralty is hard to deny."

You might be correct, in that Giuliani was not hired because of competence, but you are completely incorrect implying that Giuliani is wholly without competance.

And once again, I have to ask: is [what you said] this important? Is *why* someone is hired more important than their competence?

And once again again, I have to ask: compared to what? Is hiring Giuliani any worse than the practices of the previous administration or the runner-up candidate?

For contrast, note that Bush appointed a crony as head of FEMA who completely fell on his face during Katrina, and Obama appointed Caroline Kennedy as ambassador to Japan, who was completely outmastered in our recent Japanese treaty negotiations(*).

Is it useful *at all* to just throw throws random aspersions around?

(*) Resulting in a treaty which is beneficial to Japan, but a very bad deal for America. I have no opinion about Ms. Kennedy, good or bad, only note that she was unqualified for the position, was apparently appointed because of her ties to a famous family dynasty, and America was worse off because of it.

They expire.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Looks like the 18 months is aggressive tho. Might depend on storage conditions too.

Does someone pay people to say these things? It is much higher at least twice that in many states. https://www.washingtonpost.com... http://www.forbes.com/sites/mo...

Womble, we know that the fetus is viable on it's own after 20 weeks of gestation, so at that point, from a scientific standpoint the only difference between a fetus and a baby is location of residence and method of getting nutrients. Further, we have scientifically advanced our definition of human life (and human death) as the presence of lack of brain activity. For the fetus, this begins at around 6 weeks. Thus, from our current understanding and legal definition of human life, which we apply across the board to all human beings (except for the fetus, due to a mistake by 7 attorneys in black robes 43 years ago), human life begins at around 6 weeks after conception, and a fetus is certainly a human being at 20 weeks.

As you can tell I have a strong pro-life position, and I have thoroughly researched the issue as I personally had to make a choice on the issue of one life or another. 99% of pro-life advocates believe in exceptions for abortion in cases where the life of the mother is in danger, where abortion is a sad but necessary procedure. We do not agree that abortion for the convenience of the mother or father is acceptable. Carrying to term and childbirth are difficult consequences for irresponsible unprotected sex, but adoption is a far better option for the mental and physical health of everyone involved over 99% of the time.

Just 2.8% of women surveyed claimed that their abortion was over concerns for maternal health in the one survey that is available on the subject. The actual stats are un-knowable because no solid studies have been performed thanks to the pro-abortion lobbies who want to obfuscate the issue. We do know that maternal childbirth related deaths in the US are at 0.0185% vs Brazil at 0.055% which has strict anti-abortion laws. Assuming all the difference has nothing to do with quality of health care or delivery facilities (which it doesn't), we are talking about a 0.037% difference in maternal childbirth mortality rates. You and I think nothing of jumping in a car where your risk of dying over three years of driving is 0.033% or about the delta in risk rates. The odds of dying from a legal abortion are higher but comparable with any invasive medical procedure. Again, impossible to find exact stats due to obfuscation at the highest levels. These numbers for medically necessary abortions hardly scratch the surface on the 54,000,000 abortions since Roe v Wade.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/...
http://www.politifact.com/new-...
http://riskcalculator.facs.org...

The fact that you have to attack a person's religious beliefs instead of simply using facts like I have above shows just how weak your pro-abortion position is. Science since 1973 continues to show that the practice of abortion on demand is taking the life of another human being. There is a reason that no federal law has ever been passed making abortion legal, and that is that anyone who spends time actually digging into the facts (or who becomes pregnant and watches the ultrasound) can conclude that a fetus is a human life. In 100 years, society will look back at abortion in much the same way we look back at slavery. Amazed and disgusted that a civilized society could condone the savage abuse of a innocent, defenseless portion of the population for convenience.

http://www.whattoexpect.com/pr...

And you should also admit that Trump is largely the source of the "hire local" climate, he's caused companies to rethink their outsourcing plans, especially in light of the alternative candidate who said explicitly that she wants completely open borders for job seekers.

Nope. That's been something proclaimed for YEARS. It's been a scam.

So is Trump's "Carrier deal" and "Ford and he lied about "Boeing too.

Durp, durp, durp. You lie about Hillary Clinton as well. Just like Your Orange God

Who also made up a story about bidding on drugs. LOL. Yeah, let's see him change the Republican's opposition to the reform proposed by Democrats for decades. He'll either come up with a way to screw us, or fail and claim he somehow saved us anyway.

But none of that matters. I don't think many people really care who takes the credit.

Is it important to you?

Help me out here.

Why should credit even matter?

Ask your good buddy, Donald J. Trump, who puts his name on everything.

Sorry, but some of us know that Donald only wants CREDIT for success, he doesn't even care if the job gets done.

Maybe you like his over-the-top bombastic style of self-aggrandizement, maybe you think his much vaunted narcissism is a matter of virtue, but you're the one who has to look at what you've embraced.

With open eyes. He's already said he likes being liked. He can't see a problem in that. He'll be a suck-up to anybody who offers him praise.

And if you dare to criticize or challenge him, he'll throw a tantrum.

Here's a picture of one and it's not what I would call "micro".

GM's penalty for the ignition switch fiasco is less than $1 billion for a deliberate defect about which the the company tried to cover up and lied about for years and killed over 100 people.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...?

Who did VW piss off or forget to blow?

I'm not saying VW should pay less but I don't understand how what they did merits higher fines

don't forget Pizzagate

While both have very dubious accounting practices, only one foundation actually helps people. Well, people besides Trump.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

While both have very dubious accounting practices, only one foundation actually helps people. Well, people besides Trump.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

It's just another way they weasel out of FOIA compliance. They do the same thing with the Harris Corporation, maker of Stingray devices. If one of those comes up in court, the feds will drop the charges and let a criminal go free, rather than discuss the Stingray in court. It's becoming very popular in law enforcement to avoid FOIA any way you can. Did you know that in Massachusetts, SWAT teams are private companies and therefore immune to public records requests?

Your tax dollars at work, creating the Brave New World where law enforcement isn't accountable to anyone.

They claim "Russia accessed elements of multiple state or local electoral boards." Of this, they give no evidence. Absolutely nothing to support this claim. Seriously, tell us which electoral board, or arrest the members of the board, or something.

Russian hacking of Arizona and Illinois voter registration systems was reported back in August, but noone was paying attention back then.

Rich Barger, chief information officer at ThreatConnect, said that several of the IP addresses listed in the FBI alert trace back to a website-hosting service called King Servers that offers Russia-based technical support. Barger also said that one of the methods used was similar to a tactic employed in other intrusions suspected of being carried out by the Russian government, including one this month on the World Anti-Doping Agency.

Those figures seem to come from this set of data, from before all votes were counted. Scroll down, and you'll see all "Safe Republican" states are reporting 100%, but only half the "Safe Democrat" states. The gap widened in the days after the election as those states added their remaining vote counts.

Perhaps they are trying to show that those that Twitter deems "verified" follow a particular political narrative? After all we've seen Twitter yank verification as well as outright banning those on the right while ignoring blatant violation of their TOS like racist bile and death threats (BLM organizers) as well as celebs telling their followers to attack someone while spewing racist epitaphs (Leslie Jones) and sockpuppeting attacks on users to drum up publicity (Paul Fieg).

So while I'm not sure if handing out personal info is the way to go I've seen enough of Twitter's "Verification" to see its bad and being used for political purposes and if that wasn't bad enough its trivial to get fake accounts verified making the entire thing really pointless.

James Clapper lied about U.S. cybersecurity. James Clapper is the U.S. Director of National Intelligence. He resigned.

Two big issues:

1) If he feels comfortable lying, can anything he says be considered to be reliable?

2) He is 75 years old. Photos of him give the impression he is extremely conflicted. (See the resignation story.) Does he have any technical knowledge?

There is the possibility that everything that has been said is manipulated nonsense. Apparently NONE of the authors of the stories have investigated the depth of technical knowledge of ANYONE. There is no depth to any of the stories.

he's made it painfully clear that he'll OK any merger that crosses his desk. As always his twitter feed tells whatever story he thinks people want to hear this week though.

I would say it is a /. myth :D

The New York Times disagrees with you. So does businessinsider. And bloomberg. The Chinese control bitcoin, even in Tibet.

... the age of exploitation is over. And unless those people, companies, entities, with their Corporate Social Responsibilities, especially those with the power to influence vast masses, start putting the priorities of the Planet, which has so far given us the privilege - not right - to exist and be making all that $$$, it ain't going to benefit anyone.

You know that, at least in the US, the pro-business Republicans now control the Presidency and both houses of Congress, right? The age of exploitation is just getting started. (They even tried to get rid of their own independent ethics board.)

This article corrects the earlier one (which should have been retracted).

As federal officials investigate suspicious Internet activity found last week on a Vermont utility computer, they are finding evidence that the incident is not linked to any Russian government effort to target or hack the utility, according to experts and officials close to the investigation.

An employee at Burlington Electric Department was checking his Yahoo email account Friday and triggered an alert indicating that his computer had connected to a suspicious IP address associated by authorities with the Russian hacking operation that infiltrated the Democratic Party. Officials told the company that traffic with this particular address is found elsewhere in the country and is not unique to Burlington Electric, suggesting the company wasn’t being targeted by the Russians. Indeed, officials say it is possible that the traffic is benign, since this particular IP address is not always connected to malicious activity.

U.S. officials are continuing to investigate the laptop. In the course of their investigation, though, they have found on the device a package of software tools commonly used by online criminals to deliver malware. The package, known as Neutrino, does not appear to be connected with Grizzly Steppe, which U.S. officials have identified as the Russian hacking operation. The FBI, which declined to comment, is continuing to investigate how the malware got onto the laptop.

Initially, company officials publicly said they had detected code that had been linked by the Department of Homeland Security to Grizzly Steppe.

Over the weekend, the company issued a statement, saying only that it had “detected suspicious Internet traffic” on the computer in question.

What we had here was propaganda which initially puts out an outrageous sounding story, then stepped it back a little bit at a later time, and finally they now say it was just a misunderstanding. The number of people who see the initial headline was the highest, while the fact that it was all just bullshit gets viewed by the least. The propaganda does its job, it gains mindshare.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

Who shut down the government?

Politics is the art of negotiating. Refusing to negotiate, or even meet with the other side shut down the government. The only person who wouldn't work with the other side was Obama, and funny, but when he finally negotiated with them, the budget was signed that day. Interesting how that works, huh?

Funny, didn't Obama open up the Atlantic oil drilling locations a couple years ago?

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

I have read the linked article and article in WSJ and WashPost. There appears to be some confusion in the Ars Technica article, and in the summary. The investment in the Flat Rock Michigan plant is to create new electric vehicles, to maintain employment for the Ford Escort employees, as Ford continues its plan to move the Escorts to 100% in Mexico. This is similar to the November story, when Ford moved mature Lincoln manufacturing from Louisville KY to Mexico, but invested in a new vehicle manufacturing in KY rather than close the plant.

From the Post https://www.washingtonpost.com... :

"At Ford, Joseph Hinrichs, president of Ford in the Americas, said the decision to produce the newly announced cars in the United States was made recently and without consulting people connected to Trump. Ford Executive Chairman Bill Ford shared the news with Trump in a phone call Tuesday morning, though the details of that call were not immediately available.

While the Ford Focus will soon be produced south of the border, Hinrichs said the 3,500 workers who currently make the car at its production facility in Wayne, Mich., will instead build two yet-to-be-named vehicles, and thus those jobs will stay in place."

Trump seems very talented at getting his name into headlines about decisions that have nothing to do with him

Fake news has been a problem for years, just the advertising purporting to be factual content has been problem enough, but there's been no shortage of criticisms of deceitful agenda-driven stories.

Whether it be Holocaust denial, global warming denial, birthers, truthers or exploding trucks.

But hey, Trump voters still believe some crazy shit.

What's up with Pizza Gate and thinking you won a landslide, el fanno de Trump?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

The only thing is, all of these dumb rednecks desperately want to die early from some kind of coal-related illness. Is there some way we can still make their dream come true, even as solar gets cheaper by the day? What hope is there that they can still die of black lung in mid-life, like they so desperately want? Won't somebody please think of the coal miners?!?!?!?

The WaPo has now completely retracted the story , https://www.washingtonpost.com...
So in principle they acted correctly here. They adhered to their own rulebook. Effectively however they contributed to the hysteria and that's not acknowledged. If you look at it statistically, take 10 stories like that, some pass without complaints, some get partial retractions, some are fully retracted after the fact when the damage is done, but the net effect is a lot of scaremongering even if a paper tries to follow its own rules.

Incidentally, here are a few a few harder numbers
    https://www.washingtonpost.com...

They are form a study done by the DoJ. Unfortunately the link to the DoJ is broken and I cannot be bothered to find the document, but there is no reason the Washington Post would make numbers like these up.

They have 4'500-21'000 underage persons working in the sex trade in the US, with an average age of entry at 15.8. Only 15% have a "pimp", i.e. if you assume each pimp forces his girls into prostitution (extremely unlikely, most of those with a "pimp" will still be in it of their own free will), you get a maximum of 675-3150 underage persons forced into the sex trade overall. This nicely shows that the "100'000 children forced into the sex trade each year in the US" numbers are massively bogus and nothing but an outrageous lie.

Given the intelligence of the typical Washington Pest reporter, this really shouldn't be a surprise:

When I came home from my last TV hit, the kids, ages 4 and 5 months, were asleep. The house was quiet. I was still full of caffeine and do-gooder energy and decided to tidy up.

Among the clutter on the coffee table, I found my 4-year-old’s Party Popper, a bright yellow gun that fired confetti. For some reason, I held the gun up to my eye and looked down the barrel, the way Yosemite Sam always does.

It looked unloaded.

Then, for some reason, I pulled the trigger.

When I got to the ER, I had a swollen face, metal-foil confetti in my hair and a faint odor of gun smoke. Finally, the doctor could see me.

“I shot myself in the eye with a glitter gun,” I said. I showed him the Party Popper, which I had brought with me, in case he wanted to send it off to the National Institute of Morons for further study.

I got home from the hospital with a scratched cornea and a tube of eye ointment. The next day, with some of my dignity permanently lost, I got started on a bigger story.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

The government office of News Verification and Purity has determined that your publication, The Washington Post, is responsible for the fake news article entitled "5 Held in Plot to Bug Democrats' Office Here" is false to fact and an irresponsible use of the public trust. You are herein DIRECTED and ORDERED to remove said post and issue a retraction within 24 hours or face fines and criminal penalties.

Your immediate compliance is required as a matter of law.

Regards,
Richard M. Nixon

All sarcasm and flights of fancy aside, some cures are indeed worse than the disease, or at least carry risks of their own. This isn't to say that I wouldn't have liked to see some consequence for Mr. Trump for the constant use of the phrase "Crooked Hillery" (How many times was she investigated and never even charged with a crime?) and his characterizations of many, many others. The proper response to my mind would have been for voters to see through his waiving of the bloody shirt and throwing of dead cats on the table and simply voted for a worthy candidate. Unfortunately, 2016 saw a year where there was no worthy candidates, only those less evil, and a perfect storm of voters too stupid, too lazy, too full of hate, too misinformed, or too hypnotized to see through it. During world war II, the English (indeed, most of the rest of the world) had a saying: "You can count on the Americans to do the right thing; after they have tried everything else first."

I'm not saying fake news isn't a problem because it is. To my mind the best fix for that is a voter that is less inclined to hear what he wants to hear while disregarding any thing they don't want to hear.

That, and a billion dollars. I'm as like to get one as the other.

Yep, and now that story contains a correction at the top of the page. That's what legitimate news sites do when they make factual errors.

The BBC published an article describing biased, allegedly misogynistic criticism of the new Ghostbusters movie, quoting as an example a post from Reddit. The Sydney Morning Herald ran an article on the same point, but their reporter took five minutes to do some actual journalism, looked up the Reddit poster's history, and found it was a fairly obvious false flag attack. The BBC responded by excising this part from a revised version of their article, without any sort of acknowledgement of the change, or the fact that they had been fooled (or, less generously, had tried to fool their readers).

Does this mean that the BBC is not a legitimate news site?

Yesterday, Washington Post ran a story that the Russians hacked our power grid.

Yep, and now that story contains a correction at the top of the page. That's what legitimate news sites do when they make factual errors. Fake news sites don't issue corrections, because their entire purpose is to make up facts.

NYT a couple days after the election reported Trump had poisoned Meghan Kelly before the first debate. Their source was Mrs. Kelly. Every other news outlet rushed to her to get details and she said that never happened.

Actually, your timeline is a bit messed up. What actually happened was that New York Magazine reported in September that "Kelly had even begun to speculate, according to one Fox source, that Trump might have been responsible for her getting violently ill before the debate last summer. Could he have paid someone to slip something into her coffee that morning in Cleveland? she wondered to colleagues." This was NOT ignored in the media, but rather spread in September as a big rumor, which Kelly did NOT address or debunk at that time.

Then a couple months later when the New York Times published a book review, it talks about a passage where Kelly recounts the SAME weird story herself where a driver repeatedly insisted on giving her coffee and then rapidly became violently ill. Why exactly she reported that story in her book is unclear, but it seems to confirm that she did find the incident suspicious, as had already been reported in major media outlets two months earlier.

The NYT book review is NOT meant to be a solid piece of "factual journalism," but rather a playful dialogue with the book. Note the repeated "We report. You decide." quip in the review, which is meant to make fun of the Fox News slogan -- and in this case meant to signal a somewhat sarcastic rendering of this story from Kelly's book:

Ms. Kelly never says outright that someone tried to poison her. (A stomach bug was going around, she notes.) But the episode spooked her enough that she shared it later with Roger Ailes and a lawyer friend of his. Foul play? Again: She reports. You decide.

After this story becomes even more viral (no pun intended) than the September one did, Kelly steps in and tweets that it really was just a stomach bug. But why did she even tell the story in the first place in the book with her suspicion (of what?)?

At best, the book critic at the NYT could be accused of "reading between the lines" about a suspicious passage in the book and reporting an old story which had appeared elsewhere that had NOT been previously debunked by Kelly... and then making a playful "She reports. You decide." joke about it.

Seriously?? Those are the best examples of "fake news" in the mainstream media you can come up with?

This is an actual fake news site. It's made up of completely bogus articles, though it looks legit and the stories may sound vaguely legit if you only read the headline and first paragraph. But it's completely bogus, and most of the stories make that clear by becoming increasingly ridiculous when you read them.

YET a number of "articles" on that satirical site have been shared hundreds of thousands or even millions of times on Facebook as if they were real news. Are you seriously going to say that a corrected article in the WaPo and a quip that echoed a pre-existing st

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

What, make a ridiculous joke so you can dismiss evidence of wrongdoing and documented events?

Good job knee-jerk defending your team, though.

Do you think that a Trump administration will be tougher on Russia regarding the Ukraine?

Think again. The Trump team signed off on every single item in the RNC platform -- taxes, trade policy, abortion, education, religion, all of it -- except one thing. They said nope, that one has to go.

You know what it was? Support for the Ukraine in its fight against Russia.

Instead of just reacting to break-ins, I wish Obama would work to make our systems more secure, so that break-ins don't happen in the first place.

Thanks to the federal government's incompetence and/or carelessness, China now has the name, SSN, address, phone #, email address, and fingerprints of 4 million current and former OPM employees.

Plus there was a massive breach at Yahoo, which includes the personal info of US employees, incl. military personnel. Also passwords to work accounts, and answers to security questions. Also:

Former intelligence officials said the leak of government worker data could make the job of foreign spies easier, creating an alphabetized hit list of targets for hacking. "We went to great lengths to keep the fact people worked at NSA as low-profile as we possibly could. The last thing we’d want is an alpha list of NSA employees," said Lonny Anderson, former technology director for the NSA and now executive vice president at security company Federal Data Systems Inc.

Why was that information stored on Yahoo?

Did Obama announce a punishment for any country, or announce a massive program to secure the systems? I didn't hear anything about it.

But now that Russia has stolen and used info that Obama cares about (i.e., that affected the election), Obama is taking strong measures against Russia.

Pres. Elect Trump, please work to make our government information secure.

they are neither idiots nor ill informed by and large

How would you describe this?

And no, it's not just one voter

"Lightly customized?" I'm pretty sure that's colloquially known as "pirated".

Well... if "pirated" means "illegally copied and distributed", that verb doesn't apply in this case.

Wikipedia has a conventient list of countries showing when they became signatories to various intellectual property treaties. Note the entry for "Korea, Democratic People's Republic of".

There is no international law that requires countries to honor arrangements established by treaties they haven't signed, or to respect legal monopolies granted by other countries. So what North Korea has done is perfectly legal both by its own laws and by international law. It may be sleazy, but it hardly makes the hit parade of North Korean atrocities.