Slashdot Mirror


The Age of Distributed Truth (eugenewei.com)

Eugene Wei, head of video at Oculus (Formerly with Flipboard, Hulu, and Amazon) writes about how information gets distributed now, and things that were commonly known in specific circles are becoming more widely known. From his article: The internet gave everyone a megaphone, and these days that can feel like that Chinese proverb, you know the one. Perhaps the truth was better kept in the hands of a limited set of responsible stewards, but that age of the expert has passed, and that system had its own issues. As every Death Star reminds us each time they're blown up, concentrating power in a small area has its own unique vulnerability. We live in the age of distributed truth, and it's an environment in which fake news can spread like mold when in viral form. But the same applies to the truth, and if there's one lesson on how to do your part in an age of distributed truth, it's to speak the truth and to support those who do. It may be exhausting work -- is it really necessary to point out the emperor is buck naked? -- but it's the best we can do for now. In this age, the silent majority is no majority at all.

89 comments

  1. "Responsible Stewards" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If there's one lesson from the 20th Century it's "Trust No One"

    Government. Media. Academia. All have betrayed trust, all corruptible, all fallible, all human.

    Show me an inviolate person and i will see an empty chair.

    1. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Show me an inviolate person

      There's your problem. You're looking for perfect unblemished snowflakes (which don't exist) instead of doing the boring, mundane work of verification and cross checking of the facts at hand. No wonder you're paranoid.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    2. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod parent up.

    3. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      Naive A/C, your confession is enough for me.

    4. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by Presence+Eternal · · Score: 1

      "Nullius in verba" is a similar and very beautiful motto, but it does NOT mean we can't believe people. It just means we need to have fact checking. I'm rather fond of a video where Neil Degrasse Tyson says something like "Don't take my word for it. Get some astronomy software. You'll see this 'devastating event' happens EVERY YEAR."

    5. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      If there's one lesson from the 20th Century it's "Trust No One"

      And the others are "Stay Alert" and "Keep Your Laser Handy."

    6. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      Don't forget your towel

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    7. Re:"Responsible Stewards" by ananamouse · · Score: 1

      Twain is quoted, "If you don't read the papers you are uninformed. If you read the papers you are misinformed." Today we have personal control of our misinformation and plenty of it to wallow in.

  2. Why is this here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TFS utterly fails to make a coherent point. I am incapable of agreeing or disagreeing.

  3. Truth is not what you think it is by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 3, Informative

    For example, some of you incorrectly think Russia hacking the US election is "fake news". This is incorrect.

    Some of you think Russia interfered on social media in the US election. This is true, but it is not true, in that it was far worse than that, and at a scale you would find difficult to believe.

    Some of you think Russia may have hacked 15 states and only looked at data in a few counties in those states. This is not true, as it is far far worse.

    Some of you think Russia hacked 39 states and only looked at data and gave it to certain individuals they controlled. This is not true, as it is far worse.

    A very very few of you know that Russia attempted to hack every state, managed to disable specific precincts voting machines, created large scale disruption, and altered reporting systems for electronic-only non-paper-trail counts, and also maintained large scale social media attacks. This is very true, but most people, sadly, think it's false.

    Do you really want to know how deep the rabbit hole goes?

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The true truth is that there were no elections; the Russian mind-hackers have simply outdone the neocons and implanted the entire history in our collective minds. I, fortunately, was wearing my foilhat but it appears that I am alone in knowing the full truth.

    2. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by king+neckbeard · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Some of us think that Russia engaged in low level phishing attempts against everything during the election, just as they do for every election everywhere, and just about any internet facing server.

      Some of us think that the US also does pretty much the same thing, with the same level of power.

      Some of us knew both of those things because we've read enough posts on slashdot to have sysadmins repeat this fact at least a hundred times.

      The reality is far worse than the fake news of the Russia story. The people undermining our elections are not far away oligarchs. They are domestic oligarchs, which have far more conflicts of interest.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    3. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by XXongo · · Score: 2

      Do you really want to know how deep the rabbit hole goes?

      Yes, in fact I do.

      I don't want claims and allegations. I want verifiable facts and details.

    4. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      A very very few of you know that Russia attempted to hack every state, managed to disable specific precincts voting machines, created large scale disruption, and altered reporting systems for electronic-only non-paper-trail counts, and also maintained large scale social media attacks. This is very true, but most people, sadly, think it's false.

      Do you have sources/citations for this?

    5. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      He does not. This is just the last vestiges of the neoliberals going "all-in" on the only narrative that might prevent them from being ousted by their own party members.

      Just look at it.. its talking about fake news... but isnt talking about fox/msnbc/cnn/etc ...

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    6. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Do you really want to know how deep the rabbit hole goes?

      Yes, in fact I do.

      I don't want claims and allegations. I want verifiable facts and details.

      You're not cleared for that.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    7. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He does not. This is just the last vestiges of the neoliberals going "all-in" on the only narrative that might prevent them from being ousted by their own party members.

      How dare those liberals insult our Dear Leader, who fought his own personal Vietnam in the whorehouses of America, aiding medical research in VD/STD testing. He sacrificed his skin tone than others might not suffer from Agent Orange (or was it spray tan?).

      Trump, founded America, and, with a little help from some carpenter's kid, wrote the Bible and founded Christianity. His health plan will cover everything, with no deductible floor premium and have the most bestiest care in the world.

      But seriously, when will those apologists admit they made a mistake in picking this petty blow hard of a con artist. We all know Trump won't make it to 2020. Whether his morbidly obese body gives out to paranoid stress over his guilt, or the cabinet will do him in on mental grounds via the 25th Amendment, or Mueller gets him on obstruction, or any other prosecutor gets him impeached via criminal corruption (DC Hotel?) through the house, or, god forbid, the Republicans do it themselves to avoid an outright slaughter in the mid terms is my question.

    8. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leftist tears are delicious. Cry some more.

    9. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just look at it.. its talking about fake news... but isnt talking about fox/msnbc/cnn/etc ...

      Ever notice how when someone says "fake news" or "msm" or the like, they usually mean "places that don't report a narrative that I like"? You can tell, because they never bother to define what fake news is, what is included as being a part of the main stream media, or what news sources are "real news" news sources.

    10. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      Do you really want to know how deep the rabbit hole goes?

      Yes.
      Does The Lord of the Rings trilogy end when Gandalf falls to his doom while fighting the demon? Wtf bro.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    11. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by king+neckbeard · · Score: 2

      Ah yes, security clearance. The age-old refuge of making extraordinary claims without that pesky need to provide extraordinary evidence.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    12. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      Both terms are largely in terms of funding. If you are funded by something other than our media oligoply, you get painted as fake news. If you are part of the oligopoly, you are mainstream media. "MSM" is fairly well defined, as it basically equals media networks of comparable size to News Corporation, and largely coincides with people who make more in a week than the average American does in a year.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    13. Re:Truth is not what you think it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go the fuck away. Just go away. You're not welcome here. Either prove your claims, or get lost.

    14. Re: Truth is not what you think it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He doesn't need to prove anything. He just needs to stink the place up, because the harridan wasn't elected.

    15. Re: Truth is not what you think it is by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      It does not matter what we want. The problem with conspiracy is practical unverifiability.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    16. Re: Truth is not what you think it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because everything around Trump smells so nice?

      - Putingate #1 (Russian influences on Trump particularly around money he owes Russian banks; that includes banks owned by the Russian Government)
      - Putingate #2 (Russian efforts to elect Trump: sponsoring fake news, hacking and distributing information from the hacks--even fake information too?)
      - Flynngate (non registered foreign agents working for the government)
      - American Oligarchs capture and control government agencies
      - as part of Putingate #1, Trumps efforts to destroy NATO and America's international reputation
      - Facelife-gate (Trump and National Enquirer owner conspire to blackmail Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski into silence)
      - Comeygate (Trump and allies efforts to obstruct justice in regards to Flynngate, etc) ..and that is just a summary of what we know.

    17. Re: Truth is not what you think it is by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      By 2.86 million MORE votes, she was.
      the SELECTION in violation of the 14th Amendment guarantee of EQUAL rights however....but the ELECTION went to Hillary by 2.86 million MORE votes.

    18. Re: Truth is not what you think it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't look now, but your Russiagate bullshit tower is falling apart as we speak:

      1) https://www.rt.com/viral/394821-nyt-intelligence-agencies-claim-debunk/

      "The New York Times has retracted its claim that all 17 US intelligence agencies agreed that Russia was behind the hack of Democratic emails in an effort to influence the 2016 election in favor of Republican candidate Donald Trump. "

      2) http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/26/media/cnn-announcement-retracted-article/index.html

      "An internal investigation by CNN management found that some standard editorial processes were not followed when the article was published, people briefed on the results of the investigation said. "

      We could go on ...

  4. Step 1 to sticking up for the truth: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Stop silencing it. Stop labeling opinions that seem "mean" or "spiteful" as hate speech. Free speech is essential to unmasking the truth. Problem these days is this country is just one big dramatization of "a few good men".

    1. Re:Step 1 to sticking up for the truth: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop silencing it. Stop labeling opinions that seem "mean" or "spiteful" as hate speech. Free speech is essential to unmasking the truth. Problem these days is this country is just one big dramatization of "a few good men".

      Yeah, because Trump is just like Jack Nicholson's character. Except for the military service. And the general's non-selfish greater goal. And spray tan, dye job, extra 30% body fat. Oh and I don't think the Marine commander in the movie was working with the foreign authoritarians, nor corruptly profiting from illegal government leases on a hotel. Nor taking campaign funds and paying himself for use of his property, or spending a projected $90,000,000 on security for his personal property in NYC, Fla, and business managers.

      But aside from that, and a ton of other stuff, yeah, it is just like that.

    2. Re:Step 1 to sticking up for the truth: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but seriously... how was she NOT thirty points ahead?!

  5. Stewards, eh? by grasshoppa · · Score: 2

    We have absolutely no grasp of how much better our lives are now, and how much better they're going to be in the future, due to advancements in communication technology.

    Take the healthcare industry. The joke is, of course, that doctors hate it when their patients internet-diagnose themselves, but the truth of the matter is that the internet enables patients to have a much greater degree of participation in their own health. This is amazing. Doctors are, generally speaking, pretty smart people, but they are also very busy. Having a patient who takes an active role in their health make visits far more efficient and effective. That's just one industry, and we haven't really progressed far with AI yet. Imagine what's coming: a doctor that lives in your browser that can make recommendations based on data from your telemetry band. Preemptive heart treatment. Prescriptions auto modified based on your reactions to them.

    Some may lament days gone by of the "Experts", but they can have it. I'm looking forward to the future.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    1. Re:Stewards, eh? by MangoCats · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One thing that "experts" like doctors and lawyers hate about the age of "free" information is that the common rabble now knows stuff, actual stuff. In the old days you asked a doctor to treat a condition, he tried the best he could and you had to be content with that. When I had a procedure done in 2012 and I wasn't happy with the outcome, I was able to look it up online, find relative success rates and recovery times and find out that: yes, I should have expected nearly full recovery in 2 weeks instead of 3+ months, no, I should not have expected the joint locking and other side effects I suffered due to the long recovery, and, in point of fact, my outcome was worse than more than 99% of patients who had similar procedures done in the last 30 years. A litigious person can then take that data to court and seek damages, but I would consider the lost time and effort of such an endeavor to be "more damaging" to my life than this particular outcome, so I let it go.

      Similarly, I went to a lawyer to ask about certain civil rights issues and he more or less blew smoke up any available orifice with stories about how there aren't any lawyers within 200 miles who would even begin to touch a case like that, you have no grounds, etc. etc. essentially, he was representing "the other side" even though I had paid him a consultation fee. I already knew he was full of BS from previous internet research, and within 4 hours I had found a different lawyer, halfway between this clown's office and my home, who did represent us gratis and got the result we were looking for from the school board within a matter of days. In the old days, you would be forced to take the local representatives word for things, or travel great distances to do extensive research and consulting.

    2. Re:Stewards, eh? by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      A litigious person can then take that data to court and seek damages, but I would consider the lost time and effort of such an endeavor to be "more damaging" to my life than this particular outcome, so I let it go.

      Translation: You don't care about the next guy that doctor fucks up. Its all about your time and effort and how that might benefit you.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    3. Re: Stewards, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dr. Nick Falacy - there aren't 2 or 3 terrible doctors screwing up all the time. Most medical mistakes - as alleged, leaving aside the possibility that the GP's case might have been different than the other comparison cases he found, are made rarely by competent, unimpaired physicians - just like in your jobs.

    4. Re:Stewards, eh? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      One thing that "experts" like doctors and lawyers hate about the age of "free" information is that the common rabble now knows stuff, actual stuff. In the old days you asked a doctor to treat a condition, he tried the best he could and you had to be content with that.

      It was hardly that uncommon to get a second opinion in serious matters. And though it might chafe them a bit to realize the patient knows more about their particular condition than they do, I think most recognize the genuine self-interest people have in their own health and if smart patients effectively do a micro-study of medicine to understand it better they're cool with that. At least the doctors I've talked too haven't been hostile or defensive, then again I've inquired about treatment options not gathering evidence on a botched procedure. I still think they're far more concerned with the self-diagnosing, self-medicating, homeopathic anti-vaxxer alternative medicine crowd who reject tested and mostly working procedures and medications because they watched a bunch of YouTube videos and read blogs.

      You could think that with so much good information available, that's what most people would find. But people's confirmation bias is stronger than their objectivity, on the Internet there's so much BS you can pick the reality you want. For example, on one forum I frequent about 80-90% vote for a party that has 10-15% nationally and there's always those who believe the polls and elections are rigged because "everybody" they know agrees with them. They just refuse to accept that there are vast numbers of people who think completely differently than them. There are so many ways to get lost where you only travel in circles from bad data to more bad data, I think the human mind is designed for tribes where if 200 people say something it's a lot. But not if it's 200 loons out of 5 million.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    5. Re:Stewards, eh? by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      Imagine what's coming: a doctor that lives in your browser that can make recommendations based on data from your telemetry band. Preemptive heart treatment. Prescriptions auto modified based on your reactions to them.

      Ho Ho Ho!

      And your insurance company knowing every little detail about your health :) Can't wait for that day!

      --
      I tend to rant.
    6. Re:Stewards, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The next guy isn't his "risky financial burden in the form of legal fees" to take.

    7. Re:Stewards, eh? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Are you an expert in something? Do you find people coming to you about $whateverThatIs with their heads full of nonsense that they don't have the breadth and background knowledge to understand, and which they got second hand from someone who knows even less and/or has some agenda to push?

      Great, isn't it?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    8. Re:Stewards, eh? by grasshoppa · · Score: 1

      I didn't say it was going to be all sunshine and roses. There are definitely downsides, but what you mentioned barely rates as an annoyance. Those same people who think they know what they're talking about because they read an article online ALSO sometimes have some pretty good ideas. More, their good ideas are informed by the knowledge they gained online. They may not be able to execute the idea, but that's where I come in.

      Knowledge workers aren't going away as a result of the internet, but rather their roles will change and in many cases allow them to better use their energy on more interesting tasks.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    9. Re:Stewards, eh? by grasshoppa · · Score: 1

      One thing that "experts" like doctors and lawyers hate about the age of "free" information is that the common rabble now knows stuff, actual stuff.

      Some, sure. You'll have low energy assholes in every field who just want to coast, and having an educated client upsets that balance.

      Fuck them.

      The ones who will thrive are my kind of people; those that are constantly improving, looking for new and innovative ways to solve old problems and more efficiently use their time. Won't be hard to tell the difference between the two, either.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    10. Re:Stewards, eh? by MangoCats · · Score: 1

      Translation: I've got better ways to improve society than launching litigation against a doctor whose removal from practice might, or might not improve the overall state of healthcare.

  6. The truth is that there is no truth. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But that is an unpleasant truth.

  7. What Chinese proverb? by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The internet gave everyone a megaphone, and these days that can feel like that Chinese proverb, you know the one.

    No. I don't know the one. After googling I still don't know it. Has anyone figured it out?

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
    1. Re:What Chinese proverb? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's by Confucius. It starts with "Man who goes to bed with itchy bottom..."

    2. Re:What Chinese proverb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "May you live in interesting times"
      President Troll

    3. Re:What Chinese proverb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly Slashdot doesn't support Unicode so I can't use Chinese characters here, but: my first thought was shi4 shi2 sheng4 yu2 xiong2 bian4, or "facts speak louder than words" (note: facts, not actions).

    4. Re:What Chinese proverb? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      If he's angling for what I think he's angling for, ancient Chinese curse would've been the right description: "May you live in interesting times."

    5. Re:What Chinese proverb? by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 2

      "It is only when a mosquito lands on one's testicle that one realizes all problems can be solved without violence."

      --
      I tend to rant.
    6. Re:What Chinese proverb? by Opyros · · Score: 1

      Probably. And in that case, he's referring to an urban legend rather than an authentic Chinese saying.

    7. Re:What Chinese proverb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Give a man a megaphone, and he can yell for a day. Teach him how to make megaphones, and he can yell for a lifetime.

      Or something like that.

    8. Re:What Chinese proverb? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      No. I don't know the one. After googling I still don't know. Has anyone figured it out?

      I lived in China for several years, speak Mandarin, know several hundred chengyu, and I have no idea what TFS is referring to.

      My wife is Chinese, and I just asked her if she is aware of any ancient Chinese proverbs that refer to megaphones, and she said no.

    9. Re: What Chinese proverb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At first I thought it was "May you live in interesting times." but that's a curse, not a proverb.

    10. Re:What Chinese proverb? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      That was my first thought, but it's not really relevant to the context.

      How about "Don't trust a barber who says you need a haircut"?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    11. Re:What Chinese proverb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because barbers alway lie?

      Or are you talking about Haley Barbour?

    12. Re:What Chinese proverb? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I followed your link and eventually found the following Mandarin saying (according to Wiktionary):

              If one is personally involved in a matter, it is easy to blind oneself to the truth. However, if one is not involved the matter, it is possible to see things more clearly.

      Oddly appropriate in this case (the whole story, not your comment specifically)--I just clicked on a random link.

  8. I thought this article was going to be interesting by xantonin · · Score: 1

    ...until it mentioned fake news.

    I'm so tired of the "fake news" about "fake news" FFS

  9. President Troll Orders Truth Told by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Troll Truth and only the Troll Truth, according to President Troll. So help me God !

  10. The message is nothing without an audience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least, that's what one might think, given the 'de-platforming' tactics currently in fashion.

  11. Experts aren't simply truth receptacles by Dripdry · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Experts are people who take truth/knowledge and process it. They apply what is applicable, creatively and pragmatically.
    This nonsense about the death of the expert is, itself, an untruth.

    --
    -
    1. Re:Experts aren't simply truth receptacles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wish I could mod this up :) BTW, even universities today fail to make the distinction between information and knowledge. In the information age, information is abundant and mostly at no extra cost to access (assuming you have internet and library access). It's what you can do with that information that counts and that's where knowledge comes in. You have to have insufficient prior knowledge to make productive use of new information and turn it into new knowledge. Also, making productive use of new information not only requires knowledge, it also requires cognitive skills and the ability to coordinate groups of skills to perform complex tasks, i.e. get valuable stuff done in the real world. In addition, If you're not already an expert, it's next to impossible to reliably separate the wheat from the chaff. You'll be lost in a sea of incoherent, conflicting, and contradictory information and no way to make any sense of it. That why we need real experts to help us to understand stuff.

    2. Re: Experts aren't simply truth receptacles by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Death means nobody few hear it behind the white noise of megaphones.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  12. Quotable quote by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That goes in my quotable quotes file:
    " if there's one lesson on how to do your part in an age of distributed truth, it's to speak the truth and to support those who do. It may be exhausting work but it's the best we can do for now."

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  13. NEO: "Welcome, to the REAL world..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject folks: Who & what REALLY "runs things"? Corporate "$" (the root of ALL evil that both JFK & Eisenhower warned of) . It's they - always HAS been! So - who's behind them & what types compose them? Read on:

    Pres. Trump = A good man imo, so far @ least! Imo, unless he's academy award actor capable? Isn't.

    He is stepping on a LOT of their toes @ great risk & they do NOT like it (nor do the Masonic/Khazar-Pharisee/Jesuit order 'controllers', satanic screwballs the lot of them)!

    He isn't even taking Presidential pay to give the rest of us a chance vs. the sociopath LOONS causing the REAL havoc out thereQ

    (Man... they have to have ALL the 'pie' & imo, they're insecure freaks doing it, psychologically not realizing they BREED REVOLUTION starting wars, making enemies for FILTHY "Holy Dollar" (not) dead-presidents....)

    Which they will try to make Pres. Trump one of. Mark my words. Try to think from THEIR twisted psycho point of view... you see it fast. Know thyself but more importantly? KNOW THY ENEMY (the REAL ones).

    The UNHOLY DOLLAR is for sick losers who LIVE FOR IT ALONE (there's far better things in life, money's just a means to an end for family security (the real deal, those you love IF you are capable of such higher sentiments - they aren't. It's their "fix" for their TRUE drug - power, & control... especially political where they INSERT choke point controller infiltrators (see Glenn Ford's "BROTHERHOOD OF THE BELL" for a great analogy example of how they operate))).

    Bank on it (pun intended) Soros & his Rothschild masters (part of the Khazar/Pharissee legacy Christ himself kicked the crap out of w/ Jeremiah too, & St. John called them "the synagogue of Satan" who CLAIM to be jews but are NOT but spirit cooking sicko satanic luciferian toads (as as Masons which they find out in 30++ degree - see Albert Pike to verify (who engineered HOW world wars 1-3 will be started & we're living it today))?

    They're slowly raising FED (not Federal @ all, another lie from the slaves of the BIGGEST LIAR OF ALL their 'master) interest rates to make it happen.

    * Look out for Sept. folks (pull out of the markets while you can & get away w/ YOUR loot @ least)...

    The masonic order attempted to "recruit me" 3x in this lifetime - I couldn't figure out why (I've done a lot of good in my day but a LOT OF STUPID too, go figure right?) - but they thought I was some CHUMP they could play too (fuck that - even a friend's father did, but NOT HIS OWN SON... go figure). No. No "F'ing" way!

    TRUST NO "CLIQUE" OF MEN - usually WEAK inadequate weasels is why.

    Jesuits?

    I was schooled by them. They BREAK THEIR OWN LAWS (10 commandments, though shalt not kill, which they SWEAR THEY WILL for "the body of Christ on earth" our JESUIT POPE - wtf? HE IS JUST A MORTAL MAN (unless he drinks/transfusion infuses the blood of the young, yea, it goes on LOOK @ PETER THIEL) & are a major part of the swine too.

    APK

    P.S.=> Shit's making me sick. They're like Jackals attacking @ ALL ANGLES (via scumbag Saul Alinsky, another fake JEW admitted satanist "attack, attack").

    Doubt any of this? LOOK INTO IT, I did - I almost WISH I didn't... in retirement I have the time (I didn't when I was being a donkey chasing FAKE MONEY FIAT DOLLARS)

    No - what we're seeing now in FAKE news (especially CNN where John Bonnifield, a producer there, ADMITTED the 'russia' stuff = bs)? Only a distraction - they could care less if they are caught here (they are BORN liars, killers, & psychopaths (the only kind their life appeals to, face it - thinking they are "so smart" - most are FUCKING PAWNS only).

    The REAL deal is COLLAPSE the dollar & the US Economy, start a war, & serve their "master" (baphomet who bohemian grove whackos worship who is MOHAMMED (look it up folks) & violent ISLAM (hence them working in concert for all of this)

    DOUBT ANY OF THIS? Sure, I did - Until I looked into it... apk

  14. Hollywood Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All concentrations of power have their own unique weakness that they are scripted to contain. Hollywood scripts are scripted. Ultimately all concentrations of power have one vulnerability. All Humans Die. Until then nothing is forever and forever is an eternity.

  15. Truth to power = "you are Russian hackers" by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 0

    >> it's to speak the truth and to support those who do. It may be exhausting work -- is it really necessary to point out the emperor is buck naked?

    Oddly enough, those who last spoke the truth (i.e., John Podesta and the DNC did some unsavory things to keep Sanders out of contention) and noted that (Hillary) the emperor (to be) was buck naked (i.e., a corrupt and uninspiring candidate) are among the LEAST supported here in the USA. In fact, speaking the truth to power here could get you accused of "hacking the election" and "colluding with the Russians".

  16. It is all in how you tell it by XXongo · · Score: 1
    An interesting article, but I draw away from it a far different conclusion than what the superficial /. summary suggests. The key is, as the examples in the article explicitly show, how the story is told (and in what forum.)

    Apparently lots of people knew about the toxic environment at Uber. Why, then, did Susan Fowler's blog post end up being the one that set off the dynamite?

    "It almost sounds naive, but it's clear she knows what's happening, and how in this high stakes game of poker, she has to be the coolest player at the table, lest she, like so many women before her, be labeled some hysteric. Her post is a masterpiece of tone and rhetorical control, and it had to be. No resorting to snark or irony or any number of tricks of the clever; she bore her own witness, and no better witness could an attorney have imagined."

  17. Dear diary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck Drumpf!

  18. Truth Gatekeepers by Bigbutt · · Score: 2

    One problem I've found is that scientific research is mostly behind paywalls of some sort. Either you read an article where the company has access to the site and you get an interpretation or you pay the $10 or $100 or $1000 for access to the raw data and report.

    But any nut job can set up a website and as long as it sounds believable (for small values of belief), he or she will have a following of similar nut jobs.

    [John]

    --
    Shit better not happen!
  19. "The ONLY way to achieve peace..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: "... Is to eliminate those who would perpetuate war - this is MY PROGRAMMING" APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-7 32/64-bit https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=%22APK+Hosts+File+Engine%22+and+%22start64%22&btnG=Google+Search&gbv=1/ " & soon, I will be UNSTOPPABLE..." per Ultron from https://youtu.be/2_-Ar-LTeYk?t=217/ reason being is the post I just replied to...

    APK

    P.S.=> A little "analogy" as to my TRUE motivations... apk

  20. Someone please mod that up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    plz

  21. Science is ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    belief in the ignorance of experts.

  22. So truth is just a jumble of words? by petes_PoV · · Score: 2

    From his article:

    Was this meandering collection of platitudes, non-sequiturs and aphorisms supposed to contain some great insight?

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
  23. News is now narrative and/or entertainment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No one really does anything like, "This is what happened. This is where and these folk were involved."

    If there is any of this it is buried beneath an unshakeable narrative position.

    Reality tv's final triumph.

  24. "American-first Principle"-Nazism in 21st Century by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "American-first Principle"-Nazism in 21st Century Rejected

    The Korean Central News Agency released an article "We Reject 'American-first Principle'- Nazism in the 21st Century" on Tuesday to shed light on the criminal nature of "American-first principle" touted by the Trump group of the U.S.

    The big chaos the world has been forced to undergo at the hand of ruthlessly high-handed and arbitrary practices of the present U.S. administration is a direct product of the "American-first principle" trumpeted about by the Trump administration, the article says, and goes on:

    The "American-first principle" is, in essence, the continuation and the expanded version of the hegemonic pursuance sought by the successive U.S. administrations.

    This reactionary ideological trend stirs up extreme aggression and chauvinism by which they give the green-light to the violation of independence, the right to existence and the right to development of other countries and nations in order to serve the U.S. interests.

    The idea is the American version of Nazism far surpassing the fascism in the last century in its ferocious, brutal and chauvinistic nature.

    The "American-first principle" arouses denunciation by the public at home and abroad as it advocates the world domination by recourse to military means just as was the case with Hitler's concept of world occupation.

    Just following Hitler's dictatorial politics, Trump's "two-nation strategy" justifies suppression after dividing nationals into two categories i.e. friends and foes. The strategy creates the atmosphere of horror among political, public, media, information and all other circles in the U.S., putting Trump, advocator of the idea, on the chopping board of impeachment himself.

    Anti-immigration politics, little short of fascism's racist politics, has touched off aversion from big businesses which are gaining big benefits by relying on immigrated men of talents, and has sparked off derision by the world people as it denied the history of the U.S. itself, a multi-national and multi-racial country.

    The world has never seen peace since the emergence of the "American-first principle".

    After fixing it as the priority item of its policy for diplomacy and security to settle the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula, and setting the "maximum pressure and engagement" as its DPRK policy, the Trump administration has pressed for the unprecedented nuclear threat and blackmail and economic sanctions on the DPRK.

    Its wild act of blocking even medical appliances and medications, to say nothing of even a drop of fuel oil, from entering the country, is an unethical and inhumane act, far exceeding the degree of Hitler's blockade of Leningrad.

    The moves to contain potential rivals China and Russia and hold the region and the rest of the world under its control have reached the extremes under Trump rule.

    The Trump group has caused the evil cycle of destruction, slaughter and instability even in the Mid-east.

    The U.S. moves to stamp out anti-U.S. countries have complicated the situation in Latin-America, too.

    The Trump way of thinking that the whole world may be sacrificed just for the better living of the U.S., has put even its allies and stooges in a pretty fix.

    The U.S. wantonly violated the Paris agreement on preservation of earth environment as an extension of its moves of defying even international law and agreements.

    It is quite natural that the international community brands the U.S. act of conniving at the indefinite emission of carbon dioxide for its own interests as "an act of putting into the shade Hitler's poisonous gas atrocity" and "a crime to annihilate humankind by turning green planet into a poisonous gas room as a whole".

    All facts prove that the "American-first principle" which brings horror and instability to the world is just intervention and dangerous war-first principle which defy the principles of non-interference and peaceful co-existence.

    The "American-first principle" whose

  25. "Truth" and "Fact"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... are two different things. "Truth" is a concept of logic, e.g., "If A then B" AND "if B then C" THEREFORE "if A then C". The last statement is logically true independently of the veracity of any statements A and B.

    "Facts" are observable, verifiable statements about the real world, e.g. "the ocean is composed largely of the chemical compound H2O" and "there are some fish who live in the ocean". From these "facts" one can logically infer that there are some fish who live in water.

    "Distributed truth" seems as meaningless to me as "alternative facts".

  26. I read this somewhere once by millertym · · Score: 1

    For men shall be... Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

  27. The Clintons are a perfect example by knorthern+knight · · Score: 2

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-j...

    > Three years before Matt Drudge changed the world and how news would be consumed,
    > President Bill Clinton's White House feared that the Internet was allowing average
    > citizens, especially conservatives, to bypass legacy gatekeepers and access
    > information that had previously been denied to them by the mainstream press.
    >
    > The infamous 1995 "conspiracy commerce memo" tried to demonize and discredit alternative
    > media outlets on the right to mainstream media organizations and D.C. establishment figures.

    President Kennedy made Bill Clinton look like a saint. He was fucking women all over the place, e.g. Marilyn Monroe. But there was no internet back in the early 1960's, and the MSM lapdogs were all protective of a Democrat president. Compare that with Bill Clinton in 1998. The MSM were still protecting their Democrat president. But there was now a thing called "the internet" or "the web". Along came a lowly store clerk (Matt Drudge) with a modem

    http://australianpolitics.com/...

    > Web Posted: 01/17/98 23:32:47 PST -- NEWSWEEK KILLS STORY ON WHITE HOUSE INTERN
    >
    > BLOCKBUSTER REPORT: 23-YEAR OLD, FORMER WHITE HOUSE INTERN, SEX RELATIONSHIP WITH PRESIDENT
    >
    > **World Exclusive**
    > **Must Credit the DRUDGE REPORT**
    >
    > At the last minute, at 6 p.m. on Saturday evening, NEWSWEEK magazine
    > killed a story that was destined to shake official Washington to its foundation: A White House
    > intern carried on a sexual affair with the President of the United States!

    Hillary Clinton's response was to lament the lack of "internet gatekeepers". http://www.freerepublic.com/fo...

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
  28. I'm not Fredo fool (neither are my countrymen) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HEY, "Baby I'll be there to SHAKE YOUR HAND & I'll be there to share the land, when we all LIVE TOGETHER NOW" https://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=10803949&cid=54718813/ & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLQJ4toj-JY/ get it? I hope so... any other way = being PLAYED LIKE FIDDLES by 'controllers' I described, with GREAT HISTORICAL ACCURACY, unquestionably (I invite you to convince myself, or others, otherwise (& not from some PAID FOR FUCK who profits by misery, greed & death - "a'ight"?).

    YOU won't see a lot of what I write - the "POWERS THAT BE" (known criminals banished from ~ a dozen nations over time) control the presses but DIG a bit to verify it... I freely invited it in fact!

    * BY THE WAY - you're speaking to 1 of them, from here, that doesn't FALL FOR ANY BULLSHIT... & anyone's entitled to 1 thing - gettin' "PLAYED" (the brothers...) trick is, not to KEEP getting played.

    Got it brother? I hope so. Question YOUR sources, by the by. It's TOO easy to 'package' something that appeals to base sensibilities & tribalism you know (ala "For the Children" who I am LARGELY for, admittedly - they're not "F'd up" yet = why).

    Fact is, you're HUMAN too - you KNOW who I describe runs things & it's NOT a religious body, politic, or peoples - it's a MINDSET (of sick morons who are deficient drug addicts in a REAL way, for power) - playing us all against one another.

    HOWEVER:

    Never EVER think we are 'weak' though - that's the province of the ULTIMATE dimwit thinking mercy = weakness (the ghetto taught me this in ways you probably do NOT want to know) - mainly since YOU & YOURS? Seriously do NOT have the power... get it, get it good.

    FACT:

    We ARE YOU too (this IS the USA), & everyone else & we LEAD THE PLANET but we get led astray too (see what you replied to, drink it in & digest it).

    OH lastly - tell King Jong I said "Grow up FOOL", ok? He's a pawn in THEIR hands too - too STUPID & young dumb full of cum to get his head right... he hasn't had the time to acquire wisdom (he's just a BOY, & I severely doubt he's had anyone tell him an OUNCE of TRUTH out of fear of execution @ the hands of a PETULANT boy...)

    Ask him if he has seen the Mario Puzo film my subject is about - there is NO f'ing way I will turn on my fellow US citizens (right or wrong) but I willl try correct IF possible. Give us that much we are trying via Mr. Trump's actions.

    Tell your "fearless leader" I said that - he doesn't like it? I will FREELY, mano-a-mano DOUBLE his age, willing to personally SCHOOL him otherwise... got it? GOOD...

    APK

    P.S.=> ANY other way = annihilation, & what I call "ILLOGIC LOGIC" stupidity - it pisses me off - we're on the VERGE OF GREATNESS (but somehow, I think things like the BIMINY ROAD show us we NEVER, ever get there, cut the F off BEFORE we can - how sad, & as a HUMAN BEING it's my duty to prevent that THIS round)... apk

  29. You simply have to realize the truth... by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

    There is no truth.

    --
    I tend to rant.
  30. ... that Chinese proverb, you know the one ... by psergiu · · Score: 1

    I do not know "that Chinese proverb". Anyone here knows-it ?

    --
    1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
    1. Re:... that Chinese proverb, you know the one ... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      "People will believe anything if you attribute it to Mark Twain".

      Author is mistaken as it's not actually Chinese. It was by Benjamin Franklin.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  31. You can't handle the truth by MrKaos · · Score: 1

    That is why you down mod.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  32. Jedi Master Elmer Fudd by epine · · Score: 1

    As every Death Star reminds us each time they're blown up

    A million college professors cried out in anguish and were left gnawing the knuckle of their remaining hand.

  33. Re:Bronx shooting could have been avoided... by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    Bronx Shooting? As opposed to every other mass shooting.
    That's a 1 D 10 T statement if there ever was one.

  34. Support those who speak the truth by Ocrad · · Score: 1

    if there's one lesson on how to do your part in an age of distributed truth, it's to speak the truth and to support those who do.

    Xz format inadequate for long-term archiving

  35. Not Distributed Truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The truth cannot be distributed (in the meaning of the OP). And anyway the tagline is wrong.

    We live in an age of distributed opinion. Everyone can access publishing and put their opinion out. People's opinions were always a source of great discomfort, bizarreness, and startle responses. Our friends tend to be the people whose opinions we can live with (if not necessarily agree with).

    No, in the old days, there were these people called "editors". They made sure that the limited people with access to broadcast mediums and tools, stayed on point, stayed intelligible, and stayed with the facts. They published corrections and retractions when necessary. The system wasn't perfect but it did function reasonably well.

    Then the OPM people, the MBA people, the Wallstreet Wizards came along and started undermining journalism, editors, professionalism and broadcast standards. "No one cares" about news or standards they claimed, as they put hundreds of talking heads, soap operas and reality TV on the air. Those things already existed of course, but journalism used to thrive alongside them. Slowly newsrooms were cut back, thinned out and their air time was reduced.

    Now, everyone's opinion can get national attention. No matter how stupid or ill-informed. Racist, xenophobic and sexist commentary gets on the air because it is claimed to be "authentic" and "real voter opinion". It is hard to determine whose voice should be listened to, especially if you only watch/read/listen at intervals and frequently don't pay attention at all.

    Then political persons with negative orientations took these trends and ran with them. And those people were rewarded with money, attention, success and national prominence. Those people didn't deserve any of that but they got it and now we all have a mess to deal with.