I mean, the Russians are decades ahead in propaganda warfare, they own the US president, they only need a tiny budget to subvert US elections , they control everyone's computers through AVs , and Germany is in denial! It's a new Red Dawn I'm tellin ya!
I think it's very worthwhile to know how the manufacturers see it and the overall pattern seems to be that they strongly approve of increasing regulation which forces people to transition to more advanced and more expensive goods. That does not necessarily mean it's bad for us, just that their interests are a large part of it. Maybe too large a part, and they are not deciding everything by themselves, but certainly there is a heavy lobbying part that is kept out of view. Take safety. Car safety creates a market. It raises the bar for cars and makes it harder for competitors to get in. It forces you to switch to a car that takes a lot more energy to make, that is a lot more expensive to make. It does have benefits though, cars become safer. They become safer in such a way that it's good for the leading manufacturers. I'm still impressed by how weight of cars has been going up. It can go down again, by becoming more hightech of course. A recurrent pattern is people are forced to buy the more hightech solution. They can't say sorry I don't have the budget for that. So I pretty much think these things tend to happen at the expense of the poorer layers of the population.
Well, evidence points to social media advertising being exceedingly effective this past election.
They were even more effective than you think. I read a few things about the facebook 'campaign' and a large fraction of the ads were published after the election, and some of the ads were showing puppies. That is some seriously advanced reshaping of US politics you have there. https://consortiumnews.com/201...
That's the best explanation. Now everyone has received the warning. If you don't cooperate with the US three letter organisations we'll get you. They've got nothing on Kaspersky except that the software performed as expected and that is by detecting malware. Give it some time and every AV that is left on the market is forcibly unreliable.
They're not the only ones who thought that, it's a fairly common concept: big changes require major upsetting events. If you read the Shock Doctrine , it's about that. A strategist like Zbigniew Brzezinski also wrote about it. Every risk trader thinks like that as well. Mostly what it means is when such a thing happens, be ready to take advantage of it. And there, everyone seemed to be ready to see it as the golden opportunity. Does it mean that some people were aware that something was going to happen and deliberately kept quiet or looked away? Maybe. But the main issue should be how the government hijacked the event. I don't mean to say there should not be a more thorough investigation of the event, and I'm sure everyone involved has been only interested in covering up whatever they were doing. For instance you always have people who know things and think they are in control of the situation(don't worry, we've got people inside!) and then get a surprise. Then I'm mostly thinking of the Saudis and by extension the CIA.
It's a valid observation. In common circumstances the average speed is a lot slower than the maximum speed over a long stretch. I'm pretty sure that the situation here is optimal in this race in that there are as few interruptions as possible. I wonder if they have to stop for traffic lights. I also think that just to squeeze out a bit more speed the drivers are pretty good too.
I'm one of those who doesn't take the conspiracy theory of controlled demolition seriously. Not only that, it is a red herring. It is visible in plain view that the 9/11 attacks were seen as a golden opportunity to enforce a new order on the world. If I'm not mistaken that is what 9/11 conspiracy theorists also want us to believe and I find it perfectly obvious, but instead of focusing on the important part they want us to believe us some extra stuff that is hard to take serious.
What we want are facts, even if that results in boring news.
When the media reports official claims they are reporting facts and they are following journalistic guidelines. It is not enough to report facts. Even when the media debunks an official claim it happens low key and after the damage is done. In short what is needed is a media that works from a position of distrust. That makes them to actively go and verify the claims and actively highlight lies and debunked claims. But all that is bad for business. Instead the media works from a position of trust. If they'd adhere strictly to the journalistic code I suppose they would work from a position of passive distrust. Not motivated to investigate because that would not be objective and too partisan.
AFAIK as I know the majority of NRA members approve of the idea that 'cranks should not be allowed to get guns' but the manufacturers think every threshold for acquiring guns will affect sales.
Watergate is heavily overrated. Nixon had so much enemies that it didn't require any courage to go up against him. Proof is that Bob Woodward was part of it. You can't get any more establishment than that.
I don't know what 'conspiracies' are really but I think I can make the sweeping statement that most of what the mainstream reports about official enemies(Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria, Trump, Venezuela , Brazil, and other southern american countries) is always heavily compromised(it's usually plain rubbish), and the best way to find out is alternative sources. It can appear in the mainstream, but in such a low key manner that it passes unnoticed. The joke, or should I say the rule is that you have to read the third to last paragraph in a mainstream article to find the meat.
I suppose 9/11 could be called a conspiracy that has been covered up because of heavy Saudi involvement. Because as a rule conspiracy theorists lack imagination I'll point out that it's not because there is heavy Saudi involvement that it's a Saudi conspiracy against the US. Maybe the Saudi involvement could be described as 'heavy inviltration gone wrong', or maybe the Saudis and Al-Qaeda are so intertwined even they don't know the difference. Once everything is in the open the mainstream will report on it, but their contribution is minimal.
The weakness is in the use of 'conspiracies'. You can call every 'discrete' (as opposed to open) powerplay a conspiracy and then there are an awful lot of conspiracies, because wherever you look there are powers sneakily scheming and competing to get their way. What is clear is that the mainstream messages are now promoted at the expense of the independent/alternative sources. This happens with youtube, google, facebook and will happen with every major player.
If you look at conspiracies as typically structured in a very centralized manner: a tight core which monopolizes knowledge and power, then there are a lot less conspiracies. I don't think Google is a driving force behind the algorithms which downgrade alternative sources, it is mainly responding to pressure from many players. Maybe they're a bit more enthusiastic about spying on people.
In this case the mailman watches everything you do , decides what mail you should and should not get, and even exerts control over what mail gets sent(if they don't like what your site publishes, you lose your ads.) If you allow such concentration of power, it turns against you. And what's the topic here? That google are not exerting enough control. That's very weird.
If it is not enough to show that Russia stole the elections it is enough to demonstrate their evil intent. Now the official evil intent includes the very general 'sowing discord'. That means that they support activism of all sorts and activism becomes suspect. It means that groups like Black Lives Matters are reduced to russian stooges, the way Wikileaks was reduced to a stooge, the way a lot of alternative sites now are reduced to stooges that have to be slammed down (Google and propaganda sites like http://dashboard.securingdemoc... and PropOrNot are working on that).
It's an extremely damaging evolution, and it's a bandwagon that is mostly fueled by baseless claims that get attention when they're launched and then debunked quickly without much attention. From all the debunked stories I've read I still need proof that Russia is responsible for any of it. But the claims come so quickly it's impossible to keep track of them. I've already seen claims linking Russia to the Las Vegas shooting.
You can also see the success on this site, which already full of people trying hard to roll their eyes and mutter knowingly something about russian shills.
I just want a Ligo app so that the moment Ligo detects a signal I get notified with a chirp and a vibration, so that I can almost feel the wave as it passes.
I thought 'The American Conservative' ( http://www.theamericanconserva... ) was started just because they who called themselves paleoconservatives felt they were being squeezed out of the discourse. So together with some libertarians I consider them well informed , but unfortunately in the current context , fringe.
I think that summarizes it. A low budget sample points at trivial effects and these are equated with the effects of smoking, which is ridiculous. Smoking has very serious health effects. There is no strong indication that the nicotine bit in smoking is significantly involved in these health effects. Even if there are health effects you have to look at the 'size' of the effects. If they're an order of magnitude lower then they should be treated differently and not used as an argument to say that vaping and smoking are more or less the same thing.
You may freely disagree with some (or even all) of their rules and policies, but that still doesn't change the fact that free speech does not translate to 'third parties must always publish my opinion on their platform.'
That's a valid argument, especially when you say 'must'. But when the market is dominated by a few players who get together with the government to enforce a blackout then that argument becomes highly dubious.
Slashdot Mirror
Meanwhile the germans see no reason to warn about Kaspersky.
https://www.reuters.com/articl...
I mean, the Russians are decades ahead in propaganda warfare, they own the US president, they only need a tiny budget to subvert US elections , they control everyone's computers through AVs , and Germany is in denial! It's a new Red Dawn I'm tellin ya!
Agreed. Snowden is a fairly stereotypical hero. And that's a compliment.
I think it's very worthwhile to know how the manufacturers see it and the overall pattern seems to be that they strongly approve of increasing regulation which forces people to transition to more advanced and more expensive goods. That does not necessarily mean it's bad for us, just that their interests are a large part of it. Maybe too large a part, and they are not deciding everything by themselves, but certainly there is a heavy lobbying part that is kept out of view. Take safety. Car safety creates a market. It raises the bar for cars and makes it harder for competitors to get in. It forces you to switch to a car that takes a lot more energy to make, that is a lot more expensive to make. It does have benefits though, cars become safer. They become safer in such a way that it's good for the leading manufacturers. I'm still impressed by how weight of cars has been going up. It can go down again, by becoming more hightech of course.
A recurrent pattern is people are forced to buy the more hightech solution. They can't say sorry I don't have the budget for that. So I pretty much think these things tend to happen at the expense of the poorer layers of the population.
They were even more effective than you think. I read a few things about the facebook 'campaign' and a large fraction of the ads were published after the election, and some of the ads were showing puppies. That is some seriously advanced reshaping of US politics you have there. https://consortiumnews.com/201...
That's the best explanation. Now everyone has received the warning. If you don't cooperate with the US three letter organisations we'll get you. They've got nothing on Kaspersky except that the software performed as expected and that is by detecting malware. Give it some time and every AV that is left on the market is forcibly unreliable.
Well that's a nice color. 40 or 55?
https://media2.caskers.com/med...
They're not the only ones who thought that, it's a fairly common concept: big changes require major upsetting events. If you read the Shock Doctrine , it's about that. A strategist like Zbigniew Brzezinski also wrote about it. Every risk trader thinks like that as well.
Mostly what it means is when such a thing happens, be ready to take advantage of it. And there, everyone seemed to be ready to see it as the golden opportunity. Does it mean that some people were aware that something was going to happen and deliberately kept quiet or looked away? Maybe.
But the main issue should be how the government hijacked the event.
I don't mean to say there should not be a more thorough investigation of the event, and I'm sure everyone involved has been only interested in covering up whatever they were doing. For instance you always have people who know things and think they are in control of the situation(don't worry, we've got people inside!) and then get a surprise. Then I'm mostly thinking of the Saudis and by extension the CIA.
It's a valid observation. In common circumstances the average speed is a lot slower than the maximum speed over a long stretch. I'm pretty sure that the situation here is optimal in this race in that there are as few interruptions as possible. I wonder if they have to stop for traffic lights.
I also think that just to squeeze out a bit more speed the drivers are pretty good too.
I'm one of those who doesn't take the conspiracy theory of controlled demolition seriously. Not only that, it is a red herring.
It is visible in plain view that the 9/11 attacks were seen as a golden opportunity to enforce a new order on the world. If I'm not mistaken that is what 9/11 conspiracy theorists also want us to believe and I find it perfectly obvious, but instead of focusing on the important part they want us to believe us some extra stuff that is hard to take serious.
Yep. Best keep quiet.
You mean like this?
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...
When the media reports official claims they are reporting facts and they are following journalistic guidelines. It is not enough to report facts. Even when the media debunks an official claim it happens low key and after the damage is done.
In short what is needed is a media that works from a position of distrust. That makes them to actively go and verify the claims and actively highlight lies and debunked claims. But all that is bad for business. Instead the media works from a position of trust.
If they'd adhere strictly to the journalistic code I suppose they would work from a position of passive distrust. Not motivated to investigate because that would not be objective and too partisan.
AFAIK as I know the majority of NRA members approve of the idea that 'cranks should not be allowed to get guns' but the manufacturers think every threshold for acquiring guns will affect sales.
Watergate is heavily overrated. Nixon had so much enemies that it didn't require any courage to go up against him. Proof is that Bob Woodward was part of it. You can't get any more establishment than that.
I don't know what 'conspiracies' are really but I think I can make the sweeping statement that most of what the mainstream reports about official enemies(Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria, Trump, Venezuela , Brazil, and other southern american countries) is always heavily compromised(it's usually plain rubbish), and the best way to find out is alternative sources. It can appear in the mainstream, but in such a low key manner that it passes unnoticed. The joke, or should I say the rule is that you have to read the third to last paragraph in a mainstream article to find the meat.
I suppose 9/11 could be called a conspiracy that has been covered up because of heavy Saudi involvement. Because as a rule conspiracy theorists lack imagination I'll point out that it's not because there is heavy Saudi involvement that it's a Saudi conspiracy against the US. Maybe the Saudi involvement could be described as 'heavy inviltration gone wrong', or maybe the Saudis and Al-Qaeda are so intertwined even they don't know the difference. Once everything is in the open the mainstream will report on it, but their contribution is minimal.
The weakness is in the use of 'conspiracies'. You can call every 'discrete' (as opposed to open) powerplay a conspiracy and then there are an awful lot of conspiracies, because wherever you look there are powers sneakily scheming and competing to get their way.
What is clear is that the mainstream messages are now promoted at the expense of the independent/alternative sources. This happens with youtube, google, facebook and will happen with every major player.
If you look at conspiracies as typically structured in a very centralized manner: a tight core which monopolizes knowledge and power, then there are a lot less conspiracies. I don't think Google is a driving force behind the algorithms which downgrade alternative sources, it is mainly responding to pressure from many players. Maybe they're a bit more enthusiastic about spying on people.
In this case the mailman watches everything you do , decides what mail you should and should not get, and even exerts control over what mail gets sent(if they don't like what your site publishes, you lose your ads.) If you allow such concentration of power, it turns against you. And what's the topic here? That google are not exerting enough control. That's very weird.
If it is not enough to show that Russia stole the elections it is enough to demonstrate their evil intent. Now the official evil intent includes the very general 'sowing discord'. That means that they support activism of all sorts and activism becomes suspect. It means that groups like Black Lives Matters are reduced to russian stooges, the way Wikileaks was reduced to a stooge, the way a lot of alternative sites now are reduced to stooges that have to be slammed down (Google and propaganda sites like http://dashboard.securingdemoc... and PropOrNot are working on that).
It's an extremely damaging evolution, and it's a bandwagon that is mostly fueled by baseless claims that get attention when they're launched and then debunked quickly without much attention. From all the debunked stories I've read I still need proof that Russia is responsible for any of it. But the claims come so quickly it's impossible to keep track of them. I've already seen claims linking Russia to the Las Vegas shooting.
You can also see the success on this site, which already full of people trying hard to roll their eyes and mutter knowingly something about russian shills.
I think it's horrible. The return of mccarthyism.
Meanwhile Glenn Greenwald posted an article which explains why BeauHD falls in the category of useful idiots.
https://theintercept.com/2017/...
Well who needs civilization anyway.
I just want a Ligo app so that the moment Ligo detects a signal I get notified with a chirp and a vibration, so that I can almost feel the wave as it passes.
I thought 'The American Conservative' ( http://www.theamericanconserva... ) was started just because they who called themselves paleoconservatives felt they were being squeezed out of the discourse. So together with some libertarians I consider them well informed , but unfortunately in the current context , fringe.
I tend to be just as cynical but I happen to agree with his advice: start working on damage control.
I think that summarizes it. A low budget sample points at trivial effects and these are equated with the effects of smoking, which is ridiculous. Smoking has very serious health effects. There is no strong indication that the nicotine bit in smoking is significantly involved in these health effects. Even if there are health effects you have to look at the 'size' of the effects. If they're an order of magnitude lower then they should be treated differently and not used as an argument to say that vaping and smoking are more or less the same thing.
That's a valid argument, especially when you say 'must'. But when the market is dominated by a few players who get together with the government to enforce a blackout then that argument becomes highly dubious.