Budget overruns, endless committee meetings, sub contractors who cant meet a deadline to save their lives (literally!), mission creep, management adding new features the infrastructure was never meant to handle, sales promising it to the customer at no additional charge, shipments of materials that are delayed...I could go on, but I think you get the picture. Humans are humans. Our challenges and problems are intrinsic to us, not a product of our mutable environments, methods, and technology.
So the problems we have in 2017 this will slide a project into the next fiscal year. Apparently, in 10500 BC it will slide a project past a few millennia. Business as usual. SNAFU is the status quo.
Maybe the reason Obama didn't try to stop the Russians is because it would have been counterproductive. By this I mean that the collusion and election interference from Russia could very well have been the result of a tit-for-tat agreement connected to the uranium deal and huge donations from Russian sources toward the Clinton foundation.
So, the idea being that Obama and the DNC couldn't imagine a scenario where Hillary would lose, especially with all of the help from the Russians they purchased with uranium. This obviously did not come to pass. So the Democrats know there is collusion with Russia because they are the ones that arranged it! All they need to do to topple their opponent is pin their actions on their rivals.
If I were going to do that I would start with a narrative that my opponent was working with the Russians. I would keep saying it, without ceasing, until it was on the lips of everyone in the country. And, if you know the ways that the Russians were interfering in the election it would be very easy to use that information disparity to make your opponent look guilty.
Food for thought? I seriously don't know how valid this idea is. Personally I don't think that any election related collusion went on. There are too many other sources domestically that would provide more bang for the buck. I mean really, if $50k-$100k of foreign sourced money and influence could change the results of the election, how much more could be done with that money in the hands of domestic influence peddlers?
Ummm, I dunno, maybe that supporting an unwavering, unchanging story that came out before any investigations were done is incredibly naive, even delusional?
The fact that no facts were known, but that every factoid that is revealed fits the story perfectly in some people's minds is uncanny to the point that it is unrealistic. The facts keep changing, but the story and what the facts mean keep staying the same. That's delusional.
The only other choice is it's intentional. A story repeated so often becomes the justification of an investigation and everything learned from the investigation is somehow definitive proof of the story. Don't bite the hand that feeds, I guess.
Personally, all I can think of is "Methinks thou dost protest too much" when it comes to this subject. Since before any evidence we have heard the same thing from the same people. When I am force fed something like this I always look at it with scrutiny and objectivity. Drinking the kool-aid is a great way to allude to what happens to people who can't think for themselves. They are used for someone else's purposes and then left for dead. Sorry, I won't be that guy. I would prefer others were as circumspect, but alas, too many fanbois.
You can spin this into "He's a Trump supporter" if you like. It would be an intentional lie on your part and the accusation would be a small price to pay for me to learn exactly who I am dealing with. If you want to know the facts, it is simply this: I don't trust our government leaders, their hanger's on in the politico-sphere, the media pundits, or anyone else who has been trying to sell me this story for months now. I don't even trust the ones that haven't been trying to sell this story. I mistrust and pity anyone who has bought into this as wholeheartedly as ye olde AC has. They are obviously compromised in either their integrity, their mental capacities, or both.
When someone is so easily programmed by voices from a box (pick one: their TV, their computer, their phone) to spout other people's propaganda, it is also easy to visualize their mental processes as a simple mechanism rather than an emergent phenomena demonstrating the infinite complexity capable of the human mind. They don't seem to be aware of the fact they have awareness, or possessing the knowledge that they can observe themselves during their observation of themselves observing something. They merely parrot and regurgitate on command. No synapses necessary...
Coordination is not necessary for my assertion to be true. It only requires each party to act in their own self interest and to completely ignore their responsibilities.
Our government entities want to be able to control the narrative by selective release of facts. First, it helps them distract and misdirect. More importantly, it makes sure they can continue to do the things that they are upset at the "Russians" for doing with their ad buys, namely propagandize and manipulate the American electorate. So, no full disclosure, no full release of facts. Never let a good created crisis go to waste.
The tech companies don't want egg on their face so they are willing to hold back as much damning info as they can. The info that is released is damage controlled by their own spin teams, but the real problem they face is they were so easily exploited due to their intrinsic function. Suffice it to say, if the general public knew just how granular the reverse engineering of their users has become things might not go so well for the tech companies. If all of the ways their users have been dissected, analyzed, and packaged up for would be advertisers were well and fully known, it could affect their bottom line. So, tight lips when share price is on the line.
The press I am most disappointed in. They, who should be the ally of the electorate, are more concerned with their advertising revenue which has resulted in increasingly partisan coverage, which is no coverage at all. When the facts are so colored by "appealing to your intended audience" that they stop being facts it's no longer news and is no longer the exercise of the prerogative of the fourth estate. They aren't interested in getting us the facts, sans narrative wrapper and omitted details. They want page views and subscribers of a certain demographic and political leaning, which means massaging the facts to be easily consumed by politico-cultural factions created by the wedge issues of the political "parties." So, no way we will get the facts from a news corporation. Investigative journalism was sacrificed on the altar of the new partisan yellow journalism our weak minded fellow Americans call news.
I don't call anyone a bitch, except for my wife, and then only when she has done something surprising, exceedingly pleasant, and beautiful for me, unbidden, without expectation of recompense, and straight from her vastly perceptive heart to mine. Hearing her laugh is, to me, the most beautiful sound in the world. Under the the previously described circumstances if I call her a "vicious irrational bitch" in the right tone of voice I am rewarded with rare peals of her laughter and we share a moment of unparalleled joy. You probably wouldn't understand. I don't expect you to.
While on the subject: In the past I have coached more than a few people to get over their self imposed thinking of "I don't want people to call me a (bitch) if I stand up for myself." I supported them both in one-on-ones as well as in the larger groups we interact in. The results were fulfilling. They were able to realize that it wasn't sexism or an external force that was holding them back. It was the stories they told themselves about who they were being , who they are, and what happened around them that were holding them back. In more than one case they realized that they were using only one method of "getting their way" and "standing up for themselves," and that was to be a (bitch), by their own definition! They had trapped themselves into self destructive modes of action with thoughts and feelings they didn't even know they had going on in the background. Once that was visible to them discussions about empowering the people around them as a way to have people learn to respect them and their capabilities was the next logical step. The result? They weren't scared of being called a (bitch) anymore, even when they were standing up for themselves. They didn't need to demand equal treatment, as they were now highly respected, and even given deferential treatment. Everyone looked up to them, wanted to participate in their growth and development, and expressed a genuine desire to support them in whatever they were up to.
Remember, what you see outside you is not outside you. Everything you see is inside you. Perception happens within. Experience happens within. Reality is within you and subject to your own internal world. If you see sexism it is because it is in you. Be responsible for what you see. Be responsible for what you experience. Be responsible for your capacity to be offended. In your current state it is blinding you. Without responsibility for your experience of reality and with a blind eye to yourself, you will create in others the thing you are most fighting against inside yourself.
So, in response to your question I would say this: I cannot even begin to try to figure out where you are coming from. Really, you lost me when you implied I was calling someone a bitch when clearly the sentence you are quoting is about someone else referring to themselves in a derogatory manner. Based on the way the English language is constructed I could easily take offense at your response to what I said. You created a false statement and impression of me by twisting my words to mean something they don't say and were never meant to mean. I see this frequently. It is a very common thing these days: kneeling means you hate America, voting for Trump makes you a NAZI and a white supremacist, etc. Taking offense means taking the bait from someone who is not concerned with solutions. It derails the conversation to a mud slinging match and an opportunity to hurt people, rather than a discussion about how to solve issues, bridge gaps, come closer together, or to learn from others. I choose not to take offense. Thank you.
I used (bitch) in parenthesis as this word apparently has different meanings when attributed to a man and a woman. Insert an appropriate self-referential moniker you would use when being overbearing, unnecessarily aggressive, unconcerned for how you occur to others, and so self-focused you are unaware of or uncaring toward the mental state of people who you are interdependent with. Whatever that word is for you, go ahead and use that one.
First, until the whole kit and caboodle of information relating to these advertisements and accounts is revealed to the public we can't even begin to have an informed and fruitful discussion about what the intention was. That we do not have this information now is telling. It is an intentional smoke screen put up by our government, supported by the tech companies, and enabled by the press. It shows you one thing more than anything else, namely the first rule of the carnival: Don't let the rubes see the man behind the curtain. If you haven't figured it out, you are the rube, rube.
Second, these politicians appear to be upset that the fertile ground they created is being planted by other parties. Forsooth, it is their perpetual use of wedge issues and focus groups that gives them the ability to force coherent blocks of the electorate apart with intentionally fomented hatred and suspicion. After all of these decades of intentional mistreatment by the people we elect, the people are so sensitized to social issues they cannot even have a rational and sane discussion of the same.
Third, how the holy fucking fuck do they know that what the "Russians" did with advertising is effective? Oh, yeah, right...they do it themselves all of the time and have definitive proof of how to manipulate the American public.
Fourth, with all of the money and influence going back and forth from BOTH parties to Russia, I would not be surprised if payments were made from the US political parties to Russia to place these advertisements in the first damn place. If you would be surprised by this I recommend you study up on one thing that will open your mind to the truth. It's called: American History.
I am firmly convinced that if you are scared of the Russia boogeyman in the election you are so incredibly gullible and stupid they should lock you in a room and throw away the room.
You are delusional and need psychiatric help. You practice the same thing that delusional, paranoid schizophrenic, and religious people do, namely unshakable belief without any proof. You don't even express faith, as you have no doubts at all, which means you have no faith.
You are just stuck, like a broken clock. It is unfortunate you possess a human brain. With all of that certainty you don't even get to use any of it. It would be much easier to simulate your rigid experience of reality with matchsticks and marbles. No synapses necessary!
BRING ON THE PROCEDURALLY GENERATED ALIEN TENTACLE PORN!!!!!!
(She said, breathlessly into her cell phone...Siri responded "I'm sorry, all I have is disturbing uncanny valley porn. You will need to upgrade to the iPhone xXx for that, now with genital recognition."
Take all of the gender out of what you just said and you very closely approximate where most guys are coming from: We are treated like equals because we demand it. I don't have to put up with your shit, I'm a professional and competent at what I do. That is it.
Some women don't want to be called a "bitch" so they don't demand equal treatment. They doormat themselves. Then, after not standing up for themselves for years they assert it is everyone else's fault they don't have the promotion they never told anyone they wanted. Not fair, especially to themselves. Even if they bring and win a lawsuit they are still the person who won't stand up for themselves and blames other people for where they are in life. That just sucks.
Also, I have seen a few women who believe they should be treated like they are better than everyone else. They pigeonhole themselves as entitled and untrustworthy, even though they are usually quite proficient at what they do. Then, after being difficult to work with for years and alienating everyone from their co-workers to their bosses' boss, they decry the "boy's club" mentality they kept them from getting everything they ever wanted on a silver platter, as is their due. They usually bail out or, if they can convince someone in upper management of their deserving character, they are promoted and become a thorn in everyone else's side.
Dont get it twisted. I have seen the exact same behavior patterns I mentioned above in men, too. The difference is that fewer men trick themselves into thinking it's everyone else's fault they are where they are. They know. They have a plethorea of other men to compare themselves to, and the truth becomes obvious quickly. Illusions are dispelled.
Unfortunately, from what I have seen, many women don't consider their male peers as peers. They see them as tools to manipulate, to be played, influenced, flirted with, added to their "team" of trusted sycophants, or as an obstacle to be whispered about, taken down a notch, shown their place, out done, and embarrassed in front of their peers. Either way, that shit is just not professional.
It is refreshing to see a woman take such a male-centric viewpoint of the workplace Rastl. The realism with which you stated your case is decidedly similar to what most men are up to at work.
First, without the full set of ads and comments, and the meta-data about who they were targeted at, there is no context by which to evaluate the efficacy nor the intention of these purported meddlers in our elections. You, you simpering sheep, seem content eat whatever is fed to you and swallow it whole. I, on the other hand, don't trust you, the NY Times, or the Philly Inquirer as much as I trust actual factual data, presented without filter, cherry picking, or commentary.
In my opinion, this is what the fourth estate is there for, hard to get facts and a check on the powers of government. Unfortunately, every modern journalist sees it differently and most of the people in the US are too busy chanting along with their chosen echo chamber to concern themselves with facts. Cest la vie; doesn't mean I am going to join you morons in bailing water into the ship though.
Now that we are on the subject, I have been convinced about the media's outright lies since, oh about two decades before Trump was a reality show star, and I had my suspicions well before that. I reached this conclusion by multiple avenues:
1) Knowing firsthand the events being reported on and watching the absolutely false representations made by the media. 2) Knowing journalists. 3) Knowing humans. 4) Watching the news, once. 5) Reading history.
I guess from your commentary you believe everything that MSNBC and Fox News put up, eh? The medial never lies, right? They are our ally in all things, like super heroes, but with more humility, right? They wouldn't have an agenda of their own, nor would they be politically oriented and willing to put their political beliefs ahead of facts, nor would they sensationalize things to inflate their own coffers of advertising dollars, nor would they get anything wrong, even if it is completely contradictory to another story about the same incident, right?
If you are an avid consumer of media and you aren't interdicting and filtering everything you see with a very squinty and extraordinarily jaundiced eye....god help you, you poor simpering imbecilic fool.
My whole post is a joke, pointing toward the absurdity of the things that Americans call politics these days. So a joke, but nowhere near the breadth and scope of the joke that is the US government. You hit the nail on the head with 1950. The Pentagon Papers put this year as the first public overtures of four consecutive presidents to intentionally create a war.
Traitors, the lot of them. Conspiring against the American people, lying about their intentions and actions, inventing a war for us to die in: Truman, Kennedy, Eisenhower, and LBJ. Their statues are the ones that should be torn down. Their monuments defaced and destroyed. Their names dragged through the mud and sullied with the truth of what complete shitbags they were and are. Disgraceful, warmongering, murderers of their countrymen. There is nothing lower.
Low voter turnout, you say? It couldn't have anything to do with the parties putting up the most flawed, offensive, and polarizing candidates in the history of foreverness, could it?
You sound like those assholes that say taking a knee during the national anthem is really about ass raping a wounded soldier, or whatever stupid shit they make up instead of listening to what the protest is actually about.
And, just like when people defend the right of rich, entitled, and incredibly privileged people to protest the national anthem on a nationally broadcast stage, so you should defend to the death the right of other people to identify a problem in their community and protest against it. If you don't you're not only a hypocrite, you're completely un-American.
See, to many Americans, voting for Hillary was like a combination of shitting diarrhea on the American flag, urinating in George Washington's mouth, and converting to Canadianism all at once. So instead of casting aspersions on the people who didn't vote for her, you should be commending them for demonstrating and protesting, on a national stage, the problems they see in their community. They pulled a lever. Kind of like taking a knee, but lots less fanfare.
Apologies in advance for any offense you or anyone else takes from reading this.
I don't want to hear "The Russians influenced the election" and I don't want to hear "The Russians didn't influence the election." Nor do I want to hear about how many people, potentially, figuratively, or exaggeratedly could have might possibly seen a snippet of an ad or post by a "Russian operative."
I don't want to hear your commentary, Zuckerberg's inane prattling, any political pundit's repackaging of this bullshit, and certainly not any journalist's outright lies about this.
I just want one absurdly simple and easy thing:
SHOW ME THE FUCKING ADS AND COMMENTS YOU SAY ARE FROM RUSSIANS.
I can remember hearing news stories about Trump in the lead up to the election that were all about someone's reaction to what he said. The only problem is that what Trump said was never quoted. Then the news stories about someone else's reaction to the person who reacted to Trump's statements were out. Again no direct quote of the original statement was ever made.
On that day I realized the news in this country looks more like an angsty but popular teenage girl's diary than responsible journalism.
Yeah, you can't smell yourself because you have been steeping in your own ugly juices for way too long.
You stink of hatred...and of irony. You are what you dislike in others. You just think it's about their ideology. It's really about how you don't accept yourself exactly how you are.
If you could you would see how hilarious your diatribe is. You make mountains out of molehills. Most of all, you make everything about you, that's why someone else's actions and words about someone else are so upsetting to you. You make it personal because you don't know, down to your bones, who you really are.
In identifying your "Self" with external ideologies and people you have no choice to react with flight or fight when those external phantom "Selves" are attacked, demeaned, or worst of all, proven to have feet of clay.
My sincere hope is for you to learn who you are. For you to know who you truly are. To do this you need to go back and think about your past. Remember all of those times you failed miserably. Those time you attempted to do something of worth, something that inspired you, especially as a young person, and something happened to stop you. I want you to get connected to what you were up to when you were interrupted. What was the motivation? Who were you being? I can guarantee you that you were being exemplary. You were demonstrating love, admiration, or sacrifice, or dedication; something along those lines.
Then something happened. Your aims were not achieved. You were stopped, or you failed. In that moment, you got connected to the failure. You took that failure to mean something about yourself. You related to yourself as that failure. You still do. You still talk down to yourself about it. It comes up at night, when you try to sleep. It comes up during the day to stop you when you try to do something of true value.
This is not who you are. It's a lie. The you that is you is who you were being when you began, not when you failed. Get connected to who you were being before you failed, before life happened. That is who you truly are. Then realize that every single negative thought you have had about yourself, every time you have debased or talked down to yourself, every time you have thought you aren't good enough...all of it is a lie. None of it is true, and none of it is about who you truly are.
Once you can identify who you truly are, most of this "stuff" that so infuriates you will no longer be such a burden. Mirth, joy, love, and happiness are within you, and you get to bring them with you wherever you go. Even to a Trump rally honoring Sean Hannity's supreme court seat and Dick Cheney's Nobel Peace Prize.
"Psychology is not much more than the imposition of an orthodoxy and that orthodoxy is based on what people in the psych department think of themselves."
Or is it based on what people in the psych department think other people think about them, eh?
Put humans in a sandbox. Time every finger flick, every pause, every hover, every click. Record the same. Xor and diff similar aggregates after contradictory stimulus is posted to their wall and is subsequently hovered or clicked. Do the same with reinforcing stimulus. Record every word of every post. Analyze it over the years, creating a timeline of views and ideas. Look for word choice additions and changes after specifically crafted content is consumed. Get intentional. Record A is exposed to posts with X, Y and Z. Record B is exposed to posts with B, C, and A. In addition to all of the other metrics, examine their tone, mood, and content generated post exposure. Rate records according to their ability to be influenced, reactivity, introversion, tilt, etc. Correlate this to educational background, location, family size, marital/relationship status, self-admitted medical data, ad nauseum, ad infinitum. Build a predictive index. Test it. Test it again. Break it intentionally. Rebuild it from the broken parts. Now grow it in a neural network. Rinse, repeat, from the top, now with machine learning.
I'm not even trying to be evil with this and it looks evil as fuck. If FB's objective was directed more toward domination instead of softselling their "services" as an advertiser we would all be strapped into chairs wearing VR headsets awaiting our weekly intermittent release to perform fellatio on Zuckerberg. Thank god for greedy fucks. They have to leave us some autonomy or we couldn't go out and earn their money for them.
More of the same I see. You really cannot accept that people are 100% responsible for their own behavior, can you?
Input: "Love everyone as much as you love yourself."
Output: "GOD HATES FAGS!"
Conclusion: Religion is bad. (Wait, what?!?!?)
See, that right there? What I am pointing to is simply this: It doesn't matter what words or pictures are used, humans will find a way to pin the blame for their unacceptable behavior on something or someone other than themselves. And, there are continually people who will let them get away with it.
First: The FBI made and has retained a full copy of the drive previous to the lawsuit. The FBI has stated it is available to the participants in the lawsuit.
Second: The computer was at Kennesaw State University when it was degaussed by a low level technician.
These are the facts. What are you talking about? Everything you stated is irrelevant in light of these facts.
On the campus of Kennesaw State University maybe? That is where the computer was when it was degaussed.
It certainly wasn't in the direct control of any state elected officials. Good news though. The FBI has a complete copy of the data that was on the computer in question. Looks like you didn't know that, which is interesting. It's in the news. All you have to do is read and not be a fucking sheep.
Slashdot Mirror
Budget overruns, endless committee meetings, sub contractors who cant meet a deadline to save their lives (literally!), mission creep, management adding new features the infrastructure was never meant to handle, sales promising it to the customer at no additional charge, shipments of materials that are delayed...I could go on, but I think you get the picture. Humans are humans. Our challenges and problems are intrinsic to us, not a product of our mutable environments, methods, and technology.
So the problems we have in 2017 this will slide a project into the next fiscal year. Apparently, in 10500 BC it will slide a project past a few millennia. Business as usual. SNAFU is the status quo.
Maybe the reason Obama didn't try to stop the Russians is because it would have been counterproductive. By this I mean that the collusion and election interference from Russia could very well have been the result of a tit-for-tat agreement connected to the uranium deal and huge donations from Russian sources toward the Clinton foundation.
So, the idea being that Obama and the DNC couldn't imagine a scenario where Hillary would lose, especially with all of the help from the Russians they purchased with uranium. This obviously did not come to pass. So the Democrats know there is collusion with Russia because they are the ones that arranged it! All they need to do to topple their opponent is pin their actions on their rivals.
If I were going to do that I would start with a narrative that my opponent was working with the Russians. I would keep saying it, without ceasing, until it was on the lips of everyone in the country. And, if you know the ways that the Russians were interfering in the election it would be very easy to use that information disparity to make your opponent look guilty.
Food for thought? I seriously don't know how valid this idea is. Personally I don't think that any election related collusion went on. There are too many other sources domestically that would provide more bang for the buck. I mean really, if $50k-$100k of foreign sourced money and influence could change the results of the election, how much more could be done with that money in the hands of domestic influence peddlers?
It just doesn't make sense as presented.
Wait a minute, the media told me Trump is a NAZI. Russians hate NAZI's.
Ummm, I dunno, maybe that supporting an unwavering, unchanging story that came out before any investigations were done is incredibly naive, even delusional?
The fact that no facts were known, but that every factoid that is revealed fits the story perfectly in some people's minds is uncanny to the point that it is unrealistic. The facts keep changing, but the story and what the facts mean keep staying the same. That's delusional.
The only other choice is it's intentional. A story repeated so often becomes the justification of an investigation and everything learned from the investigation is somehow definitive proof of the story. Don't bite the hand that feeds, I guess.
Personally, all I can think of is "Methinks thou dost protest too much" when it comes to this subject. Since before any evidence we have heard the same thing from the same people. When I am force fed something like this I always look at it with scrutiny and objectivity. Drinking the kool-aid is a great way to allude to what happens to people who can't think for themselves. They are used for someone else's purposes and then left for dead. Sorry, I won't be that guy. I would prefer others were as circumspect, but alas, too many fanbois.
You can spin this into "He's a Trump supporter" if you like. It would be an intentional lie on your part and the accusation would be a small price to pay for me to learn exactly who I am dealing with. If you want to know the facts, it is simply this: I don't trust our government leaders, their hanger's on in the politico-sphere, the media pundits, or anyone else who has been trying to sell me this story for months now. I don't even trust the ones that haven't been trying to sell this story. I mistrust and pity anyone who has bought into this as wholeheartedly as ye olde AC has. They are obviously compromised in either their integrity, their mental capacities, or both.
When someone is so easily programmed by voices from a box (pick one: their TV, their computer, their phone) to spout other people's propaganda, it is also easy to visualize their mental processes as a simple mechanism rather than an emergent phenomena demonstrating the infinite complexity capable of the human mind. They don't seem to be aware of the fact they have awareness, or possessing the knowledge that they can observe themselves during their observation of themselves observing something. They merely parrot and regurgitate on command. No synapses necessary...
Coordination is not necessary for my assertion to be true. It only requires each party to act in their own self interest and to completely ignore their responsibilities.
Our government entities want to be able to control the narrative by selective release of facts. First, it helps them distract and misdirect. More importantly, it makes sure they can continue to do the things that they are upset at the "Russians" for doing with their ad buys, namely propagandize and manipulate the American electorate. So, no full disclosure, no full release of facts. Never let a good created crisis go to waste.
The tech companies don't want egg on their face so they are willing to hold back as much damning info as they can. The info that is released is damage controlled by their own spin teams, but the real problem they face is they were so easily exploited due to their intrinsic function. Suffice it to say, if the general public knew just how granular the reverse engineering of their users has become things might not go so well for the tech companies. If all of the ways their users have been dissected, analyzed, and packaged up for would be advertisers were well and fully known, it could affect their bottom line. So, tight lips when share price is on the line.
The press I am most disappointed in. They, who should be the ally of the electorate, are more concerned with their advertising revenue which has resulted in increasingly partisan coverage, which is no coverage at all. When the facts are so colored by "appealing to your intended audience" that they stop being facts it's no longer news and is no longer the exercise of the prerogative of the fourth estate. They aren't interested in getting us the facts, sans narrative wrapper and omitted details. They want page views and subscribers of a certain demographic and political leaning, which means massaging the facts to be easily consumed by politico-cultural factions created by the wedge issues of the political "parties." So, no way we will get the facts from a news corporation. Investigative journalism was sacrificed on the altar of the new partisan yellow journalism our weak minded fellow Americans call news.
I don't call anyone a bitch, except for my wife, and then only when she has done something surprising, exceedingly pleasant, and beautiful for me, unbidden, without expectation of recompense, and straight from her vastly perceptive heart to mine. Hearing her laugh is, to me, the most beautiful sound in the world. Under the the previously described circumstances if I call her a "vicious irrational bitch" in the right tone of voice I am rewarded with rare peals of her laughter and we share a moment of unparalleled joy. You probably wouldn't understand. I don't expect you to.
While on the subject: In the past I have coached more than a few people to get over their self imposed thinking of "I don't want people to call me a (bitch) if I stand up for myself." I supported them both in one-on-ones as well as in the larger groups we interact in. The results were fulfilling. They were able to realize that it wasn't sexism or an external force that was holding them back. It was the stories they told themselves about who they were being , who they are, and what happened around them that were holding them back. In more than one case they realized that they were using only one method of "getting their way" and "standing up for themselves," and that was to be a (bitch), by their own definition! They had trapped themselves into self destructive modes of action with thoughts and feelings they didn't even know they had going on in the background. Once that was visible to them discussions about empowering the people around them as a way to have people learn to respect them and their capabilities was the next logical step. The result? They weren't scared of being called a (bitch) anymore, even when they were standing up for themselves. They didn't need to demand equal treatment, as they were now highly respected, and even given deferential treatment. Everyone looked up to them, wanted to participate in their growth and development, and expressed a genuine desire to support them in whatever they were up to.
Remember, what you see outside you is not outside you. Everything you see is inside you. Perception happens within. Experience happens within. Reality is within you and subject to your own internal world. If you see sexism it is because it is in you. Be responsible for what you see. Be responsible for what you experience. Be responsible for your capacity to be offended. In your current state it is blinding you. Without responsibility for your experience of reality and with a blind eye to yourself, you will create in others the thing you are most fighting against inside yourself.
So, in response to your question I would say this: I cannot even begin to try to figure out where you are coming from. Really, you lost me when you implied I was calling someone a bitch when clearly the sentence you are quoting is about someone else referring to themselves in a derogatory manner. Based on the way the English language is constructed I could easily take offense at your response to what I said. You created a false statement and impression of me by twisting my words to mean something they don't say and were never meant to mean. I see this frequently. It is a very common thing these days: kneeling means you hate America, voting for Trump makes you a NAZI and a white supremacist, etc. Taking offense means taking the bait from someone who is not concerned with solutions. It derails the conversation to a mud slinging match and an opportunity to hurt people, rather than a discussion about how to solve issues, bridge gaps, come closer together, or to learn from others. I choose not to take offense. Thank you.
I used (bitch) in parenthesis as this word apparently has different meanings when attributed to a man and a woman. Insert an appropriate self-referential moniker you would use when being overbearing, unnecessarily aggressive, unconcerned for how you occur to others, and so self-focused you are unaware of or uncaring toward the mental state of people who you are interdependent with. Whatever that word is for you, go ahead and use that one.
First, until the whole kit and caboodle of information relating to these advertisements and accounts is revealed to the public we can't even begin to have an informed and fruitful discussion about what the intention was. That we do not have this information now is telling. It is an intentional smoke screen put up by our government, supported by the tech companies, and enabled by the press. It shows you one thing more than anything else, namely the first rule of the carnival: Don't let the rubes see the man behind the curtain. If you haven't figured it out, you are the rube, rube.
Second, these politicians appear to be upset that the fertile ground they created is being planted by other parties. Forsooth, it is their perpetual use of wedge issues and focus groups that gives them the ability to force coherent blocks of the electorate apart with intentionally fomented hatred and suspicion. After all of these decades of intentional mistreatment by the people we elect, the people are so sensitized to social issues they cannot even have a rational and sane discussion of the same.
Third, how the holy fucking fuck do they know that what the "Russians" did with advertising is effective? Oh, yeah, right...they do it themselves all of the time and have definitive proof of how to manipulate the American public.
Fourth, with all of the money and influence going back and forth from BOTH parties to Russia, I would not be surprised if payments were made from the US political parties to Russia to place these advertisements in the first damn place. If you would be surprised by this I recommend you study up on one thing that will open your mind to the truth. It's called: American History.
I am firmly convinced that if you are scared of the Russia boogeyman in the election you are so incredibly gullible and stupid they should lock you in a room and throw away the room.
You are delusional and need psychiatric help. You practice the same thing that delusional, paranoid schizophrenic, and religious people do, namely unshakable belief without any proof. You don't even express faith, as you have no doubts at all, which means you have no faith.
You are just stuck, like a broken clock. It is unfortunate you possess a human brain. With all of that certainty you don't even get to use any of it. It would be much easier to simulate your rigid experience of reality with matchsticks and marbles. No synapses necessary!
Ok, that was good. Kudos.
BRING ON THE PROCEDURALLY GENERATED ALIEN TENTACLE PORN!!!!!!
(She said, breathlessly into her cell phone...Siri responded "I'm sorry, all I have is disturbing uncanny valley porn. You will need to upgrade to the iPhone xXx for that, now with genital recognition."
Take all of the gender out of what you just said and you very closely approximate where most guys are coming from: We are treated like equals because we demand it. I don't have to put up with your shit, I'm a professional and competent at what I do. That is it.
Some women don't want to be called a "bitch" so they don't demand equal treatment. They doormat themselves. Then, after not standing up for themselves for years they assert it is everyone else's fault they don't have the promotion they never told anyone they wanted. Not fair, especially to themselves. Even if they bring and win a lawsuit they are still the person who won't stand up for themselves and blames other people for where they are in life. That just sucks.
Also, I have seen a few women who believe they should be treated like they are better than everyone else. They pigeonhole themselves as entitled and untrustworthy, even though they are usually quite proficient at what they do. Then, after being difficult to work with for years and alienating everyone from their co-workers to their bosses' boss, they decry the "boy's club" mentality they kept them from getting everything they ever wanted on a silver platter, as is their due. They usually bail out or, if they can convince someone in upper management of their deserving character, they are promoted and become a thorn in everyone else's side.
Dont get it twisted. I have seen the exact same behavior patterns I mentioned above in men, too. The difference is that fewer men trick themselves into thinking it's everyone else's fault they are where they are. They know. They have a plethorea of other men to compare themselves to, and the truth becomes obvious quickly. Illusions are dispelled.
Unfortunately, from what I have seen, many women don't consider their male peers as peers. They see them as tools to manipulate, to be played, influenced, flirted with, added to their "team" of trusted sycophants, or as an obstacle to be whispered about, taken down a notch, shown their place, out done, and embarrassed in front of their peers. Either way, that shit is just not professional.
It is refreshing to see a woman take such a male-centric viewpoint of the workplace Rastl. The realism with which you stated your case is decidedly similar to what most men are up to at work.
First, without the full set of ads and comments, and the meta-data about who they were targeted at, there is no context by which to evaluate the efficacy nor the intention of these purported meddlers in our elections. You, you simpering sheep, seem content eat whatever is fed to you and swallow it whole. I, on the other hand, don't trust you, the NY Times, or the Philly Inquirer as much as I trust actual factual data, presented without filter, cherry picking, or commentary.
In my opinion, this is what the fourth estate is there for, hard to get facts and a check on the powers of government. Unfortunately, every modern journalist sees it differently and most of the people in the US are too busy chanting along with their chosen echo chamber to concern themselves with facts. Cest la vie; doesn't mean I am going to join you morons in bailing water into the ship though.
Now that we are on the subject, I have been convinced about the media's outright lies since, oh about two decades before Trump was a reality show star, and I had my suspicions well before that. I reached this conclusion by multiple avenues:
1) Knowing firsthand the events being reported on and watching the absolutely false representations made by the media.
2) Knowing journalists.
3) Knowing humans.
4) Watching the news, once.
5) Reading history.
I guess from your commentary you believe everything that MSNBC and Fox News put up, eh? The medial never lies, right? They are our ally in all things, like super heroes, but with more humility, right? They wouldn't have an agenda of their own, nor would they be politically oriented and willing to put their political beliefs ahead of facts, nor would they sensationalize things to inflate their own coffers of advertising dollars, nor would they get anything wrong, even if it is completely contradictory to another story about the same incident, right?
If you are an avid consumer of media and you aren't interdicting and filtering everything you see with a very squinty and extraordinarily jaundiced eye....god help you, you poor simpering imbecilic fool.
My whole post is a joke, pointing toward the absurdity of the things that Americans call politics these days. So a joke, but nowhere near the breadth and scope of the joke that is the US government. You hit the nail on the head with 1950. The Pentagon Papers put this year as the first public overtures of four consecutive presidents to intentionally create a war.
Traitors, the lot of them. Conspiring against the American people, lying about their intentions and actions, inventing a war for us to die in: Truman, Kennedy, Eisenhower, and LBJ. Their statues are the ones that should be torn down. Their monuments defaced and destroyed. Their names dragged through the mud and sullied with the truth of what complete shitbags they were and are. Disgraceful, warmongering, murderers of their countrymen. There is nothing lower.
Low voter turnout, you say? It couldn't have anything to do with the parties putting up the most flawed, offensive, and polarizing candidates in the history of foreverness, could it?
Naaaaaahhhhh.....
You sound like those assholes that say taking a knee during the national anthem is really about ass raping a wounded soldier, or whatever stupid shit they make up instead of listening to what the protest is actually about.
And, just like when people defend the right of rich, entitled, and incredibly privileged people to protest the national anthem on a nationally broadcast stage, so you should defend to the death the right of other people to identify a problem in their community and protest against it. If you don't you're not only a hypocrite, you're completely un-American.
See, to many Americans, voting for Hillary was like a combination of shitting diarrhea on the American flag, urinating in George Washington's mouth, and converting to Canadianism all at once. So instead of casting aspersions on the people who didn't vote for her, you should be commending them for demonstrating and protesting, on a national stage, the problems they see in their community. They pulled a lever. Kind of like taking a knee, but lots less fanfare.
Apologies in advance for any offense you or anyone else takes from reading this.
I don't want to hear "The Russians influenced the election" and I don't want to hear "The Russians didn't influence the election." Nor do I want to hear about how many people, potentially, figuratively, or exaggeratedly could have might possibly seen a snippet of an ad or post by a "Russian operative."
I don't want to hear your commentary, Zuckerberg's inane prattling, any political pundit's repackaging of this bullshit, and certainly not any journalist's outright lies about this.
I just want one absurdly simple and easy thing:
SHOW ME THE FUCKING ADS AND COMMENTS YOU SAY ARE FROM RUSSIANS.
Really. Is it that hard?
Obama was really, really nice to them. Shouldn't we be nice to them as well?
You aren't just whistling Dixie, are you?
I can remember hearing news stories about Trump in the lead up to the election that were all about someone's reaction to what he said. The only problem is that what Trump said was never quoted. Then the news stories about someone else's reaction to the person who reacted to Trump's statements were out. Again no direct quote of the original statement was ever made.
On that day I realized the news in this country looks more like an angsty but popular teenage girl's diary than responsible journalism.
Yeah, you can't smell yourself because you have been steeping in your own ugly juices for way too long.
You stink of hatred...and of irony. You are what you dislike in others. You just think it's about their ideology. It's really about how you don't accept yourself exactly how you are.
If you could you would see how hilarious your diatribe is. You make mountains out of molehills. Most of all, you make everything about you, that's why someone else's actions and words about someone else are so upsetting to you. You make it personal because you don't know, down to your bones, who you really are.
In identifying your "Self" with external ideologies and people you have no choice to react with flight or fight when those external phantom "Selves" are attacked, demeaned, or worst of all, proven to have feet of clay.
My sincere hope is for you to learn who you are. For you to know who you truly are. To do this you need to go back and think about your past. Remember all of those times you failed miserably. Those time you attempted to do something of worth, something that inspired you, especially as a young person, and something happened to stop you. I want you to get connected to what you were up to when you were interrupted. What was the motivation? Who were you being? I can guarantee you that you were being exemplary. You were demonstrating love, admiration, or sacrifice, or dedication; something along those lines.
Then something happened. Your aims were not achieved. You were stopped, or you failed. In that moment, you got connected to the failure. You took that failure to mean something about yourself. You related to yourself as that failure. You still do. You still talk down to yourself about it. It comes up at night, when you try to sleep. It comes up during the day to stop you when you try to do something of true value.
This is not who you are. It's a lie. The you that is you is who you were being when you began, not when you failed. Get connected to who you were being before you failed, before life happened. That is who you truly are. Then realize that every single negative thought you have had about yourself, every time you have debased or talked down to yourself, every time you have thought you aren't good enough...all of it is a lie. None of it is true, and none of it is about who you truly are.
Once you can identify who you truly are, most of this "stuff" that so infuriates you will no longer be such a burden. Mirth, joy, love, and happiness are within you, and you get to bring them with you wherever you go. Even to a Trump rally honoring Sean Hannity's supreme court seat and Dick Cheney's Nobel Peace Prize.
Yes, even there.
"Psychology is not much more than the imposition of an orthodoxy and that orthodoxy is based on what people in the psych department think of themselves."
Or is it based on what people in the psych department think other people think about them, eh?
Social mining is my term.
Put humans in a sandbox. Time every finger flick, every pause, every hover, every click. Record the same. Xor and diff similar aggregates after contradictory stimulus is posted to their wall and is subsequently hovered or clicked. Do the same with reinforcing stimulus. Record every word of every post. Analyze it over the years, creating a timeline of views and ideas. Look for word choice additions and changes after specifically crafted content is consumed. Get intentional. Record A is exposed to posts with X, Y and Z. Record B is exposed to posts with B, C, and A. In addition to all of the other metrics, examine their tone, mood, and content generated post exposure. Rate records according to their ability to be influenced, reactivity, introversion, tilt, etc. Correlate this to educational background, location, family size, marital/relationship status, self-admitted medical data, ad nauseum, ad infinitum. Build a predictive index. Test it. Test it again. Break it intentionally. Rebuild it from the broken parts. Now grow it in a neural network. Rinse, repeat, from the top, now with machine learning.
I'm not even trying to be evil with this and it looks evil as fuck. If FB's objective was directed more toward domination instead of softselling their "services" as an advertiser we would all be strapped into chairs wearing VR headsets awaiting our weekly intermittent release to perform fellatio on Zuckerberg. Thank god for greedy fucks. They have to leave us some autonomy or we couldn't go out and earn their money for them.
More of the same I see. You really cannot accept that people are 100% responsible for their own behavior, can you?
Input: "Love everyone as much as you love yourself."
Output: "GOD HATES FAGS!"
Conclusion: Religion is bad. (Wait, what?!?!?)
See, that right there? What I am pointing to is simply this: It doesn't matter what words or pictures are used, humans will find a way to pin the blame for their unacceptable behavior on something or someone other than themselves. And, there are continually people who will let them get away with it.
Don't be that guy.
Pretty sure it started by licking his finger...
First: The FBI made and has retained a full copy of the drive previous to the lawsuit. The FBI has stated it is available to the participants in the lawsuit.
Second: The computer was at Kennesaw State University when it was degaussed by a low level technician.
These are the facts. What are you talking about? Everything you stated is irrelevant in light of these facts.
On the campus of Kennesaw State University maybe? That is where the computer was when it was degaussed.
It certainly wasn't in the direct control of any state elected officials. Good news though. The FBI has a complete copy of the data that was on the computer in question. Looks like you didn't know that, which is interesting. It's in the news. All you have to do is read and not be a fucking sheep.