One of many issues to solve corruption in the country is to de-monopolize the media. When they started letting moguls buy out huge chunks of media about 30 years ago we were warned that this would happen. Now you have actors and actresses repeating talking points and the AP is the single source of most "news". Investigative journalism has become a dangerous vigilante action instead of "Press" as it was defined and discussed at the time of the founding of the USA.
Lots of problems to work on in this country, and the abuse of monopoly is one.
Facts are not biased, facts are facts. Read the definition of the word. Opinions are biased. Opinions based on a lack of facts is dangerous. The videos I pointed you to are a presentation with bullet point facts. Even lacking bullet points, with a reasonable amount of intelligence and knowledge you can listen to a person speak and discern fact from opinion. Perhaps a 3rd grade language skill is all that is required for basics. So there is good news, bad news, and worse news.
Good news. A person can read and educate themselves to become more intelligent.
Bad news. You will still be hindered by a natural rate. If you truly believe what you said, you are so foolish you actually believe you are smart. This is at best a low 80s IQ so you will cap out in the 90s if you worked at it.
Worse news. You are self righteous about your ignorance which means you won't do the work necessary to become smarter. Playing call of duty, or warcraft, or whatever it is you do won't improve you. Broadening your intelligence by reading Plato, Shakespeare, Rand, Aquinas, and yes even Coulter and Friedman is hard work. You won't pursue any endeavor to improve because you already think you have smarts.
Society has played a joke on you, and there is no point in further replies to someone so content with their idiocy.
My point in saving the appeal to emotion arguments is because I have worked extensively in security and compliance in both the private and government (defense) sectors for over 25 years. Selling me on security is like selling a fish on water.
There is a massive amount of business between the two ends of the spectrum. Save the appeals to emotion because I agree with the premise, but not the statement that everyone justifies (or can justify) the costs. There is no legal requirement in almost all cases for them to do so, so they don't.
Oh got it, I refuse to do your homework for you so am wearing tin foil. Stop being lazy or stop being a shill. Go back to your safe space, or stop being a shill.
Sure, people like you and I can save companies money. The problem is that companies don't pay millions to fix bugs, and don't generally pay penalties for bugs. Large companies can look at the trade off and see ROI and even immediate value to adding security staff to all phases of development, but small companies don't get the same bang for the buck as it were. Established companies have a potential to lose millions in revenue, small companies don't have the same amount of risk and startups have virtually none.
There is plenty of evidence, back when Wikileaks started to leak the Chelsey Manning dumps they wanted him and several claimed he should be killed. You can say it's political speak, but those talking points have merit. The UK police wanting to arrest him as soon as he leaves the embassy is another clue.
You have not looked at the facts the person presents because of an appearance. How shallow do you have to be to omit information based on that? Do you enjoy Milo or do you hide from the uncomfortable? There are no facts without an opinion, none, at least that you will find on the Internet for free and easy consumption. Ann Coulter is an exceptional writer who lists literally thousands of references in her books. "She looks like." is a shallow excuse not to expand your horizons. Yet that is a common leftist statement. She's a **** but no complaints about her facts or her opinion.
Facts are not biased you moron. Facts are facts. Opinions based on a lack of facts is called a delusion. You said you lacked facts, I gave you a source for additional facts. Instead of looking at facts you cry foul because the person giving them looks scare to you. You are a moron, I'm guessing another david_thornley troll account.
If the DNC, Podesta, and Media, State Department, DOJ, FBI, and Hillary camp did nothing wrong there would be nothing to expose.
It really truly matters little "who" did the hacking. DNC colluded with media to install a candidate of their choosing. Super-PACs are colluding with the DNC. Clinton Foundation is mostly a front for pay-for-play and benefiting Hillary. Hillary is not the mild tempered person the media has been trying to portray her as, lies to the public, and is in it for personal power. Nothing we didn't already believe but now we have validation.
It does not matter if it was Russia, a 400lb guy in the basement, or a disgruntled staff member (still my most likely suspect) the actions described in the emails are illegal.
Russia, guilty or not, is being used as a way to white wash the conversation.
Not that you care because you simply troll, but for the average person they can listen and judge facts first. If you perceive the opinion biased you at least have facts. You on the other hand are simply a troll, and quite content to be a troll.
Hmm, during the primaries I would agree. During the general, it has been the opposite. In fact in June they canned every conservative talk show host in the SF Bay area and replaced them with pro Hillary pro Left/Democratic shows. One of the shows moved to a different station ID but became very much like CNN in terms of discussing the two candidates. There are some shows on FOX which support Trump but CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, and CNBC, UPN, and even to a large extent NPR have gone out of their way to ignore evidence showing corruption in the current party in power (including the candidate) and hyping stories about Trump being a womanizer. This is the Hegalian dialectic in action: own both sides of the argument to promote the narrative you wish.
Okay, Trump said something mean on Twitter and you know it. Great, that is a kind of fact (not really if you look at evidence), but I'll concede the point for this discussion. However, what is wrong with fixing immigration and controlling our borders? That gets him labelled racist, but is that really a racist policy? That narrative is not occurring. On the same line, what his Hillary's position and why is that not being questioned? We heard more in the debate last night on the issue than HIllary has ever said, and she has no policy different from Obama. This is what journalists should be doing, and really are not.
How is her plan to increase taxes and make Government a massive job provider good for the economy? How does her plan to force companies to profit share bad for the economy? Again, we hear about Trump saying a mean thing but very little on the issues if anything at all. If you looked at those Truth about Trump videos I mentioned and fact checked, you would see that most of the narrative about Trump being a bad guy are simply not true (I just gave the racist example). Does not mean he's perfect, but the imperfections are not being used to further policy dialogue. They are being used to install a candidate that people really didn't want running. The email leaks show the DNC using every dirty trick in the book to both get Hillary the nomination and Trump to be pitted against her. The only person easier for her to be would have been Cruz because he is legally not allowed to be President due to being born in Canada. Federal law requires natural born citizen and even provides an exact definition. Why are so many in media now anti-Trump and still pro-Cruz? Analyze the game and you can see it is being rigged at many different levels, but you have to have facts to analyze to making any rational conclusions.
Perhaps you should listen and fact check a few instead of immediately having a closed mind. I don't agree with everything he says, but agreement is not the point of Philosophy. The owner of that channel has a call in show, I don't know where or when but it's on their main web site. Call in and ask questions, it's kind of what he does and how he makes money.
Or don't. My first choice as I said was to tell you to read transcripts and the platform policy instead of taking summaries. If you have that much time go that route instead, I normally do.
I would normally tell you to read transcripts and watch tapes. Since time is rather short and there is much to learn, let me point you to a Philosophy show who also dabbles in the journalism so lacking in media today.
Just a word of caution: Since the media is so biased it may seem shocking to the system to get a different view. Taking the red pill as it were. Always, check sources if you are in doubt. Stefan provides them all, but may be found easier on his web site compared to Youtube.
I beg to differ with your "ignorant" statement. Trump is much smarter than people believed which is why he's doing much better than people ever conceived of. Not only has he had to contend with the Democratic machine (and Project Veritas gives us a glimpse into that corrupt cesspool), but a colluding media, and career politicians on the right who see him as a threat to their gravy train.
Not telling you how to vote, just telling you that the narrative you hear has little factual basis. Consume all the facts you can from various sources before making a decision.
Apologize while bashing the hell out of the Political Candidate you dislike. The propaganda is so thick you can taste it.
So can Facebook say "Thanks" to Mark followed by "On behalf of the Corrupt politician, corrupt political party, and corrupt media trying to install her we give our thanks!"
CANADIAN AND UK CITIZENS COME TO THE US FOR LIFE SAVING MEDICINE BECAUSE THEIR MASSIVE SYSTEM FAILS! Good grief, given 3 opportunities you still can't answer the question of how you pay for it without collapsing the economy. No point in attempting to argue with the mentally handicapped, go back to your bong.
It is very interesting to go down this path in thought, but it's overloading to a novice. It has been painted as hip and trendy to have abortions, and the people that believe that will flat out deny that much of a leap in cognitive dissonance. People aware can definitely investigate this, there are many books written on the subject. Sadly they are not horror books, but laying out evil of real people walking around in society.
Is a very painful process to go through. It gets easier in time, but a person won't improve by hiding in a safe space. This is what our Universities are getting money to preach. Since MSM media and large businesses repeat the same message, it's being reinforced all the time.
The brash open eugenics message should be extremely disturbing. Your option, boycott any company that adopts a practice like this. Petition for laws to prevent abuse of your basic human right to privacy. "Too late" is not an excuse to give up privacy, "Too late" is an excuse for the worst type of tyranny.
Lets not forget the rash of claims last year that people would be labelled by their tweets and posts and categorized by the same. Remember that these same people (openly pushing eugenics) try to claim that others are racist, homophobic, etc...
Why do you ignore the point and run off into fantasy land about Universal Health Care being un-affordable as a fallacy? Why not use facts to back your argument, as I just did, instead of avoiding basic questions. Universal Health Care is not affordable because it gave the Government monopoly powers for Health care. That assertion is based on facts! Premiums have gone up exponentially, deductibles have gone up exponentially. The only people who they claim have seen an improvement are those who were already on assistance programs and had no out of pocket expenses. UBI is not obtainable because it would cost more than our total GDP, and you have no way of pulling in the money without causing massive inflation and financial collapse.
Answer the basic goddamn question about how it would be financed first. If you can't there is no intelligence in your position. Facts, not bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
One of many issues to solve corruption in the country is to de-monopolize the media. When they started letting moguls buy out huge chunks of media about 30 years ago we were warned that this would happen. Now you have actors and actresses repeating talking points and the AP is the single source of most "news". Investigative journalism has become a dangerous vigilante action instead of "Press" as it was defined and discussed at the time of the founding of the USA.
Lots of problems to work on in this country, and the abuse of monopoly is one.
Facts are not biased, facts are facts. Read the definition of the word. Opinions are biased. Opinions based on a lack of facts is dangerous. The videos I pointed you to are a presentation with bullet point facts. Even lacking bullet points, with a reasonable amount of intelligence and knowledge you can listen to a person speak and discern fact from opinion. Perhaps a 3rd grade language skill is all that is required for basics. So there is good news, bad news, and worse news.
Good news. A person can read and educate themselves to become more intelligent.
Bad news. You will still be hindered by a natural rate. If you truly believe what you said, you are so foolish you actually believe you are smart. This is at best a low 80s IQ so you will cap out in the 90s if you worked at it.
Worse news. You are self righteous about your ignorance which means you won't do the work necessary to become smarter. Playing call of duty, or warcraft, or whatever it is you do won't improve you. Broadening your intelligence by reading Plato, Shakespeare, Rand, Aquinas, and yes even Coulter and Friedman is hard work. You won't pursue any endeavor to improve because you already think you have smarts.
Society has played a joke on you, and there is no point in further replies to someone so content with their idiocy.
My point in saving the appeal to emotion arguments is because I have worked extensively in security and compliance in both the private and government (defense) sectors for over 25 years. Selling me on security is like selling a fish on water.
There is a massive amount of business between the two ends of the spectrum. Save the appeals to emotion because I agree with the premise, but not the statement that everyone justifies (or can justify) the costs. There is no legal requirement in almost all cases for them to do so, so they don't.
Oh got it, I refuse to do your homework for you so am wearing tin foil. Stop being lazy or stop being a shill. Go back to your safe space, or stop being a shill.
Sure, people like you and I can save companies money. The problem is that companies don't pay millions to fix bugs, and don't generally pay penalties for bugs. Large companies can look at the trade off and see ROI and even immediate value to adding security staff to all phases of development, but small companies don't get the same bang for the buck as it were. Established companies have a potential to lose millions in revenue, small companies don't have the same amount of risk and startups have virtually none.
There is plenty of evidence, back when Wikileaks started to leak the Chelsey Manning dumps they wanted him and several claimed he should be killed. You can say it's political speak, but those talking points have merit. The UK police wanting to arrest him as soon as he leaves the embassy is another clue.
You have not looked at the facts the person presents because of an appearance. How shallow do you have to be to omit information based on that? Do you enjoy Milo or do you hide from the uncomfortable? There are no facts without an opinion, none, at least that you will find on the Internet for free and easy consumption. Ann Coulter is an exceptional writer who lists literally thousands of references in her books. "She looks like." is a shallow excuse not to expand your horizons. Yet that is a common leftist statement. She's a **** but no complaints about her facts or her opinion.
Facts are not biased you moron. Facts are facts. Opinions based on a lack of facts is called a delusion. You said you lacked facts, I gave you a source for additional facts. Instead of looking at facts you cry foul because the person giving them looks scare to you. You are a moron, I'm guessing another david_thornley troll account.
Haha, that CNN authorization line was the funniest thing I have heard in a long time.
Got it, you are so closed minded that you won't try to hear anything you don't already believe. Good luck with that.
If the DNC, Podesta, and Media, State Department, DOJ, FBI, and Hillary camp did nothing wrong there would be nothing to expose.
It really truly matters little "who" did the hacking. DNC colluded with media to install a candidate of their choosing. Super-PACs are colluding with the DNC. Clinton Foundation is mostly a front for pay-for-play and benefiting Hillary. Hillary is not the mild tempered person the media has been trying to portray her as, lies to the public, and is in it for personal power. Nothing we didn't already believe but now we have validation.
It does not matter if it was Russia, a 400lb guy in the basement, or a disgruntled staff member (still my most likely suspect) the actions described in the emails are illegal.
Russia, guilty or not, is being used as a way to white wash the conversation.
Not that you care because you simply troll, but for the average person they can listen and judge facts first. If you perceive the opinion biased you at least have facts. You on the other hand are simply a troll, and quite content to be a troll.
Hmm, during the primaries I would agree. During the general, it has been the opposite. In fact in June they canned every conservative talk show host in the SF Bay area and replaced them with pro Hillary pro Left/Democratic shows. One of the shows moved to a different station ID but became very much like CNN in terms of discussing the two candidates. There are some shows on FOX which support Trump but CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, and CNBC, UPN, and even to a large extent NPR have gone out of their way to ignore evidence showing corruption in the current party in power (including the candidate) and hyping stories about Trump being a womanizer. This is the Hegalian dialectic in action: own both sides of the argument to promote the narrative you wish.
Okay, Trump said something mean on Twitter and you know it. Great, that is a kind of fact (not really if you look at evidence), but I'll concede the point for this discussion. However, what is wrong with fixing immigration and controlling our borders? That gets him labelled racist, but is that really a racist policy? That narrative is not occurring. On the same line, what his Hillary's position and why is that not being questioned? We heard more in the debate last night on the issue than HIllary has ever said, and she has no policy different from Obama. This is what journalists should be doing, and really are not.
How is her plan to increase taxes and make Government a massive job provider good for the economy? How does her plan to force companies to profit share bad for the economy? Again, we hear about Trump saying a mean thing but very little on the issues if anything at all. If you looked at those Truth about Trump videos I mentioned and fact checked, you would see that most of the narrative about Trump being a bad guy are simply not true (I just gave the racist example). Does not mean he's perfect, but the imperfections are not being used to further policy dialogue. They are being used to install a candidate that people really didn't want running. The email leaks show the DNC using every dirty trick in the book to both get Hillary the nomination and Trump to be pitted against her. The only person easier for her to be would have been Cruz because he is legally not allowed to be President due to being born in Canada. Federal law requires natural born citizen and even provides an exact definition. Why are so many in media now anti-Trump and still pro-Cruz? Analyze the game and you can see it is being rigged at many different levels, but you have to have facts to analyze to making any rational conclusions.
Perhaps you should listen and fact check a few instead of immediately having a closed mind. I don't agree with everything he says, but agreement is not the point of Philosophy. The owner of that channel has a call in show, I don't know where or when but it's on their main web site. Call in and ask questions, it's kind of what he does and how he makes money.
Or don't. My first choice as I said was to tell you to read transcripts and the platform policy instead of taking summaries. If you have that much time go that route instead, I normally do.
I would normally tell you to read transcripts and watch tapes. Since time is rather short and there is much to learn, let me point you to a Philosophy show who also dabbles in the journalism so lacking in media today.
Just a word of caution: Since the media is so biased it may seem shocking to the system to get a different view. Taking the red pill as it were. Always, check sources if you are in doubt. Stefan provides them all, but may be found easier on his web site compared to Youtube.
I beg to differ with your "ignorant" statement. Trump is much smarter than people believed which is why he's doing much better than people ever conceived of. Not only has he had to contend with the Democratic machine (and Project Veritas gives us a glimpse into that corrupt cesspool), but a colluding media, and career politicians on the right who see him as a threat to their gravy train.
Not telling you how to vote, just telling you that the narrative you hear has little factual basis. Consume all the facts you can from various sources before making a decision.
Apologize while bashing the hell out of the Political Candidate you dislike. The propaganda is so thick you can taste it.
So can Facebook say "Thanks" to Mark followed by "On behalf of the Corrupt politician, corrupt political party, and corrupt media trying to install her we give our thanks!"
I'm a Gemini you insensitive clod! Which one of me don't you approve of?
CANADIAN AND UK CITIZENS COME TO THE US FOR LIFE SAVING MEDICINE BECAUSE THEIR MASSIVE SYSTEM FAILS! Good grief, given 3 opportunities you still can't answer the question of how you pay for it without collapsing the economy. No point in attempting to argue with the mentally handicapped, go back to your bong.
It is very interesting to go down this path in thought, but it's overloading to a novice. It has been painted as hip and trendy to have abortions, and the people that believe that will flat out deny that much of a leap in cognitive dissonance. People aware can definitely investigate this, there are many books written on the subject. Sadly they are not horror books, but laying out evil of real people walking around in society.
Is a very painful process to go through. It gets easier in time, but a person won't improve by hiding in a safe space. This is what our Universities are getting money to preach. Since MSM media and large businesses repeat the same message, it's being reinforced all the time.
The brash open eugenics message should be extremely disturbing. Your option, boycott any company that adopts a practice like this. Petition for laws to prevent abuse of your basic human right to privacy. "Too late" is not an excuse to give up privacy, "Too late" is an excuse for the worst type of tyranny.
Lets not forget the rash of claims last year that people would be labelled by their tweets and posts and categorized by the same. Remember that these same people (openly pushing eugenics) try to claim that others are racist, homophobic, etc...
Why do you ignore the point and run off into fantasy land about Universal Health Care being un-affordable as a fallacy? Why not use facts to back your argument, as I just did, instead of avoiding basic questions. Universal Health Care is not affordable because it gave the Government monopoly powers for Health care. That assertion is based on facts! Premiums have gone up exponentially, deductibles have gone up exponentially. The only people who they claim have seen an improvement are those who were already on assistance programs and had no out of pocket expenses. UBI is not obtainable because it would cost more than our total GDP, and you have no way of pulling in the money without causing massive inflation and financial collapse.
Answer the basic goddamn question about how it would be financed first. If you can't there is no intelligence in your position. Facts, not bullshit.
Go smoke more pot, I'm sure you will find others in the drum circle that think your idea is amazing.