from the with-great-power-comes-great-responsibility dept.
At The Hill,
Washington Monthly Executive Editor Gilad Edelman said the perception of Silicon Valley has shifted dramatically among Democrats and Republicans since the 2016 presidential election.
Edelman told Hill.TV that the industry was relatively insulated from criticism and viewed favorably by both parties until President Trump's surprise victory over Hillary Clinton, saying his win "really scrambled a lot these beliefs and intuitions."
"Silicon Valley seems to have gone from an industry with no enemies to an industry with no friends," Edelman said during an interview on "Rising."
"Democrats realized that whatever the CEOs of Google or Facebook might think, these platforms seems to have facilitated Donald Trump's election," he added. "On the right, the fact that Trump could get elected while breaking from some pretty serious orthodoxies — at least superficially on economic matters — meant that maybe there was more room to criticize corporate business practices than conservatives had previously thought."
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:07PM (33 children)
I can't believe anyone could read this and think it reflected reality. Fake news.
(Score: 5, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:14PM (19 children)
Fake news is the only news we get, always has been, likely always will be.
Go witness an event firsthand, then travel 1000 miles away and learn as much as you can about that event from the available media - tell me how often the story you observed is fairly, objectively, accurately, and completely covered by the media. In my experience: never. You're lucky if the press isn't outright lying or misrepresenting what happened, and you never get the whole unbiased story.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:26PM (10 children)
You're saying your experience of the event is objective, complete and accurate? Since it's certainly not, is it fair that you should talk about it?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:39PM (9 children)
I don't know Joe personally. It's possible that he's deaf, dumb, and blind. He could be the male reincarnation of Helen Keller for all I know. And, I'd still favor his eyewitness account of an incident over media reporting. I have also witnessed events that were later reported in the news. Not even a trustworthy smalltown paper can be trusted not to sensationalize a story, or to put a political slant on the most mundane of stories. Few reporters are actually eyewitnesses to the events they report, after all. Remember the saying, "When seconds count, the cops are only minutes away"? Well, the reporters arrive minutes after the cops arrive. They walk up to the police barricades, point their cameras and microphones, and try to interview a cop or two, and any eyewitness they can identify. If they can get a drama queen on video, they have a successful story, and that's all they care about.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 11 2019, @05:09PM (3 children)
Which is why mass generated media like Facebook, etc. is so revolutionary / scary for the establishment. Sure, everybody has an angle, prejudices, color on their commentary, but... with BILLIONS of sources, you get a statistically analyzable sample with everyone's biases out there to see. No longer do you parse the output of three primary sources and develop a huge assumption model on how their outlets color the news attempting to infer the truth-for-your-purposes, there's actually enough noise out there to average it out and extract a meaningful signal.
Of course, as Cambridge Analytica and friends have already demonstrated: this, too, is ripe for manipulation...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @05:45PM (1 child)
Exactly.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 11 2019, @06:02PM
I used to follow Scott Adams blog. In it, he related a very personal story about his bout of verbal aphasia - he had a great deal of trouble speaking for a while, which he eventually started to cure by sing-song repeating a word. As the story developed, he shared details of his struggles and progress over time. Then, a few years later, I guess he decided that was a little too much share for his taste, so he had it all scrubbed, not just off his blog but also off secondary mentions of it around the web. I didn't try too hard, but I definitely noticed it there, then gone.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @02:49AM
BILLIONS of sources that just happened to be perfectly correlated with a small number of sources.
You don't have a normal distribution that averages away noise. You have a noise amplifier that hides the signal. It's YOU. It's YOU, cunt.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Thursday September 12 2019, @03:32AM (4 children)
It's a physiological response to stressful events. When you're in fight or flight mode, you're not usually going to have the presence of mind to stare a perp in the face and memorize their features (which is unfortunate because that response is really disconcerting to a would-be attacker, but it's also high risk).
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @04:30PM
There's physical evidence of you not being good at programming C or C++ as APK schooled you on Pascal's speed/security advantages a blowhard wannabe in you ae unaware of https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=33430&page=1&cid=889582#commentwrap [soylentnews.org] & you're caught stalking him in you quoted at that posts termination too. You are a joke.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday September 13 2019, @12:31AM (2 children)
I am well aware of the unreliability of eyewitnesses. In fact, I have proven to be a poor eyewitness more than once. The only thing that might make me a little more reliable than the typical eyewitness is, I am capable of questioning myself. Example: I witnessed an auto accident, in which a paper delivery guy ran a stop sign, almost drove onto a railroad track, did a crazy-ass U-turn, came back out into the intersection and smashed into a car. Guy jumps out of the car that was hit, then a woman gets out. My crap powers of observation told me that the guy was driving. WRONG!! The guy got out first, the woman followed, and somehow I assumed the guy was driving. But, he couldn't have been driving and get out first, because the paper delivery guy's car was sitting against the driver's door. Stupid, right? So, yeah, eyewitnesses are unreliable.
The point, though, is that newspaper accounts are generally LESS RELIABLE than eyewitnesses. Eyewitness accounts may be 75% accurate, but news reporting is far less than 75% accurate.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Friday September 13 2019, @12:55AM (1 child)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by khallow on Friday September 13 2019, @03:47AM
Ridiculous how? The Graniad has worked for generations to build a fine rep as a shit paper. I can't rule out that it might be better than the Daily Mail, but what I've seen so far hasn't been very promising.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:58PM (1 child)
In other words: missing an easily digestible narrative, nuanced, and in the end, boring. You know, like real life.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 11 2019, @05:13PM
There's usually a digestible narrative - almost never easy, and lots of nuance, and real life is usually in the end boring, or maybe not - how do Oprah et. al. make their living? In large part by taking "ordinary" people with "ordinary" stories and slapping them up on stage for America to gasp in horror and amusement at for 20 minutes or so...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:53PM (5 children)
I was once the subject of a feature story in the Thanksgiving edition of our local paper about hosting two children from Guatemala in our home for facial surgery from a charity organization. Despite the totally friendly and favorable nature of the coverage, I was surprised by the number of inaccuracies and misquotes in the published article.
(Score: 3, Disagree) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 11 2019, @05:05PM (1 child)
I was interviewed by a business rag about our product, I mentioned to the reporter that our technology - as commercialized by a different company - had been used on the Space Shuttle, once. That was the only mention of space or NASA, and I certainly never made any projections about our future business prospects (publicly traded company...) I also spoke at length about several other topics. The reporter's one and only quote of me:
"Joe Merchant says: this company is going to the Moon!"
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @04:51AM
This story - every part of it - is from you. Isn't this just the same shit you're complaining about?
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Thursday September 12 2019, @03:40AM (2 children)
She said she'd submit a correction, I told her not to bother, if anyone said anything I'd say I had a brain fart and that I meant the opposite.
We take to forget that we're dealing with people working on deadline who are trying to get the facts while the people they're talking to have agendas, everything from self-aggrandizement to fraud. Unless they're purposefully trying to slant a story, cut them some slack - the ones I've known are good people.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @04:24PM
You are an idiot. APK proved it 3 ways in you caught quoted admitting you stalked him by unidentifiable anon posts + your blunders on C\C++ vs. Pascal security\speed advantages https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=33430&page=1&cid=889582#commentwrap [soylentnews.org] + you are a mentalcase tranny sicko that chemically castrated/neutered yourself too.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @06:11PM
You're an idiot. APK proved it 3 ways: You admit you stalked him by unidentifiable anon posts quoted directly, + your blunders on C\C++ vs. Pascal security\speed advantages https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=33430&page=1&cid=889582#commentwrap [soylentnews.org] + you're a mentalcase tranny sicko that chemically castrated/neutered itself deluding yourself you are a real woman. Clue: You're not and never can be.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Rupert Pupnick on Wednesday September 11 2019, @05:05PM (6 children)
It's not fake news because it isn't really even news. It's really more like an opinion piece: this person was quoted as having this opinion about how the major parties view Silicon Valley. It's interesting, but it isn't news.
(Score: 2) by legont on Thursday September 12 2019, @01:03AM (3 children)
Therefore, he should not enjoy a journalist protection. He is basically the same as we here or even as chan8 folks.
Only hard core fact digging journalists should be protected. The rest are regular citizens.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by barbara hudson on Thursday September 12 2019, @03:49AM (2 children)
Really, who would take a job at Facebook or Twitter or Amazon or Google today and publicly admit it? Better to say you're a plumber or electrician. These companies now have as little prestige as used car salesmen.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @04:15PM
APK made you look a bumbling idiot you are caught lying he started it when you did with you quoted proving that here in the end of it https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=33430&page=1&cid=889582#commentwrap [soylentnews.org] and you were destroyed on technical data regarding C\C++ against Pascal.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @06:01PM
APK made you look a bumbling idiot you are caught lying he started it when you did in you quoted proving it here @ the end https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=33430&page=1&cid=889582#commentwrap + you were destroyed on technical data regarding C\C++ against Pascal.
(Score: 2) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Thursday September 12 2019, @04:00AM (1 child)
Were you born yesterday?
This represents a radical shift in the trust these companies were receiving even a year ago.
As someone who has been advocating for this shift, I think it is newsworthy although the timing is arbitrary.
Do you have any interest in this story not being true, perhaps? It seems the 'oh you can trust little old us' people have more than a few minions/fanboys to come to their aid in their moment the second they might be perceived as a victim in any possible way, while they continue to use their monopoly status to act as shadow government institutions.
(Score: 2) by Rupert Pupnick on Thursday September 12 2019, @12:42PM
It seems you're not taking what I wrote at face value.
My criticism is not based on the content of the story. It's based on characterizing the story as news when it's just the citation of the opinion of one man, who happens to be the Washington Monthly Executive Editor, of the political landscape of SV (with some supporting historical evidence). Had Mr. Edelman made a statement that said exactly the opposite, I would offer exactly the same criticism. Instead of positioning Mr. Edelman's opinion as news, he should write an editorial, which because he is an Executive Editor, would have a very high likelihood of getting published.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by janrinok on Wednesday September 11 2019, @05:25PM (3 children)
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @07:28PM
While this is indeed a factor, let's not also forget the creeping Dystopia of a tech-powered surveillance state.
Since the Snowden revelations, it's become impossible to ignore the role of Silicon Valley in enabling authoritarianism at home and abroad. The likes of Project Dragonfly don't do much to persuade the public that Big Tech is above selling out their fellow citizens for cash or, increasingly, political power and influence as well. More and more we see the manifestations of warnings made 20 years ago, but which the heady pace of technological progress and quality of life improvements made difficult to hear. Now as the benefits of tech slow down, people are more willing to question why companies need all this data, when we don't really see a lot of benefit from it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @08:01PM (1 child)
But it has equally to do with right wing believing that they're biased against by the industry and left wing believing that hatred is just allowed to flourish unchecked. And how the tech industry is complicit with that (on both sides).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @02:53AM
Nice insight - yes of course the social media companies just want you to get on there and FROTH. Good, bad, other - just get on there and get others on there. Sell the eyeballs.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday September 11 2019, @05:36PM (1 child)
The recent Antitrust investigation that was joined by every single state in the union (except CA) is not fake news.
And, it indicates a bit of bipartisanship.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 11 2019, @06:06PM
Knowledge is power, and the government tends to be interested in power - controlling the accumulation of power in all its forms, whether military, financial, political, ideological...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:09PM
(Score: 5, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:11PM (29 children)
As evidenced by the outcome of a very close race, the Trump campaign used the tools more effectively than the Clinton campaign - just like the Obama campaign used the tools more effectively than McCain campaign in 2008.
I have a suggestion for both parties: how about you quit playing the power optimization games shooting for a 50.1% electoral win while maximizing lobbyist funding output, and just run a campaign that gives the voters what they want?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:28PM
How dare you?! The voters (who paid the most) *are* getting what they want.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:51PM (5 children)
BINGO!!!
Of all the potential D presidents in 2016, which one was able to reach out, and communicate with the voters? Certainly not Hillary.
Of all the potential D presidents in 2020, which is able to communicate? I think that O'Crazio and Beat-off O'rourke are the most capable of doing so, but they're failing. Which is pretty surprising, TBH. Trump is an old stick-in-the-mud, and he's got that Tweety-bird thing working for him. The progressives? They look like Luddites and troglodytes in comparison.
(Score: 3, Funny) by krishnoid on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:59PM (1 child)
So ... trogluddites?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:09PM
3rd and later generations, yes. They are still mostly separate species.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @05:21PM
Crazy old man rant, you need some lawn flair.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by hemocyanin on Thursday September 12 2019, @01:43AM (1 child)
If the Democrats really wanted to win, they'd stop trying to sabotage Tulsi Gabbard. She appeals to a wide range of people across party lines and could thus undermine Trump's base. But the DNC won't do it -- we'll get a warmed over 90s republican like Warren or a senile old man where everyone who votes for him is really voting for his running mate. We could even get Harris, a person who attempted legal murder by withholding potentially exonerating materials in death penalty cases and wants to turn the Presidency into an form of legislative branch via excessive executive orders, because she checks off so many of the intersectionality boxes (good policies be damned).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @02:27AM
Tulasi is the Manchurian Candidate of the Jagad Guru (AKA "Chris Butler") from his ashram in Lanikai. Look it up.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:00PM (4 children)
Why would they do that?
Unless they were independently rich, like Trump. He is the first president giving voters what they want for a long time.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @02:56AM (3 children)
Reality TV on every channel 24/7?
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Thursday September 12 2019, @03:55AM (2 children)
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @04:10PM
Only turkey I saw that baked itself is you barbarahudson! You're caught quoted admitting you stalked apk https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=33430&page=1&cid=889582#commentwrap/url? by unidentifiable anonymous and you blew it on C/C++ vs. Pascal on security and speed. You are a mentalcase deluding yourself you are a real woman when all you are is a chemically neutered/castrated loon.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @06:04PM
Only turkey is you barbarahudson caught quoted admitting you stalk apk https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=33430&page=1&cid=889582#commentwrap [soylentnews.org] by unidentifiable anonymous & you blew it on C/C++ vs. Pascal on security/speed. You are a mentalcase deluding yourself you are a real woman when all you are is a chemically neutered/castrated loon.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by meustrus on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:26PM (16 children)
Because despite people being somehow divided into 2 discrete buckets, we all have incredibly multi-dimensional political beliefs. If one party changes a position, that might sway some % of voters into their bucket. But it will piss off some of their voters, leading to an opening for the other party to change another position and sway a different % of voters into their bucket.
Nobody wants exactly 100% of what either party offers. Many of us think we do, but that's either because we don't know the full 100% or we don't know enough about the bits that are bad for us personally. Some people form this ignorance willfully because some issue is so important to them that they get caught up in the battle.
As for that lobbyist funding, it's all for winning the election. Sure, some greedy politicians try to convert it into personal enrichment. But most politicians are mainly interested in being popular and powerful, and need that money for ad campaigns and voter outreach (power can lead to personal enrichment in the future anyway). Which is to say that "maximizing lobbyist funding output" is not a separate goal. It's part of getting the electoral win.
And the 50.1% number only really applies nationally. Local elections tend to be won by much larger margins, often because one candidate actually talks to voters and advocates for a bunch of ideas that are helpful to their community, but largely overlooked by both parties.
If you want to stop the "power optimization games", you should really be targeting large campaign donors. You know, the ones who give generously to both parties just to have a personal relationship with whomever ends up in power. If it weren't for them, at least politicians wouldn't be living in their own fake news bubble completely alien to the rest of us.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:35PM (15 children)
Turns out that Trump found the "screw the other guy" bucket was particularly attractive. No other bucket necessary.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Wednesday September 11 2019, @04:19PM (14 children)
Both buckets have "screw the other guy" supporters. Those are the people who have long since forgotten what issue they cared about and simply identify with the political party.
Ideally, though, these supporters get off their asses and get into party business. It's surprisingly easy to rise to the top of a local party, given enough effort. Problem is, lots of people became party loyalists because they don't like effort. Thinking about issues takes effort, after all.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Gaaark on Wednesday September 11 2019, @04:32PM (13 children)
What gets me is the number of people who don't even identify with a party OR an issue. It's just "God i hate party A: i'm voting for party B!" Then it's "God party B is shit...i'm voting party A!"
Back and forth. Definition of insanity.
They never once think "Hey, maybe i'll vote party C and see what happens."
Or don't vote at all, but do all the bitching and complaining.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by Sourcery42 on Wednesday September 11 2019, @07:30PM (1 child)
But if you don't vote for a lizard the wrong lizard might get in.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Friday September 13 2019, @01:07AM
Ultimately, I got to change a few things for the better and that's more than would have happened if I had just voted for the lesser of two evils. If everyone did it just once in their life ..:
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @11:11PM (8 children)
Those really bother me. People don't understand that whether they cast a vote (but not who they voted for or even whether they left the ballot blank) is public and politicians pay a lot of attention to that information, at least in aggregate. Somewhere around 40% of Americans don't vote even in presidential general elections. They're the largest voting block by far. And they have this strange idea that there's nothing they can do except complain about politicians ignoring them when they're the ones ignoring the political process.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday September 11 2019, @11:32PM (7 children)
I used to share that view, but I don't anymore. Now I see it as a reflection of the reality of the futility of voting in a rigged system. People perceive that voting for D's or R's makes no real difference to their lives, that they still all get screwed by the same rich, powerful assholes over and over, so why go to all the effort of learning about issues, hacking through layer after layer of purposeful obfuscation on the part of the rigged game, and taking time out to vote when it makes no goddamn difference.
Honestly, Trump's election was a primal scream, and I believe that America is still screaming that primal scream because not nearly enough of the rich, powerful assholes have been put to the knife. If he actually does that, and really takes those same assholes down, he'll be re-elected in the most epic landslide of all time.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 12 2019, @12:17AM (4 children)
I wonder about that. Epstein? We haven't seen any big-money influential people burned by that scandal - yet at least. But, maybe the burning takes place in back yards, out of sight of the peasants? Those raids on Epstein's properties have to have some results. And, Epstein himself has met his maker, which seems to be an overall "good thing". He won't be diddling any more children!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Thursday September 12 2019, @12:46AM (3 children)
If the Epstein crowd aren't burned at the stake, then that means somebody took over his blackmail operation. Presumably, that would be Trump.
But I don't want Trump to take over the blackmail operation, I want him to publicly hang the Clintons and every other POS who diddled children at Epstein's Island. Because, goddamn it, if the fucking feds can't enforce laws against sexually abusing children then they are completely fucking useless and evil also and we Americans must hang every one of them too.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by legont on Thursday September 12 2019, @01:11AM (2 children)
I doubt it's Trump. Epstein's "madam" is probably Mossad and that's where the handlers are. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Maxwell [wikipedia.org]
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @03:03AM (1 child)
Like the man said, "I want him to publicly hang ... every POS who diddled children at Epstein's Island". Mossad included.
This is the come to Jesus moment when right and left unleash in the same direction and the nation gets to feel what that's like again. Hopefully without starting WW3.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @07:19AM
For you the Epstine scandal was a transformative event, and peering back of the veneers that hide the elite and powerful. For Mossad it was Tuesday. Their crimes are the dark-matter that keeps this galaxy together.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday September 12 2019, @01:48AM (1 child)
The better way to show that you think the process is bullshit, is to vote for Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck or whatever. Can you imagine the shitstorm if 40% of the country wrote in some cartoon character? It would take a concerted effort to get people to do that but man, it would be beautiful. The "none of the above" option when they won't print that on the ballot.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Friday September 13 2019, @01:14AM
There wouldn't be enough money for 18-month election campaigns. A month or two max.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @05:47AM
Until we get range voting or instant runoff or some other alternative, a vote for party C is a vote against your second choice. If you have any preference between the two front runners then in first past the post the way to get your preference honored is to vote for the one you prefer.
Simple version: Nader elected W.
See the book "Gaming the Vote" and nerd out about election systems.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @01:30PM
I once voted and turned in a blank ballot.
I hadn't had time to come to a conclusion about who to vote for, so I didn't want to vote for anyone (I basically never vote for anyone that is running unopposed, don't care enough to learn and thus don't feel I should support any of them). However, I wanted to still be counted as a person that votes (that is, they see that I take the effort to go to the polls, thus I am worth wooing.
Most people I told about it thought I was crazy.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:31PM (3 children)
Same thing happened to me when I started recording my friends' conversations, reading their emails, logging their movements and (allegedly) activating the camera on their phones.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:02PM (2 children)
They didn't fall in love with you over how you showed an intensely detailed personal interest in their life?!! Pfft - they don't deserve you as a friend (or lover).
(Score: 3, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:13PM (1 child)
Well, the dude does sleep in the graveyard. Terrible morning breath that lasts all day. Smells of decay, leaves a trail of decay behind him. And, he has the most pasty complexion anyone has ever seen. I wouldn't want to call him "creepy" or anything like that, but, I've heard other people use that word when describing him.
(Score: 3, Touché) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday September 11 2019, @09:16PM
It's almost like you think that's a bad thing.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @02:55PM (1 child)
The oligarchs companies have expanded tremendously by hiring borderline autists from the best tech schools of the country. So socially inexperienced that they don't understand that people don't choose whom to vote for like they were programmed, so selfrighteous from being smart, that every choice contrary to what they and their peers thought was right is denounced shrilly.
The oligarchs realize all their vast wealth could evaporate if politicians thought the vocal Silicon Valley tech culture was a threat to their orderly reelections. They would much like their employees to STFU and get to work, like Google recently said. But they can't afford to offend and lose their talent.
(Score: 1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:33PM
Dude you have no clue. You're like the 8 year old who wants to be King of England so he can eat candy all day and NOBODY will be able to stop him.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:03PM (4 children)
I'm still your friend. I kind of have to be, because you know everything about me, but then again, the government does too, and I only return their calls out of civility.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:47PM (3 children)
Hah, no, the government does not know everything about you. At least not "the government" as some monolithic entity. Sure, the NSA probably knows everything about you. But they don't share, not even with local cops. Not even with the IRS. Getting information to flow between two government organizations is like trying to get two Microsoft teams to stop cannibalizing each other. It may never happen.
Social media, on the other hand, tends to share what they know with everyone with two pennies to rub together. And since they can make lots of money off of stealing your data for its own sake, there's a lot more incentive for them to get better at it. Not like the NSA, who have a narrow goal of "finding terrorists" and no open (and potentially collaborative) experimentation outside that goal. No wonder their dragnet is actually terrible at everything.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 2, Disagree) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 12 2019, @12:25AM (2 children)
You should question that seeming presumption. It's fair to say that the NSA has a primary goal of fighting terrorism and other enemies of the state. But, it's possible that isn't even THE_PRIMARY_GOAL. We, the public, only know what the NSA allows us to know about the NSA.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Friday September 13 2019, @01:21AM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Friday September 13 2019, @07:19PM
The NSA is still primarily about foreign intelligence. And the authorization structure, flimsy though it may be, needs the stated target to be a foreign adversary.
Good thing, too. Their tech is really, really bad at picking out adversaries from innocents. They'd never get away with pointing it at white Americans, and they know it.
The point wasn't that it's not pointed at us, anyway. The point is that the program has a narrow goal and very little tolerance for experimentation.
Government agencies tend to be very bad at inventing things they don't already know exactly what they should look like. Mass surveillance is something nobody knows what it should look like.
So you get things like cops using facial recognition to find suspects, but only after Facebook made a system they could copy. And I know Facebook didn't do half the work to make that happen. But they did the UI part, the part the government can look at and copy.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by meustrus on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:39PM
A curious perspective. I was under the impression that the right dislikes social media now because of deplatforming.
I guess it depends on where you think power and influence comes from. Politicians still need votes, which means that the unwashed masses at least need to be susceptible to the ideas that taste-makers want them to vote for. And if the masses want something enough for themselves, the politicians at least need to appear to be giving it to them.
It's really unclear to me how making "more room to criticize corporate business practices" means that the Republican leadership and donor class actually want to criticize corporate business practices. It's a lot more likely that this is one of those times that the voters have an idea and the politicians have to do something with it.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 1, Troll) by bradley13 on Wednesday September 11 2019, @06:09PM (8 children)
The industry in Silicon Valley is progressive to the core. The fact that Trump got elected was pure miscalculation by the Swamp. Normally, candidates are pre-selected and the voters do what they're told. 2016 was supposed to be between Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. Remember when he slipped and said "it's my turn"? It really was. In a race between Jeb and Hillary, well...both are fully owned and operated by the Swamp, so victory was assured - for the Swamp.
However, enough voters got wind of this to make a difference. Trump was not supposed to happen, but he was the only alternative to a pre-selected candidate.
If Silicon Valley is suffering, it is because they - along with the MSM - failed in their scripting. The Swamp has already ceded 2020, but once Trump is gone in 2024, such a failure will not happen again. Only carefully selected and controlled candidates will be allowed to reach the voters. It won't matter which side wins, because - back to business as usual - they are only two sides of the very same coin.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 3, Informative) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday September 11 2019, @09:23PM (5 children)
No it's not, as the rest of your comment points out.
"The Swamp" as you put it is a wholly owned subsidiary of industry, and they use various minor issues to motivate whichever part of the electorate might care.
Examples might be gay marriage or abortions. Get people all worked up about a fringe issue and they're much easier to manipulate.
When Silicon Valley start paying more in "campaign contributions" this will all go away.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by khallow on Thursday September 12 2019, @01:36AM (4 children)
Only if that "industry" is government. Else, industry is merely some bystanders who have influence because they have something to offer the Swamp.
Exactly. Something to offer.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday September 12 2019, @02:05AM (3 children)
When industry pays for something, they own it.
There is no practical difference between the industry that has purchased your government, and the government itself.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday September 12 2019, @11:44AM (2 children)
Just like when you buy a carbonated drink, you now own the company? Or do you need industry cooties first to be able to do that?
My take is that they buy an indulgence from the government. Now they own the indulgence for as long as the government feels like it.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday September 12 2019, @08:25PM (1 child)
The analogy I was going for was more along the lines of a shareholder.
If I buy shares in the soft drink company, I am an owner. If you look at who provides the funding for your politicians to be re-elected I think you will find that most of the money comes from industry, who become the major shareholders.
Yes, if they stop paying they lose their shareholding, but why would they? It is cheap and gives them the control they want.
(So sure, it's not a perfect analogy).
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday September 13 2019, @03:24AM
Nobody can just lobby once and coast on that investment. They have to keep in the game, keep spending money to get their interests represented. And corrupt politicians will flip in a heartbeat, if someone else comes up with a better offer that you're unwilling to match. Sure, it's a cool story, bro, but the reality is that political influence/bribery is pay to play. You stop paying, no matter how much you put in to that point, you stop playing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 12 2019, @03:13AM
Despite being drained, The Swamp (c) managed to fill right back up to record new levels. In fact, it didn't even dip, just went straight up. Lucky we drained it, else it would be even higher. AMIFRITE?
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Friday September 13 2019, @01:25AM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @06:51PM
I blame the Paypal Mafia, those who were in at the ground level for online payments, made mega-bucks, and used ti for nefarius right-wing cray-cray political influence. Vampires. Palantir. Pure evil.
(Score: 2) by jmichaelhudsondotnet on Thursday September 12 2019, @04:18AM
As someone who has been advocating for this and intentionally culture jamming these institutions for several years, it is nice to wake up one day and see other people are waking up.
Being the person to own the first and only necessary railroad effectively gave you governmental control over a given area even though you weren't the government, and this power game was from the very beginning attractive to forces who effectively wanted to be a corporate mafia. The robber barons, look it up. Drew Fisk and Gould. They had gangs fighting each other on boats racing to Albany on the Eerie canal like batman villain henchmen in order to be the first to get their bribe in. Epstein's MIT scandal is much more shameful and indicates a far greater degree of corruption and implies violence we aren't seeing.
There is no need for there two be two private roads, there is no need for there to be two private fiber lines, and there is no need for there two be facebooks or googles. Actually the network grows in value if there is only the one, in an ideal world we would all be able to directly communicate with real identities of everyone and there would be no need for pseudonyms or anons.
But if the government is going to be totalitarian, then we can't have any social networks otherwise the government and other forces will manipulate it for control in ways that are very difficult for civilian government to oversee, in ways that are in almost every case plausibly deniable, and really evil. Mendaciously deceptive.
If you landed on a planet with computers, the first thing you might want to ask is what their social network is like. If everyone is afraid of it or there isn't one, you learn that it's probably a place run by asocial people who are scaring everybody else, a totalitarian system. So you say take me to your leader. And they say 'like hell if we're even going to let you know who the real leader is, talk with this giant face on a screen.'
The test of creativity and courage in our time is how we can improve this. At this point I see anyone using google or facebook as simply government entities, who have neither the creativity or courage to desire true independence, a hive-mind-brain-slug whose phone has some chance of recording this conversation.
Have you considered this: That fb app might not care about you at all because it already knows everything, but that it is really there just in case your stooge ass goes to a party and there is someone there who they know nothing about? (see arrest of catalan independence leader) Or that you are in google's walled garden because their search results and email edge filtering excludes people it doesn't like?
Draw a circle then, and inside of it is what you are allowed ot think and outside of it is what facebook and google don't want you to think.
If you have never read anything like this before, then maybe you have been inside this circle/box/bubble for too long, welcome back.
thesesystemsarefailing.net
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Thursday September 12 2019, @11:50AM (1 child)
May as well prep for dotcom 2.0. Right about now we're in January or February 2000.
Dying "anything" always goes hard left and deep censorship as the rats desert the sinking ship and whats left is holier than thou virtue signalling.
The old days of this cycle where enormous profits were generated off virtualization and cloudy stuff are long over. All we got left is "we gonna be middle men for office real estate" or "we going to ignore the laws for hotel and taxi until we get caught and wiped out" there's not much out there left in THIS cycle thats actually making money.
(Score: 3, Informative) by barbara hudson on Friday September 13 2019, @01:36AM
The initial investors knew it was doomed, but they got their money so who cares, and subsequent investors are too tech-ignorant to understand that they were doomed from the beginning , and won't sue for stock fraud. Or just still hoping that they can get out and leave someone else holding the bag.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.