Ryan_G

iTrader: (8)

Don't get me wrong, I don't hate my job. There are parts of it that I enjoy, parts of it that I hate, and a lot of it that I am entirely indifferent too. Money doesn't buy happiness but it sure does make it easier.

I simply think the notion that most people can find something they love to pursue as a career that will also provide them with a lifestyle they will be happy with is a naive one. I'm the type of person that doesn't love anything if I HAVE to do it 40 hours a week. I don't like any single topic that much. I'm the type of guy who has 50 hobbies of which I focus on 3-4 at any given time in my life. I have decided that it is in my own best interest to pursue a career that I don't hate that pays quite well and will provide me and my family with financial stability and eventually financial independence. I find my happiness outside of work with my friends, family, and hobbies. Work is simply a means to an end. Maybe there is a job out there that I would love but I don't know what it is and don't intend to hop around entry level positions until I find it.

I'll continue climbing the corporate ladder and working on business ideas until I have accumulated enough wealth (preferrably before 50) that I am beholden to no one but myself. Then I'll likely stop working a dick around with a large number of small projects that make little or no money so I can satisfy my ADD.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Russia also makes a good cover story when someone in your own party leaks a bunch of emails to wikileaks that's very damning to the democratic candidate with only 1 month till the election.

Maybe a Russian did it, maybe the Russians did it, maybe not. But the only things the email revealed was corruption within the DNC -- there is still zero evidence of "meddling with elections" in this regard.


Here's a question: exactly who determined the DNC server "hack" to be a Russian source? I'll wait.

also: If Russia is bad, why did the mass media and the Left get angry with Trump last week when he (rightly) chastised Germany for making a billion dollar gas deal with them while simultaneously under-funding their NATO obligations and telling the US we need to subsidize their defense against Russia?

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

I know you're not an American, but you understand that all of this is political circus, right? We (the USA) "meddle" in the elections to some degree of every other country on earth, every single election they have. It's why we're so awesome! I would wager a paycheck that most first world nations do the same... ie, every country out there that can exert influence, does in fact exert their influence in every election in every other country to some degree, and has done so since the beginning of time. Russia, in this case, was just a little too obvious about it, even if you can attach the word "meddling" to what they did. So start your thought process there.

Now imagine that you're a registered Democrat just before the election... what is going through your brain...
"I know Hillary sucks. I know it in my heart. I feel it my soul. She's a horrible person through and through, and I ******* know she's going to be a **** President, just like Obama. I ******* hate her, and I really wish it was Biden or even Bernie, but it's Hill. I'm a sheep, and I can't vote independent. All my conservative friends are literally ****'s, so, #neverTrump. I guess I'm stuck. And now thanks to Russian meddling, I also know the Democratic party is wholesale corrupt. I really thought it was just the Clintons, but damn, it's the whole DNC. I guess I've known this for a long time, so has the rest of the country. I don't want to confront this fact internally because I'd realize I'm a total dipshit... oh well, Hilldog is gonna win anyways, and I'm a winner! OH WAIT, she lost? Now I have to rationalize how this happened because I'm clearly a dipshit and not a winner."

**FEEL-GOOD LIBERAL MEDIA TO THE RESCUE** **THE ART OF THE DEFLECT**
Democrats should be outraged (not about the meddling, gotta be careful to make that clear... can't be about the actual meddling), about how Trump supporters can still support Trump after the Russians helped him win! Trump supporters are evil *****!
Democrats should ignore that the meddling may have helped Trump win because it exposed mass corruption within the Hillary campaign that extended through the entire Democratic party, that most people alread knew. #stillwithHer!

Just open up some MSM feed and click away... after you watch a Ford or anti-depressent commercial... and get your daily dose of propaganda. CLICK HERE OMG SCANDAL RUSSIA!!!

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Sedition is a very heavy word.



Heard an interesting segment this afternoon on All Things Considered. I'll post the full text below, but wanted to start with a brief summary, followed be a couple of questions:

Summary:

Even pre-dating the 2016 elections, Russia has been creating Twitter accounts which seem like they belong to local, US-based newspapers, without specifically plagiarizing or impersonating any specific, active newspaper. Using these accounts, they published factual, non-controversial news stories and did not create or disseminate "fake news." Some people suspect that this was done in order to gain large followings and establish credibility, in preparation for later using these accounts to spread misinformation.


Questions:

1: What law does this break? If this had been done by US citizens, it would have been protected speech under the constitution.

2: Even if we agree that, while not illegal, this is rather smarmy, why is it OK for the US to do the same thing in other countries? I mean, the Voice of America has been freely broadcasting pro-US propaganda all across the globe for 70 years, and nobody in the US seems to get upset about this. In fact, the Smith–Mundt Act of 1948 specifically forbade VOA from broadcasting to US audiences, in order to protect US citizens from being exposed to the propaganda efforts of their own government.

I'd be particularly interested to hear Braineack's opinion of Twitter's decision to delete these accounts.


Full text:

Russian Influence Campaign Sought To Exploit Americans' Trust In Local News

July 12, 2018 5:00 AM ET
Heard on All Things Considered



Newly discovered aspects of Russia's active measures apparently reveal an effort to exploit Americans' greater trust in local news than in national news organizations.

Russia's information attack against the United States during the 2016 election cycle sought to take advantage of the greater trust that Americans tend to place in local news.

The information operatives who worked out of the Internet Research Agency in St. Petersburg did not stop at posing as American social media users or spreading false information from purported news sources, according to new details.

They also created a number of Twitter accounts that posed as sources for Americans' hometown headlines.

NPR has reviewed information connected with the investigation and found 48 such accounts. They have names such as @ElPasoTopNews, @MilwaukeeVoice, @CamdenCityNews and @Seattle_Post.

"A not-insignificant amount of those had some sort of variation on what appeared to be a homegrown local news site," said Bret Schafer, a social media analyst for the Alliance for Securing Democracy, which tracks Russian influence operations and first noticed this trend.

Another example: The Internet Research Agency created an account that looks like it is the Chicago Daily News. That newspaper shuttered in 1978.

The Internet Research Agency-linked account was created in May 2014, and for years, it just posted local headlines, accumulating some 19,000 followers by July 2016.

Another twist: These accounts apparently never spread misinformation. In fact, they posted real local news, serving as sleeper accounts building trust and readership for some future, unforeseen effort.

"They set them up for a reason. And if at any given moment, they wanted to operationalize this network of what seemed to be local American news handles, they can significantly influence the narrative on a breaking news story," Schafer told NPR. "But now instead of just showing up online and flooding it with news sites, they have these accounts with two years of credible history."

Twitter caught these Internet Research Agency accounts in the act and suspended them.

The discovery and suspension of the local accounts suggests two things as investigators continue to build their understanding about Russia's campaign of active measures against the United States and the West.

First, that the Russian misinformation project was a years-long effort, one that wasn't simply focused on the 2016 election but on destabilizing the United States over an extended period of time.

"The Russians are playing a long game. They've developed a presence on social media. They've created these fictitious persons and fictitious organizations that have built up over a period of time a certain trustworthiness among people that follow them," said Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee.

Second, the failed effort to create local news accounts also says something about how Americans trust local news sources more than national news — and how the Russians evidently knew about that vulnerability.

A Pew survey from 2016 found that 82 percent of Americans have "some" or "a lot" of confidence in local news organizations.

"If you're trying to pass along information that is not true but you want people to believe it, creating or inventing fake local news sources is an effective way of doing it because people will convey some trust to the locality even if the publication is one they've never seen before." said Tom Rosenstiel, the executive director of the American Press Institute.

Though this particular effort to exploit local news failed, the Russian misinformation campaign continues now.

"This effort is not over," said Sen. Susan Collins, a Republican on the Senate intelligence committee. "It continues to this very day, where the Russians are trying to sow the seeds of discontent in our society, take advantage of the polarization that exists."


https://www.npr.org/2018/07/12/62808...-in-local-news

sixshooter

iTrader: (12)

Would the same story have been heard if Hillary won?

olderguy

iTrader: (19)

vitamin j

iTrader: (5)

Everybody who has been involved in the internet for any period of time knows that there are outside influencers who impersonate average people in order to push a narrative, product, ideology, or cover something up. It is not new and Russia didn't invent it.

Surprised that article didn't mention Obama got 2 million fake bot followers deleted just recently. I wonder what kind of fake news those bots were pushing.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Mostly reports about school-board policy reform in Sandusky Ohio, and hotlinks to sponsored products on Amazon.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

1. none.

2. because:




I have no opinion of twitter cause it's a stupid free-speech-suppressed, left-wing-echo-chamber app who caters only to the celebrities that use it.

They touched on this very thing on the previous season of homeland -- of course it was a right-winged conspiracy on the show, because of course.

but honestly, if twitter has a policy that says not bot accounts, then go ahead and delete them. But we all know they are only going to delete anti-left accounts. This is a company whose upper management got together in a room to discuss one single right-wing user and then banned him because he "upset a celebrity".





random pictures:

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Haven't you heard? Being civil towards other heads of state is now bad. You're supposed to react to them with the same venomous contempt that the SJW movement harbors towards people who don't hate the same things that they do.

This is a recent development, which is why it was OK for Clinton and Obama to do it. (It was bad when Bush did it, for reasons to obvious to explain.)

ryansmoneypit

iTrader: (6)

All of these comments just feeding off one another, pretending that this whole thing isn't a **** show. All parties and governments included, and starting with a screwed up voting system that somehow overrides popular public opinion. You guys aren't any different than the group you love to hate.

Carry on.

Schroedinger

Jesus Christ on a bicycle. Tinfoil hat club here, eh? You guys need to get outside for some fresh air. Amazing car knowledge aside, I have a hard time respecting people who hold the position that one political party does all the right things and has all the right answers, while the other is full of dummies and bad behavior.

I don't really care about this election/collusion circus. I just want to know if Trump is laundering Russian money through his businesses. Because that would explain a lot. Seems like that Magnitsky Act could be a minor inconvenience for both of those clowns.

Partially related sidebar discussion. An individual on Trump's campaign team was CEO of a business competitor of mine. The knowledge of this person/company's high-level influence, rule breaking and outright fraud has been widespread throughout my industry for years. I've seen it with my own eyes on numerous occasions. Somehow though, they always stayed ahead of the black cloud. This individual is close personal friends with a few senators and congressman, one of whom was director of a federal agency under Trump (and then, not.) Purely by coincidence I'm sure, the very same federal agency that awards contracts for our industry. This public company has been on a rocket ride for six years, despite aggressive public lawsuits trying to ruin whistleblowers, etc. A very familiar playbook in these times. Well, in the last few months it came out that this company has been under investigation by both SEC and DOJ for nearly a year, and didn't disclose it to their investors. Several customers have already been indicted for bribes and kickback schemes through federal programs. There are widespread allegations of this company defrauding the federal government as well as their shareholders through channel stuffing/revenue inflation schemes. Due to an internal investigation into accounting practices on behalf of the shareholders, said CEO and entire executive team were relieved of their duties by the board a few weeks ago. Interim CEO's claim to fame is riding Lehman Brothers into bankruptcy after the crash. $1B of shareholder value wiped out, so far. But hey, most of the analysts that cover this stock still have a "Buy" rating on it, so nothing to worry about, right?

Unrelated? Perhaps, but forgive me for being a bit skeptical as it pertains to this administration's capabilities for fraud and abuse.

BGordon

It does feel like "Preaching to the Choir".
and leads me to a question.

I wonder how the political leaning of Miata owners looks on paper.
30%Left - 30% neutral - 30% right - 10% hating anything political ?

BGordon

How much Russian money did the Clinton's launder?

At least Trump has some semblance of a legitimate business.
All the Clinton's have is the Clinton Foundation and a couple of business fronts that are for disposing of one hour speaking fees at $250K a pop.
You will never convince me that that speaking fee crap is anything more than a legal way to pay a bribe.

Schroedinger

My political affiliation is Skeptic. And I happen to think that fraud and money laundering are morally wrong regardless of who's committing the act.

sixshooter

iTrader: (12)

The whole problem with the company that Schrodinger pointed out would be impossible if there wasn't so much money being doled out by the federal government. Take them back to the size they are supposed to be in the way the Constitution is actually written and you don't have these kinds of problems with people with buying contracts and influence because there are no contracts and influence to buy. Give Congress control over very little money and they will have very little influence to sell.

This whole problem was created by the illegal expansion of the federal government. Should anyone be surprised that illegal acts beget illegal acts? Or unintended consequences?

olderguy

iTrader: (19)

In my younger years, I worked for the owner of a small company who went to see one of our customers that was having a problem with a part we supplied them.

When he returned, I asked him what happened to which he answered;

"I told them the truth, and today the truth is...…….."

I left that job soon afterward realizing that, to some, the truth is very malleable. It was an early life lesson in politics and business.

Schroedinger

I agree with the point that the federal government is overgrown and ineffectively managed. However, even die-hard Libertarians will concede that the federal government is necessary for a number of functions, for the good of society. Like it or not, we need it. Just because the current size creates outsized opportunity for fraud and corruption doesn't excuse fraud and corruption.

Here's the thing though- enforcement can never keep up with criminals when the practices are widespread and accepted at the highest levels. People need to do the right thing. Accountability starts with the personal.

I have met the person I described above. If I asked him, I'm sure he would say that he thinks he's an honest person. That all he's guilty of is playing the game better than me. That's the thing with criminals; everyone believes in their heart that they're the good guy, irrespective of their own actions.

I won't comment on the legality of expansion of the federal government, only that both parties seem equally committed to it.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

An engineer, a physicist, and a politician were being interviewed for a position as chief executive officer of a large corporation.

The engineer was interviewed first, and was asked a long list of questions, ending with "How much is two plus two?"

The engineer excused himself, and made a series of measurements and calculations before returning to the board room and announcing, "Four."

The physicist was next interviewed, and was asked the same questions.

Before answering the last question, he excused himself, made for the library, and did a great deal of research. After a consultation with the United States Bureau of Standards and many calculations, he also announced "Four."

The politician was interviewed last, and was asked the same questions.

At the end of his interview, before answering the last question, he drew all the shades in the room, looked outside the door to see if anyone was there, checked the telephone for listening devices, and asked "How much do you want it to be?"