Go Back   AzBilliards.com > Main Category > Non Pool Related
Reload this Page Perception Management: Corporations, Government, And The Serfs - "Psywars" The Film
Reply
Page 2 of 24 12 3412 Last »
 
Share Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average.
Keep supporting your "party"...."they" depend on it....
Old
  (#16)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,251
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
Keep supporting your "party"...."they" depend on it.... - 03-17-2016, 05:54 AM

We Choose the Nominee, Not the Voters: Senior GOP Official

March 16th, 2016

It’s the same with the Democrats.

With regard specifically to Trump, I’m going with the same guess as I’ve had all along.

Trump becomes the candidate for the Republicans, and Hillary becomes President.

Alternate scenario, the Republicans shit the bed over Trump, some manner of a third party candidate situation results, and—that’s right—Hillary becomes President.

All this nonsense with the counter-Trump protests is the CIA/NGO script for color revolutions applied inside the U.S. One more time, Hillary becomes President.

(I hope my site doesn’t go down for three days again…)

Via: CNBC:

Political parties, not voters, choose their presidential nominees,
a Republican convention rules member told CNBC, a day after GOP front-runner Donald Trump rolled up more big primary victories.

“The media has created the perception that the voters choose the nomination. That’s the conflict here,” Curly Haugland, an unbound GOP delegate from North Dakota, told CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Wednesday. He even questioned why primaries and caucuses are held.

Haugland is one of 112 Republican delegates who are not required to cast their support for any one candidate because their states and territories don’t hold primaries or caucuses.

Even with Trump’s huge projected delegate haul in four state primaries Tuesday, the odds are increasing the billionaire businessman may not ultimately get the 1,237 delegates needed to claim the GOP nomination before the convention.

This could lead to a brokered convention, in which unbound delegates, like Haugland, could play a significant swing role on the first ballot to choose a nominee.
  
Reply With Quote

Old
  (#17)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,251
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
03-28-2016, 05:21 AM

PSYOP: Public Perception of Autonomous Machines

March 26th, 2016

The vast majority of robotics research is funded by the military industrial complex.

There is a lot of dancing around that fact, but the reality is that it’s governments’ desire for more, cheaper and deadlier killing machines that’s at the root of this.

Sure, the corporate drive to shrink payrolls is a large factor, but I see that as a by-product of the military work.

I found this piece interesting because it touches upon the efforts with perception management around autonomous systems; the sugar that helps the Rise of the Machines medicine go down.

With regard to the “soft fascism” described here, don’t miss the recent post on The New Mind Control, which describes an emerging, “unseen dictatorship.”

Via: The Atlantic:

The year is 2016. Robots have infiltrated the human world. We built them, one by one, and now they are all around us. Soon there will be many more of them, working alone and in swarms. One is no larger than a single grain of rice, while another is larger than a prairie barn. These machines can be angular, flat, tubby, spindly, bulbous, and gangly. Not all of them have faces. Not all of them have bodies.

And yet they can do things once thought impossible for machine. They vacuum carpets, zip up winter coats, paint cars, organize warehouses, mix drinks, play beer pong, waltz across a school gymnasium, limp like wounded animals, write and publish stories, replicate abstract expressionist art, clean up nuclear waste, even dream.

Except, wait. Are these all really robots? What is a robot, anyway?

This has become an increasingly difficult question to answer. Yet it’s a crucial one. Ubiquitous computing and automation are occurring in tandem. Self-operating machines are permeating every dimension of society, so that humans find themselves interacting more frequently with robots than ever before—often without even realizing it. The human-machine relationship is rapidly evolving as a result. Humanity, and what it means to be a human, will be defined in part by the machines people design.

“We design these machines, and we have the ability to design them as our masters, or our partners, or our slaves,”
said John Markoff, the author of Machines of Loving Grace, and a long-time technology reporter for The New York Times. “As we design these machines, what does it do to the human if we have a class of slaves which are not human but that we treat as human? We’re creating this world in which most of our interactions are with anthropomorphized proxies.”

In the philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s 1807 opus, The Phenomenology of Spirit, there is a passage known as the master-slave dialectic.
In it, Hegel argues, among other things, that holding a slave ultimately dehumanizes the master. And though he could not have known it at the time, Hegel was describing our world, too, and aspects of the human relationship with robots.

But what kind of world is that? And as robots grow in numbers and sophistication, what is this world becoming?



There are all kinds of reasons why engineers might want to make a robot appealing this way.
For one thing, people are less likely to fear a robot that’s adorable. The people who make autonomous machines, for example, have a vested interest in manipulating public perception of them. If a Google self-driving car is cute, perhaps it will be perceived as more trustworthy. Google’s reported attempts to shed Boston Dynamics, the robotics company it bought in 2013, appears tied to this phenomenon: Bloomberg reported last week that a director of communications instructed colleagues to distance the company’s self-driving car project from Boston Dynamic’s recent foray into humanoid robotics.

It’s clear why Google might not want its adorable autonomous cars associated with powerful human-shaped robots. The infantilization of technology is a way of reinforcing social hierarchy: Humankind is clearly in charge, with sweet-looking technologies obviously beneath them.

When the U.S. military promotes video compilations of robots failing
—buckling at the knees, bumping into walls, and tumbling over—at DARPA competitions, it is, several roboticists told me, clearly an attempt to make those robots likeable. (It’s also funny, and therefore disarming, like this absurd voiceover someone added to footage of a robot performing a series of tasks.) The same strategy was used in early publicity campaigns for the first computers. “People who had economic interest in computers had economic interest in making them appear as dumb as possible,” said Atkeson, from Carnegie Mellon. “That became the propaganda—that computers are stupid, that they only do what you tell them.”


What matters, in other words, is who is in control—and how well humans understand that autonomy occurs along a gradient. Increasingly, people are turning over everyday tasks to machines without necessarily realizing it. “People who are between 20 and 35, basically they’re surrounded by a soup of algorithms telling them everything from where to get Korean barbecue to who to date,” Markoff told me. “That’s a very subtle form of shifting control. It’s sort of soft fascism in a way, all watched over by these machines of loving grace. Why should we trust them to work in our interest? Are they working in our interest? No one thinks about that.”

“A society-wide discussion about autonomy is essential,” he added.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#18)
chefjeff
No sides, only players
chefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond repute
 
chefjeff's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 52,834
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
   
03-28-2016, 06:48 AM

But jimmy, there'd be no one "investing" in such "good" things if the govt didn't force us to.

We're stupid; they're smart. We're bad; they're good. We're unable; they're omnipotent.


etc. etc. is the mysticism that allows the criminal class to not only get away with their crimes but be handsomely rewarded and encouraged for making more crime. E.g.: "vote for and send money to _______ or you are part of the problem."

Jeff Livingston
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#19)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,251
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
03-28-2016, 08:21 PM

Top German Journalist Admits Mainstream Media Is Completely Fake: "We All Lie For The CIA"

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 03/28/2016 - 22:40



Entire article: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-0...we-all-lie-cia

"I’ve been a journalist for about 25 years, and I was educated to lie, to betray, and not to tell the truth to the public." Ever since Operation Mockingbird, a CIA-based initiative to control mainstream media, more and more people are expressing their concern that what we see in the media is nothing short of brainwashing.

Leading German journalist and editor Udo Ulfkotte went on public television stating that he was forced to publish the works of intelligence agents under his own name, also adding that noncompliance with these orders would result in him losing his job.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#20)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,251
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
03-30-2016, 10:41 AM

  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#21)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,251
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
04-01-2016, 05:05 AM

How Associated Press Cooperated with the Nazis

March 30th, 2016

Via: The Guardian:

The Associated Press news agency entered a formal cooperation with the Hitler regime in the 1930s, supplying American newspapers with material directly produced and selected by the Nazi propaganda ministry, archive material unearthed by a German historian has revealed.


When the Nazi party seized power in Germany in 1933, one of its first objectives was to bring into line not just the national press, but international media too. The Guardian was banned within a year, and by 1935 even bigger British-American agencies such as Keystone and Wide World Photos were forced to close their bureaus after coming under attack for employing Jewish journalists.

Associated Press, which has described itself as the “marine corps of journalism” (“always the first in and the last out”) was the only western news agency able to stay open in Hitler’s Germany, continuing to operate until the US entered the war in 1941. It thus found itself in the presumably profitable situation of being the prime channel for news reports and pictures out of the totalitarian state.

In an article published in academic journal Studies in Contemporary History , historian Harriet Scharnberg shows that AP was only able to retain its access by entering into a mutually beneficial two-way cooperation with the Nazi regime.

The New York-based agency ceded control of its output by signing up to the so-called Schriftleitergesetz (editor’s law), promising not to publish any material “calculated to weaken the strength of the Reich abroad or at home”.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#22)
chefjeff
No sides, only players
chefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond repute
 
chefjeff's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 52,834
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
   
04-01-2016, 06:24 AM

Yep, the "good" war is being exposed for not being so good afterall.

'bout time, I say


Jeff Livingston
  
Reply With Quote
Don't even believe what you think you see....
Old
  (#23)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,251
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
Don't even believe what you think you see.... - 04-09-2016, 12:28 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohmajJTcpNk
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#24)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,251
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
04-12-2016, 08:40 AM

How The Media Confuses Americans About The Most Common Ways To Die


Daniel Drew, 7/8/2015

The Charleston church shooting flooded newsrooms around the world. Did the killer act alone? How much did he really hate black people? Should we burn every Confederate flag in the country? When will another racist strike next? Stay tuned for more! After reading this, one would assume there was an evil Confederate in every town, ready to open fire on every family in America. The reality is much different. The greatest danger to the average American is the cheeseburger they ate for dinner last night.

The best visual example of the state of the media is the recent Jake Gyllenhaal movie Nightcrawler, which documents his character's freelance career as a journalist who records grisly footage of violent crimes and accidents. His boss advises him, "Think of our newscast as a screaming woman running down the street with her throat cut." One quick glance at any major news source today, and one quickly discovers this is not an exaggeration. One study from the American Public Health Association found that some homicides were more newsworthy than others. The best murders for the news involve victims who are female, children, or the elderly. Top locations are in wealthy neighborhoods. Conversely, black and hispanic victims are not as exciting, apparently. A young white woman who is murdered in Beverly Hills will be all over every newsroom in the country, but a black man who got shot up in Compton might make a footnote in the LA Times if he's lucky.

Aside from the grotesque moral issue of masquerading journalists using violent crime as vile entertainment, an even greater tragedy is unfolding: the inability of Americans to properly assess risk in daily life. The pandering to our lower instincts via the tabloid journalism format has left a shocking void of real information and understanding. One popular statistical website, Five Thirty Eight, has provided a refreshing source of analysis in the otherwise mathematically oblivious journalism industry. Yet even Five Thirty Eight occasionally succumbs to a generally irrelevant story selection process with articles about lottery odds and sports instead of focusing more on science, economics, and politics. The average American knows more about LeBron James than the most common ways they could die. This is a failure of the journalism industry.

While you may never see a story about some random fat person dying from heart disease, that is actually the most likely way for an American to die. Second place is cancer. Nothing else even comes close to these two causes. Confederate racists, rogue policemen, terrorists, white thugs, black thugs, car accidents, airplane crashes, earthquakes, tsunamis, heat waves, blizzards, tornadoes, whatever you happen to be afraid of - it doesn't come close to the danger of being fat and dying of heart disease. It's such a huge factor, there's even an investment strategy for it.

If the media wants to continue their daily death tolls, the responsible thing to do would be to discuss how many people died of heart disease at the end of every broadcast. Every day, 1,674 people die from heart disease. That's the equivalent of three 747 airplane crashes every single day. In 2013, 611,105 people died from heart disease, which is more than the 407,000 Americans who died in World War II. Unlike other ways to die, heart disease is preventable 90% of the time. Yet instead of worrying about how to stop being such a fatass, Americans are more concerned about Confederate flags, gun control, police brutality, and ISIS. This is not a commentary on the validity of those issues. It's just a numerical analysis on the fact that Americans are avoiding the elephant in the room - which happens to be themselves.

Here are the numbers from the CDC.


In America, you're more likely to kill yourself than be murdered. Suicide is the tenth most common way to die, and it outnumbers homicides by more than 2 to 1.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#25)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,251
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
04-18-2016, 04:10 PM

Elliott: Why the media lies so much


I recently read an article on rt.com written by Cynthia McKinney, the first black woman elected to the Georgia Legislature. The title of the article was “Why Does The U.S Media Lie So Much?” I’ll continue after a brief aside to talk about rt.com (which stands for Russia today).

Rt.com is a news outlet sponsored by the Russian government, much like British Broadcasting Corporation of Britain, CBC of Canada and ABC of Australia. A few months ago, I was in a discussion group and I mentioned rt.com, which I visit daily, and a young man (30-ish) interrupted me to inform me that rt.com was nothing but Russian propaganda.

I immediately thought of the quote attributed to everyone from Shakespeare to Mark Twain to Winston Churchill, “Never do battle of wits with an unarmed man.” Contributors to rt include economists Paul Craig Roberts, Richard Wolff, Michael Hudson, Noam Chomsky, Lee Camp, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser, Larry King, Thom Hartmann and other Americans. Also George Galloway, former member of parliament in Britain. Why would any of these people want to be part of Russian propaganda?

Anyway, back to McKinney’s article. Why does the U.S media lie so much? The simple answer is — and the courts have ruled — that they can and it’s legal. They claim that it is part of free speech and that the responsibility is on the public to be informed as to whether the information is true or not. Thomas Jefferson said basically the same thing.

Therein lies the problem.

The American public has been lulled into watching the evening news and thinking they are being informed. They aren’t. They’re being manipulated.
If you question the reports you are given the handy label conspiracy theorist and dismissed. A study showed that Fox News told the truth 17 percent of the time. Critics have even divided the remaining 83 percent into partially true, mostly false and ‘pants on fire’.

Not only does the media lie, so does the government.

I have friends who are always posting pro-Democratic and Obama memes on Facebook. They don’t seem to realize that Democrats initiated our involvement in the three worst wars of the 20th century.

Bill Clinton did away with the Glass-Steagall Act that, since the 1930s, kept the banks from gambling with depositors’ money.
Hence, the crash of ‘08 and the robbery that continues. Clinton also pushed for and succeeded in passing NAFTA, the most disastrous “Free Trade Agreement” ever (only to be outdone by TPP, which is NAFTA on steroids, which Obama is pushing).

The news nightly blabbers about the “recovery.” There is no recovery, folks. We are falling further and further behind every day. The economic reports are laughable. Retail sales were up in January; unemployment has decreased under Obama.

Yeah, right, retail sales are so good that Wal-Mart is closing 269 stores, and unemployment is down? Oh really, what kind of jobs? Any $22-an-hour jobs with benefits? No! Mostly part-time, low-skill jobs at minimum wage with no benefits, no security. This is not a stable or sustainable economy.

The most laughable meme is that oil prices under Obama are drastically lower than under Bush. The president has no control over oil prices. If the president had that power, don’t you think that Jimmy Carter would have lowered the price back in the early ‘70s, when gas prices caused gas lines like soup lines in the ‘30s? Who falls for this nonsense? The current low price is because the Saudis lowered their price to hurt Iran, Russia and Venezuela, but mostly Iran. Three nations the U.S. hates because they won’t grovel and go along with our desire for complete world domination, as wouldn’t Iraq, Libya or Syria.

I hate to say this, but America has become the playground bully. If you don’t go along with our idea of world order or can’t be bribed or coerced into joining our — what Gerald Celente calls — coalition of the killing, you will have economic sanctions imposed on you, and if that doesn’t work, we will simply destroy you.

Today, America is an empire and the power elite love it. Any remotely close examination of empires shows two major things. One: They all die, usually from internal collapse. Two: The average person was destitute. A view of the Russian Empire in 1913, and the following few years, graphically shows what empire collapse can look like.

At the end of World War II, it was obvious that the British Empire was collapsing. They had the choice: Do away with democracy or the empire. I think they made the smart decision. Will we?

Now that you’re all cheered up, I’ll let you think about that for a bit. Until next time, take care.

— Fred Elliott is a Salina artist.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#26)
Casual Observer
Viva... yeah whatever
Casual Observer has a reputation beyond reputeCasual Observer has a reputation beyond reputeCasual Observer has a reputation beyond reputeCasual Observer has a reputation beyond reputeCasual Observer has a reputation beyond reputeCasual Observer has a reputation beyond reputeCasual Observer has a reputation beyond reputeCasual Observer has a reputation beyond reputeCasual Observer has a reputation beyond reputeCasual Observer has a reputation beyond reputeCasual Observer has a reputation beyond repute
 
Casual Observer's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 22,490
vCash: 4100
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: May 2006
   
04-18-2016, 07:11 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmyg View Post
Only the Left could create professional whiners and leeches and call it "progress"...


"...And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw..."

Neil Peart

“...I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine...”
Atlas Shrugged
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#27)
chefjeff
No sides, only players
chefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond reputechefjeff has a reputation beyond repute
 
chefjeff's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 52,834
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
   
04-19-2016, 04:57 AM

In 1993, the Des Moines Register couldn't print one edition due to the flooding that year. It was a big deal that this rag for the first time missed an edition.

It happened the other day, too, and barely a whimper. So few cared at all.

ha ha



Jeff Livingston
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#28)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,251
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
04-30-2016, 06:04 AM

  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#29)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,251
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
05-10-2016, 07:23 AM

2016-05-09 15:30 by Karl Denninger

Facebook's So-Called Trending Sidebar? It's a Lie


When is a story that is "trending", that is, that people are talking about, not actually trending?

When someone manually plays editor just like at a regular print newspaper.


Facebook workers routinely suppressed news stories of interest to conservative readers from the social network’s influential “trending” news section, according to a former journalist who worked on the project.
This individual says that workers prevented stories about the right-wing CPAC gathering, Mitt Romney, Rand Paul, and other conservative topics from appearing in the highly-influential section, even though they were organically trending among the site’s users.

Facebook is, of course, free to present whatever slant it wants on what it calls "news", just as is every other media outlet. Does that freedom, however, not expire if they lie?

See, Facebook claims that the "trending" sidebar is about organic discussions -- what the software determines people are talking about. The truth, according to this story, is a different matter -- "trending" not only might include stories that are in fact popular but it might also includes those that editors push on you and suppression of stories they do not want you to read, irrespective of the fact that they're popular.

This is what should be expected, however, when you are the product being sold. After all one of the key items in selling something is making it more attractive to the buyer. In this case the buyers are advertisers and presenting the illusion that you're talking about all nice squishy things might be exactly what the advertisers want to hear.

Of course it might not be what you want to hear. But remember, you're not the customer when you're using Facebook.

You're the product -- and you're being sold.

How's it feel to have a "Facebook" when you discover that what's being discussed is manipulated -- things you are talking about are suppressed, and things you're not are being advanced, all under the claim that this sidebar actually reflects what people are discussing?

You really shouldn't have expected otherwise, by the way. See, that's what happens when you are product -- you're massaged, lipstick is put on the pig (you), you're all dolled up and then presented for the actual customer, just like an apple has wax put on its skin to make it appear shiny and meat has carbon monoxide passed over it so it appears pink. It's why cereals have cartoon characters or Bruce Jenner on the label when in fact eating fast carbohydrates (like cereals, for instance) has a known propensity to make you fat. It's why sodas are formulated the way they are -- they are intentionally designed not to quench your thirst, but leave you wanting something to drink -- like another soda. And it's why some bars have a pail of free salted peanuts on the table -- again, go ahead and eat 'em -- you'll order more beer, and the beer generates far more profit than the peanuts cost.

You can keep being marketed and sold -- that is, keep being product -- if you wish. After all, is it slavery if you volunteer?


All you have to do is keep using Facebook.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#30)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 32,251
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
05-11-2016, 09:00 AM

What Manipulation Does To The Free Market

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 05/11/2016 - 11:47

Had the federal government held a constant measuring stick rather than "tinkering, engineering, distorting" key government calculations such as the size of the economy (GDP), the rate of inflation, level of unemployment, or size of federal deficits and federal debt...the reality we face would be plain and honest choices needed.

Instead, the responsibility of those working for "the people" has been breached via falsifying and distorting each of these (over decades). This consistently improves the output and does not allow a true means to quantify and qualify the nations health. Simply put, the government has continually tinkered, tampered, and distorted the accounting so as to mislead or create a falsely positive appearance.
  
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 2 of 24 12 3412 Last »

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.