Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > The Russian Connection

The Russian Connection (Page 4)
Thread Tools
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 03:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I'm not disagreeing with your technical analysis; I believe I saw something like that posted in July or so. But your analysis has no bearing on the report that the investigation is still open. Perhaps that is routine, but as a layman that seems noteworthy, and given past explanations, confusing.
But IMO, there's nothing to read into the investigation still being open. This can happen for many, many reasons and in it of itself does not provide for anything besides speculation. i.e. lets keep this constrained to what is being reported as fact, not what could be read into a lack of such reporting.

I'm not knocking you here, just saying there's nothing here for us to look at. If the FBI's investigation bears more information, by all means let's take a look at it, but until then and based on the facts and fantasy being reported, I do believe the CNN article posted not only lacks credibility, but aims to deceive.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 03:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
I'm sorry, I don't consider the above an example of intelligently discussing anything. You call it an ad hominem, I call it checking out of a conversation that was going nowhere.
i.e. you can't address my reasoning, so in your mind it's "going nowhere". Your argument may not have been going anywhere, but that doesn't mean the discussion was standing still.

You continually state that the DNS request are weird and notable, yet when I press you on what about the DNS requests could possibly be weird or notable, "the conversation is going nowhere".

If you can make any of your points without managing to insult me, I'll continue. But the truth is I'm not sure what else I have to say. You keep accusing me of believing things I've never claimed. I've stated my thoughts on why it was a story and that's it.
Heal thyself, doctor. You aren't getting any filtering here because you've recently accused me of reading comprehension & intellectual honesty issues for simply having a different (and well supported) viewpoint. I don't think you've really earned the right to lecture on what constitutes civil and intellectual discussion.

Also, I've stated my thoughts on why it is a bogus story, thoughts well supported by the reality of the technology involved. Your inability or unwillingness to address the specifics in an intellectual conversation does NOT mean I am accusing you of believing anything. I'm simply trying to get to the bottom of WHY you believe those things given the facts we know and can independently verify, and you're unable to articulate your argument beyond "I believe it's weird and notable". You can't really claim to be interested in intellectual conversation if you check out of the conversation when it's readily apparent your assertions are undermined. It's ok to admit you don't know everything about everyting and are susceptible to bias - i've had to do it many times right herre on these forums when presented with independently verifiable fact that demonstrably undermined my arguments.

Don't dish it out if you can't take it. You will get it back in turn.

Also, that verge article you cited is pretty much in lock step with my conclusions. Yet, somehow that support's your argument against our two mutually exclusive arguments?
( Last edited by Snow-i; Mar 16, 2017 at 03:36 PM. Reason: clarity)
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 03:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Originally, "fake news" meant stories completely made up by some guy in Macedonia to get Facebook likes and ad revenue.

So now I guess "fake news" means "news biased against your point of view"?

"Pope Francis endorses Hillary Clinton" is fake news. It's not a thing that happened.

"This server activity is suspicious" is not fake news, it's a (potentially) slanted take on something that actually happened.
I use the term to mock those who coined the term and made it a thing in the first place. "fake news" has always been a thing, way back to the cave men. It only drew mainstream ire when it became a convenient thing for the democrats to blame their embarrassing election schlepping on.

I'll be happy to edit "fake news" to "intellectually dishonest and intentionally misleading opinion shamelessly presented as objective fact-based news" if you would prefer to stick to the narrow, liberal approved connotation of the term.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 03:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Its just the latest double standard.
To the left, fake news is fake news: Any fabricated story published as news.
To the right, fake news is any news story you don't agree with.

Its not even a new double standard, its just a new way to enshrine they way they've been thinking for years. If the truth is inconvenient, pretend its not the truth.
Wait, are you coming out in support of my assessment of the CNN article? Because your last statement summarily describes my gripe with CNN on this one.

Also, your partisan bias is showing again. Cover up dude!
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 06:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
I use the term to mock those who coined the term and made it a thing in the first place. "fake news" has always been a thing, way back to the cave men. It only drew mainstream ire when it became a convenient thing for the democrats to blame their embarrassing election schlepping on.
What?
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 06:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
But IMO, there's nothing to read into the investigation still being open.
Great. I disagree. Hence why I posted it.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
This can happen for many, many reasons and in it of itself does not provide for anything besides speculation. i.e. lets keep this constrained to what is being reported as fact, not what could be read into a lack of such reporting.
You may want to check what thread you're in and read the OP. You're fighting the right battle on the wrong hill.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 06:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
What?
Is there a question in there or do you need me to further articulate what I mean by that?
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 06:05 PM
 
Former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn paid $56,200 by Russian firms in 2015, documents show - ABC News

There's nothing I'm certain of regarding this Trump/Russia thing, but Manafort and Flynn doing some shady shit before working for him seems incredibly likely.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 06:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Is there a question in there or do you need me to further articulate what I mean by that?
What is fake news? Its origins and how it grew in 2016
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 06:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Great. I disagree. Hence why I posted it.
Fair enough.

You may want to check what thread you're in and read the OP. You're fighting the right battle on the wrong hill.
*shrugs*

You're not wrong, but I fear that as a whole the hysteria has lowered many people's standards to the point that they don't want to be on the right hill at any time. Perhaps a little unity could be found if we could stop feeding the hysteria monster that's making these "news" outlets a ton of money and further incentivizing them to make shit up and turn ignorance (which is legion) directly into money. I won't contend to ruin the campfire feel of telling ghost stories...but is it really worth another thread to discuss these same issues but from a perspective grounded in reality where we all at least try to be objectively reasonable?
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 06:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Ok, so the media/trump came up with a new term for an ancient phenomenon, and attributed it directly to the election in '16. Put lipstick on a pig and you still call it a pig. There's nothing new or novel about it.

Originally Posted by google
prop·a·gan·da
ˌpräpəˈɡandə/
noun
1.
derogatory
information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.
how is this any different?
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 06:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
I fear that as a whole the hysteria has lowered many people's standards to the point that they don't want to be on the right hill at any time.
I think you're giving this hysteria a ton of credit it isn't due. This is not a new phenomenon.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Perhaps a little unity could be found if we could stop feeding the hysteria monster that's making these "news" outlets a ton of money and further incentivizing them to make shit up and turn ignorance (which is legion) directly into money.
Whats happening with the news is a symptom, not the problem.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2017, 06:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
It only drew mainstream ire when it became a convenient thing for the democrats to blame their embarrassing election schlepping on.
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Ok, so the media/trump came up with a new term for an ancient phenomenon, and attributed it directly to the election in '16. Put lipstick on a pig and you still call it a pig. There's nothing new or novel about it.



how is this any different?
Someone who hates being partisan is being a little partisan, methinks.
( Last edited by The Final Dakar; Mar 17, 2017 at 08:27 AM. Reason: Bb code)
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2017, 07:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Wait, are you coming out in support of my assessment of the CNN article? Because your last statement summarily describes my gripe with CNN on this one.

Also, your partisan bias is showing again. Cover up dude!
Do you think your bias doesn't ever show?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2017, 12:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
whoosh.gif
Since it's the Left who lives by identity politics, that's really the only connection I could find. Maybe you could clarify?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2017, 12:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
That's what he was talking about when he said, "liberal approved connotation of the term". Now the phrase is directly tied to everything the Leftist MSM throws at a wall in the hope that it will stick.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2017, 12:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I think you're giving this hysteria a ton of credit it isn't due. This is not a new phenomenon.
Touche. Still, the hysteria I'm witnessing (outside the NN) has been on a level beyond anything I can remember.


Whats happening with the news is a symptom, not the problem.
True, but what can we do about the root cause? Unfortunately, it is human nature we would be fighting against.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2017, 12:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Do you think your bias doesn't ever show?
I am far from perfect, and yes I understand that I, along with everyone else, am prone to bias. If someone calls me on it for a particular topic, I'll go back and check my standpoint/argument for signs of bias and adjust if need be. I encourage you to point it out when/if you feel my arguments are unreasonable due to bias. I am interested in getting as close to objectively reasonable as possible - that doesn't mean I will always hit the mark perfectly, but perhaps together we can overcome.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2017, 12:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Someone who hates being partisan is being a little partisan, methinks.
Biased as it may be, do you think it's off the mark?
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2017, 02:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
If someone calls me on it for a particular topic, I'll go back and check my standpoint/argument for signs of bias and adjust if need be.
Okay.

I use the term to mock those who coined the term and made it a thing in the first place. "fake news" has always been a thing, way back to the cave men. It only drew mainstream ire when it became a convenient thing for the democrats to blame their embarrassing election schlepping on.
1. Incorrect use of "fake news" term.

2. Getting origin of "fake news" term wrong.

3. Taking pride in mocking people that coined "fake news" term (presumably liberals, Democrats, or the left), even though they didn't actually create "fake news" term.

4. Connotation of basically every word in that last sentence.

None of those are helping your "I try to be unbiased" case.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2017, 03:15 PM
 
I find that when I try to be unbiased around here I get called biased anyway.

That said, I stand by what I've always said about bias in the media and fake news is no different when it comes to how the scales are balanced.

LW media will tweak or omit details or stories to express their left wing bias, but they will criticise and attack their own politicians and public figures when they mis-step and even report it when their guys are merely accused of such.
RW media will ignore, avoid or deny quite big stories to protect their own people, avoiding the slightest criticism in all but the worst circumstances or if two of their guys are going after each other. They are also much more likely to point fingers of blame at the left without substantiation, and will disown their own guys if they veer too far from the company line (RINOs etc).
They are also highly prone to either fabricating stories completely or using Cartman-esque lawyer-talk to report on other sources' stories to get around the pesky fact checking and libel concerns that most main stream news sources hold themselves to.

Are both sides biased? Yes. Is it anything like equal in scope? No way. Its actually rather like the 'nice list' imbalance uncovered in my Day in the life thread.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2017, 04:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
LW media will tweak or omit details or stories to express their left wing bias, but they will criticise and attack their own politicians and public figures when they mis-step and even report it when their guys are merely accused of such.
RW media will ignore, avoid or deny quite big stories to protect their own people, avoiding the slightest criticism in all but the worst circumstances or if two of their guys are going after each other.
Making these sort of claims without any data or evidence means the only thing you have backing it up is your bias, no?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2017, 10:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I find that when I try to be unbiased around here I get called biased anyway.

That said, I stand by what I've always said about bias in the media and fake news is no different when it comes to how the scales are balanced.

LW media will tweak or omit details or stories to express their left wing bias, but they will criticise and attack their own politicians and public figures when they mis-step and even report it when their guys are merely accused of such.
RW media will ignore, avoid or deny quite big stories to protect their own people, avoiding the slightest criticism in all but the worst circumstances or if two of their guys are going after each other. They are also much more likely to point fingers of blame at the left without substantiation, and will disown their own guys if they veer too far from the company line (RINOs etc).
They are also highly prone to either fabricating stories completely or using Cartman-esque lawyer-talk to report on other sources' stories to get around the pesky fact checking and libel concerns that most main stream news sources hold themselves to.

Are both sides biased? Yes. Is it anything like equal in scope? No way. Its actually rather like the 'nice list' imbalance uncovered in my Day in the life thread.
What's being considered left-wing media here?
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2017, 12:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
What's being considered left-wing media here?
I'm going with the RW definition which is 'Anything that isn't RW, or that we don't like."
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2017, 12:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Making these sort of claims without any data or evidence means the only thing you have backing it up is your bias, no?
I have no intention of conducting my own study other than whats in my own memory and what I see on a daily basis.
Take a partisan issue and pick a media outlet, try to predict which side they'll come down on and whether or not they will temper their reporting with some fact or comment to balance out or open their stance to scrutiny or interpretation. I don't take notes but I do this a lot and the RW sources are much more predictable and less likely to balance their reporting.

Its built into the nature of politics in the US. If you look at partisan rulings on the SC, the LW judges are more likely to rule against their own beliefs and in favour of what the law says. The RW judges are more likely to ignore the law in favour of what they prefer.

The ultimate difference between Liberal and Conservative in the US is selfless vs. selfish. In that light it should be obvious that one is capable of being objective and neutral (even if they aren't always) and the other isn't capable at all.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2017, 10:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I'm going with the RW definition which is 'Anything that isn't RW, or that we don't like."
Whenever I claim the MSM has a left-wing bias I'm told this is incorrect. I'm likewise told this is incorrect by the MSM itself.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2017, 12:26 PM
 
One of the things that is surprising is that lately EVEN FOX has been critical of Trump. I think this shows how over the line he is, for this is unusual.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2017, 12:39 PM
 
This appears to me more like a pivot than Trump offending their delicate sensibilities.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2017, 02:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Whenever I claim the MSM has a left-wing bias I'm told this is incorrect. I'm likewise told this is incorrect by the MSM itself.
The media likes to think they are being fair and balanced even when they aren't. I got enraged at a BBC presenter last night who spent a couple of minutes claiming to have no political opinions whatsoever in his official capacity then proceeded to harass a youth member of the SNP with a question whose phrasing was dripping with political bias repeatedly. I wanted to punch him.

I don't think the MSM is that biased. They might be a little bit because their owners and presenters are mostly inclined towards the left but as I keep trying to point out, if you have a shred of selflessness in you, you're going to be biased to the left. Or more accurately against the right. Whether you believe its that people earning enough cash as owners of news networks or working as presenters can afford to be more selfless than average or whether its just that broadcasters prefer to display decent values I leave to you.

Theres an element of truth to it sometimes, but ultimately the MSM being liberally biased is two labels used by the right to diminish the influence of their rival networks and rival points of view.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2017, 02:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
The media likes to think they are being fair and balanced even when they aren't. I got enraged at a BBC presenter last night who spent a couple of minutes claiming to have no political opinions whatsoever in his official capacity then proceeded to harass a youth member of the SNP with a question whose phrasing was dripping with political bias repeatedly. I wanted to punch him.

I don't think the MSM is that biased. They might be a little bit because their owners and presenters are mostly inclined towards the left but as I keep trying to point out, if you have a shred of selflessness in you, you're going to be biased to the left. Or more accurately against the right. Whether you believe its that people earning enough cash as owners of news networks or working as presenters can afford to be more selfless than average or whether its just that broadcasters prefer to display decent values I leave to you.

Theres an element of truth to it sometimes, but ultimately the MSM being liberally biased is two labels used by the right to diminish the influence of their rival networks and rival points of view.
I'm not a rival network, I'm a consumer. I won't deny people are waging semantic war with the term MSM, but I hope I'm given some allowance for the ease of using it rather than listing the three networks, a cable outlet, a couple newspapers, and public broadcasting.

The MSM can be as biased as it wants, and if it's that way because they have a shred of human decency, then more power to them. What I care about is accuracy. It doesn't matter how good the intentions are if they cause a journalist to jump to the wrong conclusion.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2017, 03:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
i.e. you can't address my reasoning, so in your mind it's "going nowhere". Your argument may not have been going anywhere, but that doesn't mean the discussion was standing still.
This is simply not true. For starters, you have several times criticised my grasp on technology, when it is clear from your initial posts that you did not understand what was at issue. You got hung up on WHOIS when, if you had either read the article critically instead of just dismissing it because of 'bias' you would have realised that was not the case. Moreover, a very quick google search lead to articles with more technical detail that further discredited your understanding of the situation. Let's review that facts.

1) A server for a Russian bank made an inordinate number of DNS requests for a server under the control of the Trump organisation.

2) While I have never been in cyber security myself, I have managed a team that had that responsibility. Anomalies such as these are, as I've repeated again and again, weird and notable. While the requests in and themselves are not dangerous, they could be cover for some other activity or attack.

3) The Russian state has been very involved in cyber attacks on U.S. (and allied) systems.

4) The US server in question was under the control of (at the time) a candidate for U.S. President.

5) There are more than a few links between Trump, his team, and the Russians, including business, Government, and Intelligence.

6) All of this adds up to this situation being worthy of investigation.

They haven't found anything, and they may never do so. There may be nothing to find. If they do find something, Trump (or his people) could be involved or they could be victims. Just because the traffic itself appears harmless, it's possible it was a cover for something else. That's how cyber attacks work.

Everything I have written was in response to your original post- which was littered with inaacruaceis.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Fake news, anyone?
Biased and poorly reported, I would agree. Fake, no.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
A russian server did a whois on one of trump's servers, and CNN leads with "odd computer link" and implies a trump-russia connection with a headline for a ROUTINE, harmless, and one way process done millions of times a day all over the internet by literally anyone with access to said internet.
This is a mischaracterisation and misunderstanding of the article and the reality as reported by other sources.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Here's your fake news, folks. The headline should have read: "Some guy in russia did a WHOIS on one of trump's domains using a computer connected to alfabank's network"
Well now that would be fake news, because it's wrong.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
The masses scream conspiracy, when the truth is ignorance and idiocy has won the day.
Some are screaming conspiracy, true. I was, however, doing my best to explain to you and others that while it was a poorly written article, the investigation was understandable. The only ignorance on display was yours and your understanding of what has been reported.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2017, 06:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'm not a rival network, I'm a consumer. I won't deny people are waging semantic war with the term MSM, but I hope I'm given some allowance for the ease of using it rather than listing the three networks, a cable outlet, a couple newspapers, and public broadcasting.

The MSM can be as biased as it wants, and if it's that way because they have a shred of human decency, then more power to them. What I care about is accuracy. It doesn't matter how good the intentions are if they cause a journalist to jump to the wrong conclusion.
Indeed, bias is one thing, blatant misrepresentation that borders on gaslighting is another.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2017, 09:59 PM
 
I wouldn't phrase it that way because it implies an intent I honestly think isn't there.

My pet theory is most journalists are kinda full of themselves, and think they observe the world as it truly is.

Yet for them, as with most people, what they consider to be reality is in fact an extremely rough approximation composed of brain trickery.

I think if they realized how illusory the nature of perception is, they'd take pains to be better about it.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2017, 04:42 AM
 
And it's back in the news.

Russia's Alfa Bank Says Cyberattacks Falsely Tie It to Trump.

So even Alfa Bank agrees with my assessment. In fact they take it further claiming the DNS requests were cover for a cyber attack.

Still very possibly (perhaps even likely) nothing, but the intrigue justifiably remains.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2017, 07:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
One of the things that is surprising is that lately EVEN FOX has been critical of Trump. I think this shows how over the line he is, for this is unusual.
Remember, Murdoch's sons have taken over and Ailes is out. That latter would have been enough on its own, but the former seem to be aiming for a more... mainstream? moderate? take on the news.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2017, 07:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
True, but what can we do about the root cause? Unfortunately, it is human nature we would be fighting against.
We'd have to agree what the root cause is. I see it as politicians increasingly demonizing the opposition. My solution would be removing FPTP elections, because its a great asset to us vs them two party systems.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2017, 07:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Biased as it may be, do you think it's off the mark?
"Yes, I'm biased but am I wrong?" Welcome to my world, friend.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2017, 07:26 PM
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/18/u...rref=t.co&_r=0
Roger J. Stone Jr., an informal adviser to President Trump, has been asked by the Senate Intelligence Committee to preserve any records he may have in connection to a broader inquiry into Russian attempts to interfere with United States elections.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2017, 05:57 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'm not a rival network, I'm a consumer. I won't deny people are waging semantic war with the term MSM, but I hope I'm given some allowance for the ease of using it rather than listing the three networks, a cable outlet, a couple newspapers, and public broadcasting.

The MSM can be as biased as it wants, and if it's that way because they have a shred of human decency, then more power to them. What I care about is accuracy. It doesn't matter how good the intentions are if they cause a journalist to jump to the wrong conclusion.
I'm pretty sure they fact check. Meanwhile the likes of Fox have a legal team to help them phrase things so they won't get sued.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2017, 10:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Its built into the nature of politics in the US. If you look at partisan rulings on the SC, the LW judges are more likely to rule against their own beliefs and in favour of what the law says. The RW judges are more likely to ignore the law in favour of what they prefer.
Again, an unsubstantiated statement that no one believes because it's coming from someone who would want it to be true. Back it up with data.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2017, 10:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I'm pretty sure they fact check. Meanwhile the likes of Fox have a legal team to help them phrase things so they won't get sued.
Someone explain to me the legitimacy of the "but FOX does X" argument.

I can be a shithead as long as I find a bigger shithead to point to?
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2017, 11:23 AM
 
Same as the "Hillary is just as bad" statements.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2017, 11:38 AM
 
Obvious prediction: Comeys words will be misconstrued to mean more than they actually indicate.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2017, 11:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Same as the "Hillary is just as bad" statements.
While I think there are a few places this more true than one would expect, like when it comes to her private rages, it's not very good as a general argument, is it?
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2017, 11:51 AM
 
The GOP concern trolling over leaks reeks of "it's about ethics in games journalism."
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2017, 11:56 AM
 
Link or search terms?
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2017, 12:05 PM
 
Its the seriousness of the charges.......
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2017, 12:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I'm pretty sure they fact check.
They do, yet despite this, every time I've had personal knowledge of a story, they get a bunch of stuff wrong. It isn't some type of political thing, they just get shit wrong.

But whatever. That's not what I'm complaining about. The news isn't a listing of facts from robots. It has editors who decide what's important, and writers who set the tone of an article.

Politics gets tied up in those two things and the result is an inaccurate representation of reality.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2017, 01:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Same as the "Hillary is just as bad" statements.
I'm pretty sure we said she's worse (she is).
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2017, 01:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
I'm pretty sure we said she's worse (she is).
Where I think it counts is with stuff like reacting to a terrorist attack. He seems worse on that one.
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum 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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:13 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2