Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sister or sinister? It's always gone on it's just more refined and easier to reach the ones you want to frighten, influence them to the agenda and get ho.. Democracy for the modern age.. Cheaper than and less bloodshed than gunboats.. " Haha, if I say sister I mean sister!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me "You should be bothered. This is not just about voting, this is about them snooping through and using all your data. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me "You may not vote, but others do, and they elect governments whose decisions then effect you. Unless you're a free citizen like another forum user  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
You should be bothered. This is not just about voting, this is about them snooping through and using all your data."The same way Theresa May is doing | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What is scary is just how entwined the Tory party are with all this: https://www.theguardian.com/news/series/cambridge-analytica-files I know this has always happened to a lesser extent, but when you combine that with the fact that a third of all pro-leave tweets in the run up to the referendum were bots, you can see what a massive effect it has. Even more reason to see the ‘people have spoken’ line is a bunch of nonsense. -Matt" Well the thing about 'the "people" have spoken' crowd is that they say how wonderful UKIP have been in securing the vote, but seemingly ignore the fact that UKIP was single handedly bankrolled by a single billionaire, Arron Banks. So it's not the "people" at all, it's one 1%er who through enough money at the problem until he achieved the political outcome that he wanted to achieve. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me "No it is not. It is very targeted psychometric manipulation where 2 people married to each other in the same household using the same computer if targeted will receive totally different messages and will not even know that the messages they are receiving are of a political nature. The fact is Cambridge Analytica can predict your response to any issue with a 98% accuracy rate after you answer just 52 of their questions and that accuracy rate increases the more questions you answer. They are also able to tailor messages to suppress actions (like voting or protesting) of those opposed to their clients and to convert those who would vulnerable to manipulation. You may not be worried because you don't vote, but have you given any thought to the possibility that the reason you don't vote is because someone is manipulating you because if you did vote you would not vote the way they want you too? By the way Cambridge Analytica only do political work for right wing and nationalist people and causes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
You may not vote, but others do, and they elect governments whose decisions then effect you. Unless you're a free citizen like another forum user ". I've opted out of the bullshit, I don't use Facebook or Twitter or Instagram or any other load of bollocks they sell you. I recommend it  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
No it is not. It is very targeted psychometric manipulation where 2 people married to each other in the same household using the same computer if targeted will receive totally different messages and will not even know that the messages they are receiving are of a political nature. The fact is Cambridge Analytica can predict your response to any issue with a 98% accuracy rate after you answer just 52 of their questions and that accuracy rate increases the more questions you answer. They are also able to tailor messages to suppress actions (like voting or protesting) of those opposed to their clients and to convert those who would vulnerable to manipulation.
You may not be worried because you don't vote, but have you given any thought to the possibility that the reason you don't vote is because someone is manipulating you because if you did vote you would not vote the way they want you too?
By the way Cambridge Analytica only do political work for right wing and nationalist people and causes."And what about all the rest of the tracking from Facebook? https://fieldguide.gizmodo.com/all-the-ways-facebook-tracks-you-that-you-might-not-kno-1795604150 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And what about all the rest of the tracking from Facebook?" Firstly, it is not just Facebook that is used for data mining. Secondly, using data mining for commercial purposes may be questionable. But to be honest if I am going to be bombarded with adds, spam emails and snail-mail at least if it is targeted directly at me I may get to hear about something that I want. The problem with Cambridge Analytica is they are using data mining to covertly influence politics on behalf of the hard right and that is very sinister. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's George Soros using to convince all these knob ends that the left wing antifa version is what's needed?. Two sides setting each other at war?. No thanks it's not for me, I know the pitch forks are coming, I've been telling you all this for ages... Next thing you'll all be telling me is this climate change is gonna get seriously fucking real in the next 10-15 years. "FFS! Antifa... You do realise there are only 2 sorts of people in this world, Fascists and Anti-Fascists. Antfa is ANTiFAscist. As for your climate change jibe, did you hear the news? It has just been discovered that an area of antarctic sea ice the size of France is now free-floating and is expected to accelerate the rate sea rise. You my friend really need to start reading more widely. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And what about all the rest of the tracking from Facebook? Firstly, it is not just Facebook that is used for data mining. Secondly, using data mining for commercial purposes may be questionable. But to be honest if I am going to be bombarded with adds, spam emails and snail-mail at least if it is targeted directly at me I may get to hear about something that I want. The problem with Cambridge Analytica is they are using data mining to covertly influence politics on behalf of the hard right and that is very sinister. " I think Facebook are going far beyond data mining! And given how left-wing the internet is, I doubt that Cambridge had any effect! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's George Soros using to convince all these knob ends that the left wing antifa version is what's needed?. Two sides setting each other at war?. No thanks it's not for me, I know the pitch forks are coming, I've been telling you all this for ages... Next thing you'll all be telling me is this climate change is gonna get seriously fucking real in the next 10-15 years.
FFS!
Antifa...
You do realise there are only 2 sorts of people in this world, Fascists and Anti-Fascists. Antfa is ANTiFAscist.
As for your climate change jibe, did you hear the news? It has just been discovered that an area of antarctic sea ice the size of France is now free-floating and is expected to accelerate the rate sea rise.
You my friend really need to start reading more widely."So there is nothing in the middle between Ultra right-wing loonies and Ultra left-wing loonies? Really?! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Have we not known this was happening all along? Only know we know more of the ingredients in the Cambridge Analytics secret sauce." No, this is a relatively new development. In fact Cambridge Analytica was only formed in 2013 and its first major campaign was Brexit. Further it was Farage who introduced it to the Republicans and to Trump in particular. Before 2013 the whole field was little more than an area of psychological research that had generated an interesting algorithm that was being researched in Cambridge. In fact the man whose original research has been used to form this monster has effectively been shunned by the whole of his academic community because of how one of his students has perverted his work. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Have we not known this was happening all along? Only know we know more of the ingredients in the Cambridge Analytics secret sauce. No, this is a relatively new development. In fact Cambridge Analytica was only formed in 2013 and its first major campaign was Brexit. Further it was Farage who introduced it to the Republicans and to Trump in particular. Before 2013 the whole field was little more than an area of psychological research that had generated an interesting algorithm that was being researched in Cambridge. In fact the man whose original research has been used to form this monster has effectively been shunned by the whole of his academic community because of how one of his students has perverted his work. " You mean because they have realised he is apparently right wing and 99.99% of students and universities are left wing! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
You may not vote, but others do, and they elect governments whose decisions then effect you. Unless you're a free citizen like another forum user .
I've opted out of the bullshit, I don't use Facebook or Twitter or Instagram or any other load of bollocks they sell you.
I recommend it "Doesn't make one jot of difference, you can still be effected by the governments elected by the people who do. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's George Soros using to convince all these knob ends that the left wing antifa version is what's needed?. Two sides setting each other at war?. No thanks it's not for me, I know the pitch forks are coming, I've been telling you all this for ages... Next thing you'll all be telling me is this climate change is gonna get seriously fucking real in the next 10-15 years.
FFS!
Antifa...
You do realise there are only 2 sorts of people in this world, Fascists and Anti-Fascists. Antfa is ANTiFAscist.
As for your climate change jibe, did you hear the news? It has just been discovered that an area of antarctic sea ice the size of France is now free-floating and is expected to accelerate the rate sea rise.
You my friend really need to start reading more widely.". Ooh lord help me | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Have we not known this was happening all along? Only know we know more of the ingredients in the Cambridge Analytics secret sauce. No, this is a relatively new development. In fact Cambridge Analytica was only formed in 2013 and its first major campaign was Brexit. Further it was Farage who introduced it to the Republicans and to Trump in particular. Before 2013 the whole field was little more than an area of psychological research that had generated an interesting algorithm that was being researched in Cambridge. In fact the man whose original research has been used to form this monster has effectively been shunned by the whole of his academic community because of how one of his students has perverted his work. " Interesting to see where you read Farage introduced Cambridge Analytica to the Republicans and Trump. According to Christopher Wylie, the Republicans were introduced to SCL (Cambridge Analytica's parent company) after Mark Block, a veteran Republican strategist, happened to sit next to a cyberwarfare expert for the US air force on a plane. The CW expert suggested they should meet SCL as they do cyberwarfare for elections. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/data-war-whistleblower-christopher-wylie-faceook-nix-bannon-trump | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
You may not vote, but others do, and they elect governments whose decisions then effect you. Unless you're a free citizen like another forum user .
I've opted out of the bullshit, I don't use Facebook or Twitter or Instagram or any other load of bollocks they sell you.
I recommend it "Burn books whilst you are at it. I hear they are really bad too. People write about ideas and stuff in them. Don’t want you getting any ideas. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
You may not vote, but others do, and they elect governments whose decisions then effect you. Unless you're a free citizen like another forum user .
I've opted out of the bullshit, I don't use Facebook or Twitter or Instagram or any other load of bollocks they sell you.
I recommend it
Burn books whilst you are at it. I hear they are really bad too. People write about ideas and stuff in them. Don’t want you getting any ideas.
-Matt". It's a free world I hear | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" By the way Cambridge Analytica only do political work for right wing and nationalist people and causes." Do they? SCL Group, the parent group of Cambridge Analytica, reportedly entrapped the leader of the opposition party in St. Kitts and Nevis with a $1.4 million (£1 million) bribe, in order to secure an election win for the country's Labour party, who was a client of SCL Group. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And given how left-wing the internet is..." You’ve not looked at much of it, then. Deary me. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me "No it isn't. Obama's campaign directly targeted likely voted with overt political messaging. Like an advert, it was obvious what it was. The data was also not gathered under false pretences. Existing data was used. What was different about this was that various quizzes were sent out to gather specific information without indicating the reason. This was then used to create a bubble of information and misinformation that influenced people without them knowing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
You may not vote, but others do, and they elect governments whose decisions then effect you. Unless you're a free citizen like another forum user .
I've opted out of the bullshit, I don't use Facebook or Twitter or Instagram or any other load of bollocks they sell you.
I recommend it
Burn books whilst you are at it. I hear they are really bad too. People write about ideas and stuff in them. Don’t want you getting any ideas.
-Matt"If you're a far left Momentum Corbyn supporter you'll be burning newspaper's. People report on the news and stuff in them. Don't want you getting any ideas. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's George Soros using to convince all these knob ends that the left wing antifa version is what's needed?. Two sides setting each other at war?. No thanks it's not for me, I know the pitch forks are coming, I've been telling you all this for ages... Next thing you'll all be telling me is this climate change is gonna get seriously fucking real in the next 10-15 years.
FFS!
Antifa...
You do realise there are only 2 sorts of people in this world, Fascists and Anti-Fascists. Antfa is ANTiFAscist.
"There are 2 types of people in this world, those who respect the rule of law and those that don't. Those that don't then attempt to take the law into their own hands, we call these people vigilantes. Antifa are nothing but vigilantes and violent ones at that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And what about all the rest of the tracking from Facebook? Firstly, it is not just Facebook that is used for data mining. Secondly, using data mining for commercial purposes may be questionable. But to be honest if I am going to be bombarded with adds, spam emails and snail-mail at least if it is targeted directly at me I may get to hear about something that I want. The problem with Cambridge Analytica is they are using data mining to covertly influence politics on behalf of the hard right and that is very sinister. I think Facebook are going far beyond data mining! And given how left-wing the internet is, I doubt that Cambridge had any effect!" First it was cries of "Let's blame the Russians" for Trump and Brexit, now when that hasn't really cut through with the public they look to blame someone else like Cambridge Analytica....nothing to do with the fact that the EU and Hillary Clinton are despised and disliked by a huge number of people (and have been for years), and nothing to do with the Remain Campaign and Hillary Clinton's campaign being Shit! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And what about all the rest of the tracking from Facebook? Firstly, it is not just Facebook that is used for data mining. Secondly, using data mining for commercial purposes may be questionable. But to be honest if I am going to be bombarded with adds, spam emails and snail-mail at least if it is targeted directly at me I may get to hear about something that I want. The problem with Cambridge Analytica is they are using data mining to covertly influence politics on behalf of the hard right and that is very sinister. I think Facebook are going far beyond data mining! And given how left-wing the internet is, I doubt that Cambridge had any effect! First it was cries of "Let's blame the Russians" for Trump and Brexit, now when that hasn't really cut through with the public they look to blame someone else like Cambridge Analytica....nothing to do with the fact that the EU and Hillary Clinton are despised and disliked by a huge number of people (and have been for years), and nothing to do with the Remain Campaign and Hillary Clinton's campaign being Shit! " Why did Clinton get more votes then? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
No it isn't. Obama's campaign directly targeted likely voted with overt political messaging. Like an advert, it was obvious what it was.
The data was also not gathered under false pretences. Existing data was used.
What was different about this was that various quizzes were sent out to gather specific information without indicating the reason. This was then used to create a bubble of information and misinformation that influenced people without them knowing."One is just a more sophisticated version of the other. Both are abuse of data whether freely supplied (a questionable notion at best) or not and advertising which has always been about persuasion and economical trurhs. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"cambridge analytica ... just more lying right wing shit sacks with a falangist agenda who pervert democracy whilst pretending to drain the elite swamp when they are in fact the very fetid effluent that make's the right wing political swamp stink so repulsively ... pretty standard stuff these days to be fair" Indeed. And now leave.eu have removed their page on their strategy and how they use Cambridge Analytica to target demographics. Wonder why they’ve suddenly removed that then? I mean leave supporters swear blind that they were not duped by the media. So what’s the problem? I mean even when the lead of leave.eu comes out saying ‘we duped you’ try still don’t believe it. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What's George Soros using to convince all these knob ends that the left wing antifa version is what's needed?. Two sides setting each other at war?. No thanks it's not for me, I know the pitch forks are coming, I've been telling you all this for ages... Next thing you'll all be telling me is this climate change is gonna get seriously fucking real in the next 10-15 years.
FFS!
Antifa...
You do realise there are only 2 sorts of people in this world, Fascists and Anti-Fascists. Antfa is ANTiFAscist.
As for your climate change jibe, did you hear the news? It has just been discovered that an area of antarctic sea ice the size of France is now free-floating and is expected to accelerate the rate sea rise.
You my friend really need to start reading more widely."I agreew with you on the climate change issue, but the political activist group antifa does genuinely have a militant wing which hides behind everyone else. Ive come face to face wih them at several events and the way they shut down free speech is dire. To clarify though ive also ecountered far right and hard right groups who are much the same. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" First it was cries of "Let's blame the Russians" for Trump and Brexit, now when that hasn't really cut through with the public they look to blame someone else like Cambridge Analytica....nothing to do with the fact that the EU and Hillary Clinton are despised and disliked by a huge number of people (and have been for years), and nothing to do with the Remain Campaign and Hillary Clinton's campaign being Shit! " Surprisingly there were multiple people involved in getting the President of America elected. In fact in a shocking fact I can reveal exclusively here on fabswingers, in every single US presidential election there have been multiple groups involved. 
As for Russian collusion not "cutting through with the public" in December 61% of Americans believed Russian efforts to influence the election were a serious issue. In a january Quinnipac poll it increased to 68%. In a CNN poll in february 72% are very concerned about Russian influence on the elections. Far from the issue not "cutting through with the public" Americans are taking it more seriously as more evidence piles up.
But lets take a brief walk through the links between Trumps campaign, CA and Putins government shall we?
CA's board recently had Rebekka and Robert Mercer (Trumps major donors) and Steve Bannon (campaign ceo and former special advisor to Trump). CA have now been awarded a major state department contract. The Mercers also funded Bannons version of Breitbart for years to further their alt right views.
The indictments of the Russians have revealed that Russian operatives were in the US, stole american identities and conducted information warfare. They were funded with $1.2million per month from the Russian government. Their facebook ads alone were seen by 126 million Americans.
Wikileaks is known to have hacked emails from the DNC and RNC since before the election. Only the DNC was released.
The dnc hack was committed by "Guccifer 2.0". Guccifer 2.0's ip address has been traced to Russian intelligence hq in Moscow. Guccifer 2.0 hacked the DNC emails and was in contact with trumps advisor Roger Stone who knew about the emails before it was public knowledge.
CA reached out to Wikileaks to organise the dissemination of the DNC emails.
Manafort is under house arrest due to the russian probe and Gates has pled guilty. Both have extensive ties to the Russians incuding people very close to Putin. Specifically Oleg Deripaska who Manafort offered to give briefings to during the campaign. Deripaska has close ties to the Putin regime.
So we have a Trump advisor in contact with Russian intelligence, Russian intelligence working hand in glove with wikileaks, CA working with Wikileaks, CA working with Trump and CAs board members funding his campaign. And we have campaign advisors briefing close allies of Putin.
Shall I draw you a little diagram if all that was a little too complicated for you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The major issue with CA is that they illegally stole the information of 50 million people, and not just the people who did those quizes but also their friends because facebook was that lax with peoples information. First it was cries of "Let's blame the Russians" for Trump and Brexit, now when that hasn't really cut through with the public they look to blame someone else like Cambridge Analytica....nothing to do with the fact that the EU and Hillary Clinton are despised and disliked by a huge number of people (and have been for years), and nothing to do with the Remain Campaign and Hillary Clinton's campaign being Shit! Surprisingly there were multiple people involved in getting the President of America elected. In fact in a shocking fact I can reveal exclusively here on fabswingers, in every single US presidential election there have been multiple groups involved.
As for Russian collusion not "cutting through with the public" in December 61% of Americans believed Russian efforts to influence the election were a serious issue. In a january Quinnipac poll it increased to 68%. In a CNN poll in february 72% are very concerned about Russian influence on the elections. Far from the issue not "cutting through with the public" Americans are taking it more seriously as more evidence piles up.
But lets take a brief walk through the links between Trumps campaign, CA and Putins government shall we?
CA's board recently had Rebekka and Robert Mercer (Trumps major donors) and Steve Bannon (campaign ceo and former special advisor to Trump). CA have now been awarded a major state department contract. The Mercers also funded Bannons version of Breitbart for years to further their alt right views.
The indictments of the Russians have revealed that Russian operatives were in the US, stole american identities and conducted information warfare. They were funded with $1.2million per month from the Russian government. Their facebook ads alone were seen by 126 million Americans.
Wikileaks is known to have hacked emails from the DNC and RNC since before the election. Only the DNC was released.
The dnc hack was committed by "Guccifer 2.0". Guccifer 2.0's ip address has been traced to Russian intelligence hq in Moscow. Guccifer 2.0 hacked the DNC emails and was in contact with trumps advisor Roger Stone who knew about the emails before it was public knowledge.
CA reached out to Wikileaks to organise the dissemination of the DNC emails.
Manafort is under house arrest due to the russian probe and Gates has pled guilty. Both have extensive ties to the Russians incuding people very close to Putin. Specifically Oleg Deripaska who Manafort offered to give briefings to during the campaign. Deripaska has close ties to the Putin regime.
So we have a Trump advisor in contact with Russian intelligence, Russian intelligence working hand in glove with wikileaks, CA working with Wikileaks, CA working with Trump and CAs board members funding his campaign. And we have campaign advisors briefing close allies of Putin.
Shall I draw you a little diagram if all that was a little too complicated for you? "Wow are you an investigative journalist? If not you should be! As Trump has openly admitted the election was "not fair" - he didn't say which side it wasn't fair to! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
No it isn't. Obama's campaign directly targeted likely voted with overt political messaging. Like an advert, it was obvious what it was.
The data was also not gathered under false pretences. Existing data was used.
What was different about this was that various quizzes were sent out to gather specific information without indicating the reason. This was then used to create a bubble of information and misinformation that influenced people without them knowing.
One is just a more sophisticated version of the other.
Both are abuse of data whether freely supplied (a questionable notion at best) or not and advertising which has always been about persuasion and economical trurhs. "No. That is not true. You can dislike Obama for all manner of things, but there is no equivalence in this. The Obama used the available data and sent adverts which clearly indicated that they were pro-Obama political messages. The CA process covertly gathered data about people and then,sent them a range of "information" to illicit a change in behavior without their knowing that was the intention. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"rambling irrelevant codswallop ... data has been stolen ... the political right are in this shit it up to their eyeballs ... and still they pretend to be working for the little guy while the whole time they're just burgling the little guys shit and pissing on his family while they do it" This is what is so tiring about political discussion. Everyone has to be right with no space for compromise. It is all about power or more acturately how much person freedom you have which is the extent of your own power. You becry 'the right' and imagine 'the left' care.. they don't, both sides wish to enslave you which either collectivist socialism or corporatetist capitalism. either way you lost. supporting the guy in your favour colour of tie will do little to change this as will voting in general because people have little to no power to affect anything except the personal. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"rambling irrelevant codswallop ... data has been stolen ... the political right are in this shit it up to their eyeballs ... and still they pretend to be working for the little guy while the whole time they're just burgling the little guys shit and pissing on his family while they do it This is what is so tiring about political discussion. Everyone has to be right with no space for compromise. It is all about power or more acturately how much person freedom you have which is the extent of your own power. You becry 'the right' and imagine 'the left' care.. they don't, both sides wish to enslave you which either collectivist socialism or corporatetist capitalism. either way you lost. supporting the guy in your favour colour of tie will do little to change this as will voting in general because people have little to no power to affect anything except the personal." Fuck the left and the right and vote green.The planet is slowly being destroyed and will be under Tory filth or labour scum.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
No it is not. It is very targeted psychometric manipulation where 2 people married to each other in the same household using the same computer if targeted will receive totally different messages and will not even know that the messages they are receiving are of a political nature. The fact is Cambridge Analytica can predict your response to any issue with a 98% accuracy rate after you answer just 52 of their questions and that accuracy rate increases the more questions you answer. They are also able to tailor messages to suppress actions (like voting or protesting) of those opposed to their clients and to convert those who would vulnerable to manipulation.
You may not be worried because you don't vote, but have you given any thought to the possibility that the reason you don't vote is because someone is manipulating you because if you did vote you would not vote the way they want you too?
By the way Cambridge Analytica only do political work for right wing and nationalist people and causes."I heard another psychologist on Radio 4 saying that Cambridge Analytica had massively hyped their predictive capability and it was actually impossible to predict people's political responses to anything like a useful level. I suspect this is closer to the truth. also impossible to measure any impact such campaigns have had because elections are secret and you cannot rerun them with different advertisting to see if you get a different outcome. You can ask people whether they changed their voting intentions in response to a campaign but funnily enough people usually either lie or cannot remember why they voted a certain way. Its basically selling smoke so I am not overly worried about it although the data protection laws and implementation do need strengthening. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
No it is not. It is very targeted psychometric manipulation where 2 people married to each other in the same household using the same computer if targeted will receive totally different messages and will not even know that the messages they are receiving are of a political nature. The fact is Cambridge Analytica can predict your response to any issue with a 98% accuracy rate after you answer just 52 of their questions and that accuracy rate increases the more questions you answer. They are also able to tailor messages to suppress actions (like voting or protesting) of those opposed to their clients and to convert those who would vulnerable to manipulation.
You may not be worried because you don't vote, but have you given any thought to the possibility that the reason you don't vote is because someone is manipulating you because if you did vote you would not vote the way they want you too?
By the way Cambridge Analytica only do political work for right wing and nationalist people and causes.
I heard another psychologist on Radio 4 saying that Cambridge Analytica had massively hyped their predictive capability and it was actually impossible to predict people's political responses to anything like a useful level. I suspect this is closer to the truth. also impossible to measure any impact such campaigns have had because elections are secret and you cannot rerun them with different advertisting to see if you get a different outcome. You can ask people whether they changed their voting intentions in response to a campaign but funnily enough people usually either lie or cannot remember why they voted a certain way. Its basically selling smoke so I am not overly worried about it although the data protection laws and implementation do need strengthening."Hush Gary, don't you see you're interrupting our circle jerk! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hush Gary, don't you see you're interrupting our circle jerk! "I have heard of multiple 'medical experts' paid by the tobacco industry say there was 'no proof' that smoking caused cancers and heart disease from the 1940's till a few years ago. I wonder what side of that controversy you were on? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hush Gary, don't you see you're interrupting our circle jerk!
I have heard of multiple 'medical experts' paid by the tobacco industry say there was 'no proof' that smoking caused cancers and heart disease from the 1940's till a few years ago. I wonder what side of that controversy you were on? "The question doesn't make sense, I'm 31. I've heard the Nazis scientists proved the link long before Anglos figured it out. I've also heard that Russians have a bunch of similar science that we're still completely ignoring. So... I wouldn't get comfy really, we're all just different species of idiot. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"rambling irrelevant codswallop ... data has been stolen ... the political right are in this shit it up to their eyeballs ... and still they pretend to be working for the little guy while the whole time they're just burgling the little guys shit and pissing on his family while they do it This is what is so tiring about political discussion. Everyone has to be right with no space for compromise. It is all about power or more acturately how much person freedom you have which is the extent of your own power. You becry 'the right' and imagine 'the left' care.. they don't, both sides wish to enslave you which either collectivist socialism or corporatetist capitalism. either way you lost. supporting the guy in your favour colour of tie will do little to change this as will voting in general because people have little to no power to affect anything except the personal." 'i becry the right' and then you made the rest up by pretending i said something i didn't ..... that's very flimsy bollocks you're talking now | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think the relationship between democracy (as in voting) and representation is under threat by multiple forces. There exist forms of representation which are not related to communicating at all, I think going there is a better route than shoring up a system that has had a tenuous connection between power and voting for quite a long time. Eh? What are we doing? Alternating between dynastic political power sharing families of Clintons, Bushs, Millibands, Kennedys? This is what you want to keep? Why not be honest and install a sovereign like the Queen, only in a non-symbolic role - it's the same concept without expensive taxpayer funded elections. The pro-democracy activists will scream blue murder under all circumstances if it does not look like a person placing a piece of paper into a ballot box but they're in danger of being inflexible to the point they don't accomplish their objective which was supposed to be representation. Voting by itself is worthless - we could vote all day long on an infinite number of things and would probably do no better than chance at achieving superior outcomes. The Liberals know that but they also have run out of ideas. This is a very old subject and I must admit I do not like the modern incarnation of pro-democracy supporters. They seem ignorant, obnoxious and immune to understanding anything outside of their very simple world model. Leftists need better objective ideals and new ideas, they are getting tiresome, nobody is impressed by having to keep seeing them jerking off Karl Marx's corpse." What are your ideas? You'd like a dictatorship? Picked by...themselves? Opposed by...themselves? Working selflessly for their people like...Putin? You seem obnoxious, self-regarding, arrogant and terribly bad company at a party. Bless
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
No it is not. It is very targeted psychometric manipulation where 2 people married to each other in the same household using the same computer if targeted will receive totally different messages and will not even know that the messages they are receiving are of a political nature. The fact is Cambridge Analytica can predict your response to any issue with a 98% accuracy rate after you answer just 52 of their questions and that accuracy rate increases the more questions you answer. They are also able to tailor messages to suppress actions (like voting or protesting) of those opposed to their clients and to convert those who would vulnerable to manipulation.
You may not be worried because you don't vote, but have you given any thought to the possibility that the reason you don't vote is because someone is manipulating you because if you did vote you would not vote the way they want you too?
By the way Cambridge Analytica only do political work for right wing and nationalist people and causes.
I heard another psychologist on Radio 4 saying that Cambridge Analytica had massively hyped their predictive capability and it was actually impossible to predict people's political responses to anything like a useful level. I suspect this is closer to the truth. also impossible to measure any impact such campaigns have had because elections are secret and you cannot rerun them with different advertisting to see if you get a different outcome. You can ask people whether they changed their voting intentions in response to a campaign but funnily enough people usually either lie or cannot remember why they voted a certain way. Its basically selling smoke so I am not overly worried about it although the data protection laws and implementation do need strengthening."Of course they were over-selling themselves. They were trying to make more money. However, you have made the point very; "people usually either lie or cannot remember why they voted a certain way". Does that not imply that they are easily manipulated? Does that not imply that being able to keep them in a nice hate bubble will motivate them to vote one way or demotivate them from voting another way? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I heard another psychologist on Radio 4 saying that Cambridge Analytica had massively hyped their predictive capability and it was actually impossible to predict people's political responses to anything like a useful level. I suspect this is closer to the truth. also impossible to measure any impact such campaigns have had because elections are secret and you cannot rerun them with different advertisting to see if you get a different outcome. You can ask people whether they changed their voting intentions in response to a campaign but funnily enough people usually either lie or cannot remember why they voted a certain way. Its basically selling smoke so I am not overly worried about it although the data protection laws and implementation do need strengthening." Thats completely wrong, there is a massive amount of information supporting the facts that with enough information you can easily predict how certain people will react. Effective online adverising is built on these ideas and there is proof for any mid level or up company that spends decent money in their own analytics accounts. And these are measured on a continuing basis and re done and re tried. An election may only happen once but online advertisment is daily and measurable and comporable so you can see exactly how you can manipulate people and how to target effective advertising to different groups. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I am just growing so tired of being exposed to online advertising. One of the pleasures of this site is the lack of advertising. I would gladly pay a small amount of money to browse ad-free and not to have my private space and data interfered with. Regarding CA, they are not right or left wing, just a company that does whatever it takes to make money. And Corbyn campaign were not above using social media to attack in packs anyone who didnt agree with them. In fact, together with the current CA scandal and targeted advertising on overdose, they have ruined the facebook experience." Fellow Jack, this technology already exists and is easy to use. For a browser you can install an extension called an 'ad blocker', there's a variety of them out there, just google 'how to install ad blocker'. The real treat is to block all advertising at source so it doesn't use up any of your bandwidth, that exists too but requires some technical expertise to put into action. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I heard another psychologist on Radio 4 saying that Cambridge Analytica had massively hyped their predictive capability and it was actually impossible to predict people's political responses to anything like a useful level. I suspect this is closer to the truth. also impossible to measure any impact such campaigns have had because elections are secret and you cannot rerun them with different advertisting to see if you get a different outcome. You can ask people whether they changed their voting intentions in response to a campaign but funnily enough people usually either lie or cannot remember why they voted a certain way. Its basically selling smoke so I am not overly worried about it although the data protection laws and implementation do need strengthening. Thats completely wrong, there is a massive amount of information supporting the facts that with enough information you can easily predict how certain people will react. Effective online adverising is built on these ideas and there is proof for any mid level or up company that spends decent money in their own analytics accounts. And these are measured on a continuing basis and re done and re tried. An election may only happen once but online advertisment is daily and measurable and comporable so you can see exactly how you can manipulate people and how to target effective advertising to different groups." I think you're both right in a way. My tribe has a saying 'biology is the root, culture is the flower'. So in this context you can apply all manner of psychological tricks to 'judo throw' the opposition, that is true. However at bottom you can't change people's instincts and political leanings as a group, the sciences have strong evidence to say that being left wing or right wing is hardwired into your skull. This is good in my opinion because otherwise a totalitarian system would have triumphed a long time ago and reigned forever. I suspect we have evolved adaptions in our brains that allow us to 'escape the frame' if you see what I'm getting at, because any network that developed a permanent idea or algorithm eventually perishes by its rigidity. This is why despite being far right I welcome the continued existence of the left wing - the true egalitarians. I believe I am correct, I don't believe I'm *that correct*. Nobody wins forever and all systems fail apart to entropy - so you need something better than just political ideas. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" What are your ideas? You'd like a dictatorship? Picked by...themselves? Opposed by...themselves? Working selflessly for their people like...Putin? " We are not especially sweet on each other, but a genuine question deserves a genuine answer. I've read a few books on history and philosophy. The main conclusions are that: 1. Many forms of government have been tried. 2. Nearly all of them have failed in some way. 3. It is far from clear we have an optimal form of government, not just in the sense of complaining about this year's politics - but even compared to our recent ancestors. 4. Everybody has an opinion and believes it correct. My conclusion is that we need to try everything. Like the others, I suspect I know some of the correct policy answers but cannot know for sure, not when implementing a policy on millions of people simultaneously. Our present state of governance that does just that should strike us as extremely frightening, even in moderate and mediocre states policy goes wrong frequently in ways that kill people or take away valuable years. So we need a mechanism to sort bad policy from the good. Fortunately we have one, the scientific method. Unfortunately we don't have a control group and unfortunately such 'experiments' in policy would be extraordinarily expensive, worse yet one might need to tweak policy parameters and run repeated trials, not possible at the scale of our States. The solution is known. We reduce the scale to the smallest viable communities and empower political partisans and political scientists to run experimental policy on partisan volunteers. Of course I am not saying all political policy is based around efficiencies or even objective results - but a lot of the time everybody wants the same things, there's no political platform for making less intelligent citizens or more unhealthy citizens. Examples of this in real life include: Ycombinator's Basic Income Project and Friedman's Seasteading proposals. TLDR; We could learn something from The Truman Show. " You seem obnoxious, self-regarding, arrogant and terribly bad company at a party. Bless
"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" What are your ideas? You'd like a dictatorship? Picked by...themselves? Opposed by...themselves? Working selflessly for their people like...Putin? We are not especially sweet on each other, but a genuine question deserves a genuine answer. I've read a few books on history and philosophy. The main conclusions are that: 1. Many forms of government have been tried. 2. Nearly all of them have failed in some way. 3. It is far from clear we have an optimal form of government, not just in the sense of complaining about this year's politics - but even compared to our recent ancestors. 4. Everybody has an opinion and believes it correct. My conclusion is that we need to try everything. Like the others, I suspect I know some of the correct policy answers but cannot know for sure, not when implementing a policy on millions of people simultaneously. Our present state of governance that does just that should strike us as extremely frightening, even in moderate and mediocre states policy goes wrong frequently in ways that kill people or take away valuable years. So we need a mechanism to sort bad policy from the good. Fortunately we have one, the scientific method. Unfortunately we don't have a control group and unfortunately such 'experiments' in policy would be extraordinarily expensive, worse yet one might need to tweak policy parameters and run repeated trials, not possible at the scale of our States. The solution is known. We reduce the scale to the smallest viable communities and empower political partisans and political scientists to run experimental policy on partisan volunteers. Of course I am not saying all political policy is based around efficiencies or even objective results - but a lot of the time everybody wants the same things, there's no political platform for making less intelligent citizens or more unhealthy citizens. Examples of this in real life include: Ycombinator's Basic Income Project and Friedman's Seasteading proposals. TLDR; We could learn something from The Truman Show. You seem obnoxious, self-regarding, arrogant and terribly bad company at a party. Bless
"So much written, yet so little said  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What is scary is just how entwined the Tory party are with all this: https://www.theguardian.com/news/series/cambridge-analytica-files I know this has always happened to a lesser extent, but when you combine that with the fact that a third of all pro-leave tweets in the run up to the referendum were bots, you can see what a massive effect it has. Even more reason to see the ‘people have spoken’ line is a bunch of nonsense. -Matt" Momentum are the greatest purveyors of this...... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So.... what do people make of the whistleblower giving evidence this morning Found it fascinating " Is this the guy that was “outed”? If so, from looking at and listening to him I think it was hardly a secret. As for what he said....seemed a great deal of drivel and no substance. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Is this the guy that was “outed”? " No. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I heard another psychologist on Radio 4 saying that Cambridge Analytica had massively hyped their predictive capability and it was actually impossible to predict people's political responses to anything like a useful level. I suspect this is closer to the truth. also impossible to measure any impact such campaigns have had because elections are secret and you cannot rerun them with different advertisting to see if you get a different outcome. You can ask people whether they changed their voting intentions in response to a campaign but funnily enough people usually either lie or cannot remember why they voted a certain way. Its basically selling smoke so I am not overly worried about it although the data protection laws and implementation do need strengthening. Thats completely wrong, there is a massive amount of information supporting the facts that with enough information you can easily predict how certain people will react. Effective online adverising is built on these ideas and there is proof for any mid level or up company that spends decent money in their own analytics accounts. And these are measured on a continuing basis and re done and re tried. An election may only happen once but online advertisment is daily and measurable and comporable so you can see exactly how you can manipulate people and how to target effective advertising to different groups." I don't agree with you - there is a difference between online marketing which tries to sell you something you are already interested in e.g. a holiday because the systems know you looked at travel sites, and political advertising which is aimed at the swing voter. The actual impact of online advertising on political decisions has not been studied in any depth because it is quite a new trend. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So.... what do people make of the whistleblower giving evidence this morning Found it fascinating Is this the guy that was “outed”? If so, from looking at and listening to him I think it was hardly a secret. As for what he said....seemed a great deal of drivel and no substance." Must admit I thought exactly the same thing when I saw his interview on ITV breakfast, you could tell he was gay straight away if you will pardon the pun! So I don't think it will have come as too much of a shock for his family if they are being honest! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I don't agree with you - there is a difference between online marketing which tries to sell you something you are already interested in e.g. a holiday because the systems know you looked at travel sites, and political advertising which is aimed at the swing voter. The actual impact of online advertising on political decisions has not been studied in any depth because it is quite a new trend." Its not particularly new though, Obama very famously tapped into social media 9 years ago (without using illegal data) and 9 years in tech is forever. Political parties have for nearly a decade been able to view analytics from these campaigns and we've only seen digital ad spend increase. And there have been many studies done over the past decade on the effectiveness of social media in politics. A quick google search shows papers from the Brookings Institute, British Journal of Political Science and basically all the major political and social science publications going back to at least 2009. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's basically what Obama did to win his first election, specifically designed modern big data targeted on your designated core voters. I don't vote so it doesn't bother me
No it is not. It is very targeted psychometric manipulation where 2 people married to each other in the same household using the same computer if targeted will receive totally different messages and will not even know that the messages they are receiving are of a political nature. The fact is Cambridge Analytica can predict your response to any issue with a 98% accuracy rate after you answer just 52 of their questions and that accuracy rate increases the more questions you answer. They are also able to tailor messages to suppress actions (like voting or protesting) of those opposed to their clients and to convert those who would vulnerable to manipulation.
You may not be worried because you don't vote, but have you given any thought to the possibility that the reason you don't vote is because someone is manipulating you because if you did vote you would not vote the way they want you too?
By the way Cambridge Analytica only do political work for right wing and nationalist people and causes.
I heard another psychologist on Radio 4 saying that Cambridge Analytica had massively hyped their predictive capability and it was actually impossible to predict people's political responses to anything like a useful level. I suspect this is closer to the truth. also impossible to measure any impact such campaigns have had because elections are secret and you cannot rerun them with different advertisting to see if you get a different outcome. You can ask people whether they changed their voting intentions in response to a campaign but funnily enough people usually either lie or cannot remember why they voted a certain way. Its basically selling smoke so I am not overly worried about it although the data protection laws and implementation do need strengthening."The data and AI companies can run personalised campaigns and I going sampling of the people they target, to judge the impact of their work. They don't see the vote slips but scrutinising millions of people can reveal many things. Several parties and states paid £millions for it, which likely means they know the level of effectiveness is not zero. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It appears CA are declaring bankruptcy, neatly avoiding any potential legal action and fines. The parent company, including the same people who ran CA are still about though under a different name. It's been a great day for coverups everywhere. "
I'm sure a few of them will have siphoned off good sums of money before it went insolvent. Hopefully employees and directors will be pursued for any illegal undertakings. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
