https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/09/26/technology/computer-science-stem-education.html Great video, great message. Credit where it's due, Ivanka did good. Now let's hope DeVos doesn't fuck shit up.
Electra Complex jokes aside, its interesting how Ivanka has really assumed the First Lady role more than Melania. Not that shes particularly bad at it or anything, just interesting how it plays out.
Again, if data mining companies let advertisers target your history, isn't that just showing you already had a predilection toward x,y,z product/topic? You really think the people's who's click history would flag them for fake facebook adds that were anti Hillary would be the fence sitters that decided this election? The whole point of big data advertising is segmenting the exact group of people who will buy your product. Also, your repeated example of the "adage" of refuting bad info also needs to be accepted as fact by the individual before any positive information needs to enter the equation. Be honest how many people do you know that took it as fact on it's face, and still believe it to be turth, with something like Pizzagate or Piss Tape Kompromat weren't already set in their beliefs one way or the other?
I was actually surprised she wasn't named first lady, anyway. Both Thomas Jefferson and Woodrow Wilson's daughters were, and there was a president with a sister first lady. ETA: Wiki says Grover Cleveland and Chester Arthur both had sisters who were first lady.
This is what is most puzzling to me about the narrative. I'm not saying swing voters are smarter or dumber than other voters, but they tend not to be the ones swayed by facebook ads and conspiracy theory nonsense. The hardcore party members are the ones who will believe anything that is negative about the other party. Obama birther crap, Trump's golden showers, Trumping raping a 13 year old, etc. The demographic that believes that shit is pretty clear.
I do believe you drastically underestimate the subtlety and effectiveness of modern day propaganda. This isn't "steel doesn't burn" shit, this is little things, at scale, that specifically affect those swing voters, because they need so little to nudge them over. When I was making games, we would bring in psychologists and other experts in the field to manufacture behaviour from people... things like compulsion loops. Basically bring in addiction experts and use their knowledge to increase the level of addiction, not decrease it. Propaganda isn't the old-school Red Army or Uncle Sam bullshit... it has matured and become an incredible science, and it most definitely IS something to be feared... because it works. The vast majority of people on the internet will believe other shit they see on the internet without doing any fact checking. Make it even somewhat believable, and the next thing you know, it's being repeated as fact.
You're still having to sway over a million swing voters in a fairly limited number of states. I just don't buy it. Why does Russian propaganda work and not other propaganda? I know that's not what you're saying, but there's a mountain of shit out there. It was one source of many. Hillary had her own facebook troll army. Literally paid trolls, not just followers. So... they just weren't as good or what? Plus, the news was reporting Russia was throwing ads out while people were still deciding who to vote for. People just hated Hillary, and that's nobody's fault but her own. The blame game is 90% an unwillingness to accept fault, in my opinion.
Exactly my point. You don't know anything about it, but you refuse to believe it. You might as well be an anti-vaxor... you can't explain it, you've spent no time investigating or studying it, nor can you talk intelligently about it, but you have no problem taking a stance against it just because of how you feel. It's not black and white... TONS of propaganda is working all the time, from many different players, both for political intrigue or for straight up product marketing. Why do people have brand loyalty to Coke but not Pepsi? Bud but not Miller? Do you honestly think it's because one tastes better than the other? Different campaigns, be they marketing or international affairs, have different levels of complexity, skill, nuance, and goals. When a snowball starts rolling down a mountain, it's easy to nudge it in the right direction in order to have it hit the target you want. That little nudge is almost imperceptible, but still effective. What if the ONLY goal was to get Trump on board so he could defer the sanctions against Russia, like he's just done? What if all they had to do was put some shit out there, subtly, that would get picked up by Fox News? What if all it takes for Trump to accept it as fact is to see it on Fox News? (Geee, that's a HELL of a stretch, isn't it?) <---- blatant sarcasm Now he's thinking, "Hmmm... Russia isn't so bad... and they did finance a few hundred million dollars of my properties... and that Putin guy seems nice...", and the next thing you now, the Executive Branch of your country is sidling up next to the head of a country that you fought the Cold War with. Do you really think that the Russians have changed that much that they are now your ally? Or do you think that you have a moron for a President who is too stupid to understand the history or complexity of what he's just stepped into? Exactly. If you are trying to compare a paid-for business that's providing Reddit armies and other blatantly obvious and noticeable automated social media brute force actions, to a highly sophisticated nation state like Russia and their highly effective cyber teams, then you really do not at ALL understand how that shit works. One has the precision of a brain surgeon removing a tumour using a scalpel, the other of a lumberjack operating on a dog with a chainsaw. I'll let you figure out which is which. (And then swap them, because you're bound to get it backwards).
Absolutely. The bullshit that is the main stream media is being taken advantage of, as is the general ignorance and gullibility of the masses when it comes to shit that rolls by on their news feeds.
Honestly I don't think their efforts were even that ambitious. The Russians succeeded far beyond their wildest fantasies. It seems pretty clear that they went into this with the goal of throwing a wrench in the gears; undermining American credibility and influence globally and forcing us to tend to domestic divisions and take our eyes off how they were operating globally. Instead they accidentally hotwired the whole damn car and have been joyriding it ever since, wondering when the cops are going to show up. Putin has made a number of statements since the election that are literally just him tweaking our nipples because he can. I'm sure he's nearly as shocked as the Democrats are that it worked to the degree it did.
Here's an interesting story about how the Kremlin appears to have been supplying specific information to Trump's team in order to spin a narrative that they wanted. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/27/...column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
Neither can you. You don't know what the extent of the program was, so how can you lecture anybody on exactly what the impact is? I doubt the CIA is in the position to make that statement about how it affected the election, so how can you? By the way, I do have a degree in marketing, which is not exactly the same field, but it is closely related so I'm not actually starting at zero in terms of understanding the effects of propaganda and a campaign. My not buying it is an opinion. Nothing more, nothing less. Yours is also an opinion, but you're almost stating it like you're in a position to know for sure, and you aren't. Also, as much as we bicker I really agree with Aetius on this. Who won the election likely wasn't that important to the Russians (again, OPINION). I think the goal was just to rock the boat, and that succeeded regardless of who won. But, and this is where I do disagree with Aetius, I don't think it's really about the Russians. They are probably patting themselves on the back, but this nation was fucked up to begin with, no help needed.
Well, better go stock up on popcorn... CNN is reporting that a Federal Grand Jury has approved charges brought on by Meuller's investigation. They are still sealed right now, but this should be just a little bit interesting as it unfolds. Any bets on what the details are? http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/27/politics/first-charges-mueller-investigation/index.html
My money is on Manafort and maybe one or two other small fry that they're going to try to roll up. Mueller is pursuing this the same way the FBI went after the Mafia.
If a grand jury signed off, then I'm thinking it's not just a fishing trip... but I agree... now the real art of the deal begins.
Oh the people being charged are dead to rights, but they're going to offer deals to roll on the people higher up. Nibble away at the outside of the organization and work in toward the center. Whether he gets there, we shall see.
I tend to think that Trump doesn't engender a great sense of loyalty in people he works with... again, it'll be interesting.
Guys c’mon. Trump won and Hillary lost. Can’t we just move on already? This sore loser bullshit is getting old.
I'm thinking Manafort (midnight raid), Gorka (doth protest too much), and Flynn (where's he been?). Unless Flynn turned rat and that's where these charges stem from.