• Welcome to TalkWeather!
    We see you lurking around TalkWeather! Take the extra step and join us today to view attachments, see less ads and maybe even join the discussion.
    CLICK TO JOIN TALKWEATHER
Logo 468x120

Archive 2017-2019 Political Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gangstonc

Member
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
299
Location
Meridianville


Comes from MSNBC, so take it with a grain of salt, but if it’s true...

I just don’t see how trump could have survived any investigations if this was in fact the case. Likely poor reporting and wishful thinking lead to this tweet.
 
Last edited:
G

gangstonc

Member
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
299
Location
Meridianville
gangstonc said:


Comes from MSNBC, so take it with a grain of salt, but if it’s true...

I just don’t see how trump could have survived any investigations if this was in fact the case. Likely poor reporting and wishful thinking lead to this tweet.
Click to expand...



As far as I am concerned Lawrence’s career should be on the line. If you are going to put out a single source story like this, it sure as heck better be correct.
 
G

gangstonc

Member
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
299
Location
Meridianville
Kory said:
Click to expand...

I wonder if that will be enough of a retraction to get Trump off his back. He didn't say it was false, just that it was unverified, which we already knew. I still don't see how somebody would not have found out by now if Trump did actually have Russian co-signors. You'd have to show me the signed docs before I would begin to believe it.
 
G

gangstonc

Member
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
299
Location
Meridianville
Matt said:
You are a fool! You bought this crap!
Click to expand...
I’m actually not a fool and if you would read my posts, you would see that I was highly skeptical.
From my post:

“I just don’t see how trump could have survived any investigations if this was in fact the case. Likely poor reporting and wishful thinking lead to this tweet.”

You seem to have gotten up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. I hope today gets better for you.
 
Lori

Lori

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Messages
1,035
Reaction score
653
Location
Vandiver, AL
Special Affiliations
  1. SKYWARN® Volunteer
Matt said:
Climate change is a hoax. Your generation has had this lie crammed down your throats for years. And most of you believe it. Sad! We could not destroy the climate even if we wanted to.
Click to expand...

Al Gore’s version was a hoax and there is a “chicken little the Sky is falling” mentality from many liberals but I believe we’ve been murdering the climate since the industrial revolution, conservative or liberal, that cannot be denied. We’ve trashed the air we breathe, the earth we plant and the waters (especially the oceans) for so many years, there is no way this doesn’t effect our climate!!
We’ve been such a wasteful generation! We should be ashamed and fussing about it isn’t going to help!!
Why not a few added steps and protests to take better care of the Earth our creator blessed us?
I don’t know how much it helps but it feels satisfying to recycle weekly, carry off various chemicals and other compounds to their proper disposal area.
We can’t just think, “well we will be gone or Jesus will come back before we pay for it”.
We’re paying for it already with our health and the amount of crap in our environments!!
 
Lori

Lori

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Messages
1,035
Reaction score
653
Location
Vandiver, AL
Special Affiliations
  1. SKYWARN® Volunteer
gangstonc said:
From wiki:

In 2012, Epstein publicly disputed with Google Search over a security warning placed on links to his website.[10] His website, which features mental health screening tests, was blocked for serving malware that could infect visitors to the site. Epstein emailed "Larry Page, Google's chief executive; David Drummond, Google's legal counsel; Epstein's congressman; and journalists from The New York Times, The Washington Post, Wired, and Newsweek."[10] In it, Epstein threatened legal action if the warning concerning his website was not removed, and denied that any problems with his website existed.[10] Several weeks later, Epstein admitted his website had been hacked, but criticized Google for tarnishing his name and not helping him find the infection.[11]

After this incident, Epstein offered other criticism of Google's practices. In 2013, he wrote in Time magazine that Google had "a fundamentally deceptive business model".[12][13] In 2015, he said that Google could rig the 2016 US presidential election and that search engine manipulation was "a serious threat to the democratic system of government".[14] According to Epstein, "Perhaps the most effective way to wield political influence in today's high-tech world is to donate money to a candidate and then to use technology to make sure he or she wins. The technology guarantees the win, and the donation guarantees allegiance, which Google has certainly tapped in recent years with the Obama administration."[14]

Throughout 2016, Epstein discussed the possibility of Google search algorithm manipulation in favor of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.[15][16] He estimated in a September article that as many as three million votes in the upcoming election could be shifted as a result.[17] In 2017, former head of Google Search Amit Singhal directly disputed this, claiming that "Google has never ever re-ranked search results on any topic (including elections) to manipulate user sentiment."[18]

In a 2017 article, Epstein criticized efforts by companies such as Google and Facebook to suppress fake news through algorithms, noting "the dangers in allowing big technology companies to decide which news stories are legitimate".[19]

Other journalists and researchers have expressed concerns similar to Epstein's. Safiya Noble cited Epstein's research about search engine bias in her 2018 book Algorithms of Oppression,[20] although she has expressed doubt that search engines ought to counter-balance the content of large, well-resourced and highly trained newsrooms with what she called "disinformation sites" and "propaganda outlets".[21] Ramesh Srinivasan, a professor of information studies at UCLA focusing on "the relationships between technology and politics", agreed with Epstein that "the larger issue" of how search engines can shape users' views is "extremely important", but questioned how many undecided voters are using Google to them help decide who to vote for.[21]

The Los Angeles Times reported in March 2019 that Epstein's criticism of Google had been "warmly embraced" by some conservatives, a phenomenon that Epstein said "is driving me crazy".[21]

In July 2019, Epstein presented his research to the Senate Judiciary Committee, claiming that Google could manipulate "upwards of 15 million votes" in 2020 and recommending that Google's search index be made public. In a clarification to a question asked by Ted Cruz he also said that "2.6 million is a rock bottom minimum" for how many votes Google might have swung towards Hillary Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election, and that "the range is between 2.6 million and up to 10.4 million votes".[22][23] Google dismissed Epstein's research as “nothing more than a poorly constructed conspiracy theory.”[24] Epstein's white paper was not peer-reviewed and was challenged by other researchers. Among the criticisms was that a small sample size was used to extrapolate conclusions about a population of millions and the lack of disclosure of the underlying methodology. Panagiotis Metaxas, a Massachusetts based Wellesley Liberal Arts College computer science professor, said the paper demonstrated a possibility of “what such an influence could have been if Google was manipulating its electoral search results,” adding "I and other researchers who have been auditing search results for years know that this did not happen.”[25]
Click to expand...

I’m not in this part of the discussion but dang was there any way you could have nutshelled this...(I know it was a paste from Wikipedia) posts like this and most of Evan’s (sorry I brought up your name, I know we don’t have debate currently going on) are so lengthy, my ADD goes into overdrive!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top