Discussion in 'The Red Room' started by El Chup, May 26, 2018.
how nice that you can opt out of politics because none of it affects your life as a white woman.
That’s laughable. Women’s right to control their bodies is at stake. Doesn’t matter if they’re black or white.
How does blocking out any political news or discussion help that?
It doesn't, but it might be good for some people's mental health.
That's obviously more important than the healthcare initiative he promised to deliver within two weeks... two weeks ago.
Can someone tell the Commander-in-Chief that there are more pressing problems than social media?
Stopped clock and all. If we're banning Chinese hard spyware (Hwawei), why shouldn't we ban Chinese soft spyware?
Baseball season has helped me get away from the 24 hour news cycle. I find a brief morning look in and a few check ins with Yahoo or Apple News is enough to satisfy my need to stay informed.
Couple of things:
1. In the Snowden leaks, it was revealed that the US was going after Huawei because we could easily hack their shit and we wanted to make it look like we were afraid of their technology. So other nations would buy it and then we could spy on them.
2. TikTok is the platform where the K-Pop stans co-ordinated how to humiliate Trump at his Tigerkingistan rally.
3. The kids are all abandoning Facebook properties for TikTok, and they're the most eagerly sought after demographic by tech companies today.
4. FB is not only the one social media platform that has given Trump a pass on what he posts, for the most part. They also gave him massive ad discounts in 2016.
5. US military personnel are already prohibited from using TikTok (and several other apps) due to the security risk it poses. Not sure how the data TikTok gathers is any different than what Google, FB, etc. gather (and then sell), other than it's owned by a Chinese company with ties to the military and government.
It seems increasingly apparent that Tik Tok is funneling increasing amounts of info to the Chinese government, but at the same time US agencies have certainly had their hooks in most big American tech companies for a long time and countries which block them are condemned.
Yeah, they're almost certainly doing thsi for the wrong reason, but it's a good thing to block tiktok anyway. That platform is vile in ways Facebook and the like can only dream of, and almost certainly do. Added benefit: we'll see whether it is possible to block a popular social media network backed by China, or whether America's youth will vpn out of the US firewall to reconnect with their Chinese allies.
I don't really disagree with what you're saying here, but I am not sure we are talking about the same thing. It seems obvious that there is more to reality than we can possibly grasp (hence chaos theory). Furthermore, the universe is vastly bigger than anything we can possibly grasp. For example, I have no idea what is going on right now under the 'Xarth-'ta dome on the planet Phülizz, around the star Kadr'17359, in the Andromeda galaxy. (And don't ask me how I know that dome even exists. It's highly classified information, and if I tell you, then I will have to kill you -- and who will I discuss epistemology with then?)
But it seems to me that you are talking about a quantitative analysis while I am talking about a qualitative analysis. I don't know any way of proving that the total number of bits of information in the universe is an aleph number (and probably greater than aleph-nul at that), but I highly suspect it is. If so, it is obvious that no matter how much information we can collect, there is still an infinite amount that we don't have available. At the same time, it is obvious that the number of bits of information that can be retained and/or processed by a human brain is finite, no matter how intelligent the person may be. Any finite quantity, expressed as a percentage of an infinite quantity, is exactly 0%. So in that sense, of course what we grasp of reality is insignificant compared to the whole.
But from that it does not follow that our grasp of that part of reality which is accessible to us is thoroughly faulty. Incomplete, and at least partly erroneous, certainly. That's why I said originally that there is more subjectivism in our understanding of reality than most people realize. But it's like being lost on a thoroughly dark world with only one small candle to light the way. The vast majority of what is out there is hidden, but that does not mean that the little bit around you that you can see is radically different from what it appears to be. The trees you think you see are probably actually there, even though there are beyond any possible doubt aspects of them that you not only do not grasp, but almost certainly do not suspect.
As I said earlier, if you try to construct a working philosophy of life based on the principle that even what little bit of reality you grasp is so woefully incorrect as to have little relation to anything that could be considered truly objective, you will find it very difficult. You would have to start with: "I cannot really understand anything, everything I think I see or know or experience is probably no more meaningful than what a tiny chip of rock from Mount Everest could tell me about what the mountain is really like, and I have no hope of ever going beyond that in any area." It seems to me that that would lead very quickly to catatonia: you wouldn't dare to do anything, because your grasp of reality is so faulty that you have no way of predicting cause and effect in any way, so that no matter what you do, there is a very real possibility (and I am not talking about an infinitesimal probability that is little more than an epistemological curiosity) that anything you do could produce results so totally unlike what you expected that you had no way of predicting them.
Sure, that can happen, and sometimes does happen, but it is not what composes my daily life. As a general rule, when I hit the light switch, the light comes on. If the light doesn't come on, then there is a problem somewhere that has to be solved. But hitting the light switch doesn't result in the ghost of my grandmother coming for tea, or in the value of π suddenly changing to 8.714, or in me finding myself in the year 807. I can not always know what will be the results of my actions, because my grasp of reality is never perfect, but the fact that 99+% of my actions produce results that are in a fairly narrow range around the expected result, or at least results that I know are possible (such as the light not coming on because the bulb has burned out), would indicate that my grasp of reality, though extremely limited in quantitative terms, is not nearly as limited in qualitative terms.
This is a common misconception. Google and FB don’t sell data. They take great pains not to, in fact. They’ve worked hard to collect all that data on you, and they’ll be damned if it’s just going to spread all over the net. What they sell is access to the right eyeballs for advertisers, using that data. TikTok isn’t different, except that they do give away the data to the CCP. And they collect far more than FB and Google. FB and Google aren’t spying on your clipboard. FB doesn’t upload unpublished videos to an Alibaba server in China.
TikTok is spyware feeding info to the Chinese government. Not just another data-gathering ad-selling operation.
I think another reason Trump is banning TikTok is because of Sarah Cooper. She’s been racking up views and he’s been racking up half empty rallies.
"Mickey Mouse" signs Rhode Island refund checks; technical error to blame
You're forgetting the Cambridge Analytica scandal, where it was revealed that FB was giving all kinds of access to people's personal data to companies like Cambridge Analytica (a company that has close ties to the Russian government and merely changed their name). FB apologized for this, said that they've made changes to their policies so it can't happen again, and have repeatedly apologized for allowing it to happen again. Google will sell anonymized data to companies, and that can be deanonymized to identify people if you have enough of it. Both companies will also happily hand over any information to any government that asks for it, if given a warrant (and possibly if the government just asks nicely).
I'm not sure about Google, but some of the largest investors in FB all have close ties to the Russian government. If you don't think that information winds up in the hands of the Russian government, then you have a lot more faith in FB than I do.
I'm dubious of this statement, since both FB and Google have admitted to keeping (at least temporarily) things that you've typed into their services, even though you've never hit "enter."
But LinkedIn (a MS company) certainly was.
No, they keep them on their own servers, partially funded by Russian investors.
Which means that they're less of a middle-man than FB is when it comes to doing the same with the Russian government.
I'm constantly amazed at how much personal information people post on FB. My default position is that someone, somewhere, is gathering your kids' and grandkids' photos for some nefarious purpose. They're not getting anything like that from me - I mostly lurk and Like.
I’m not too terribly worried about the data they collect on me because I have multiple accounts on the various social media platforms I use (each one keyed to a different interest of mine, with little to no overlap) and in looking at what FB thinks about me (you can check that under advertising), they’re wildly off-base as to who I am.
The longest video The Lincoln Project has done to date, and it's damn powerful.
I get my politics elsewhere. Most facebook political postings are from shit sources. But if you trust FB for your political information, that could explain some things.
FB should not be used as a primary source of information, but if someone posts a link to a reputable source that others might have missed, it has its value. FB is for discussion or, these days, for people I don't know (friends of friends of friends who show up in my feed) posting things like "What Are Your Feelings About Wearing Masks?"
Like I said, it interrupts what I am on facebook for. By the time I have hit facebook I have already looked for new news from reputable sources. The friends I had there who posted news articles were prone to horrible sources and reposting bullshit. Low informational bullshit was not what I was looking for. I came there for people's lives, not for the lies.
I can go look things up myself without having some idiot repost every spam news article from their shit sources.
Trump is such a fucking bed wetting Manchild.
Fair enough. I joined FB primarily to keep up with friends and family, but I have an unfortunate habit of accepting friend requests from friends of friends and Trek fans who stumble onto my page. (The wrangle I got into a few days ago with people exploring their feelings about wearing masks involved the latter.)
Recently I've stopped following my high school alumna page (between the almost-daily photos of someone's four-year-old grandchild eating corn on the cob and the constant "Please send prayers for my brother-in-law's third cousin who just had a wart removed and we're praying it's not cancer!" it was enough to make me )
I've also started snoozing some people and unfriending others. Past time to weed the garden...
I have a friend who thinks like this. And while I do value HER opinion, I’m not entirely convinced personal data could be used for anything more than large scale statistics. My friends list is small and private. People I know personally; a few people I went to high school with; and some posters I know from here and trekbbs. I got on Facebook shortly before or shortly after I left my ex husband, so I was always leery of people I don’t know accessing my account for nefarious purposes. Anyway, even without social media, there’s enough of my personal information out there that so someone could do real damage if they wanted to.
I’m more worried about people who can gain lists - lists with name an ssn and/or credit card number. I don’t care if they’ve seen a photo of me at disneyworld.
Separate names with a comma.