SSOTT

[Kidscollege$]

Originally Posted by Lups

I bet djia dips to 20k before July. Any takers?

Stop it!

[Kidscollege$]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

I am and I'm not ...

I've never been on facebook other than having an account which is just a shell and I haven't been able to log in to for 4 years, and twitter I use a little more, but to lurk, i've hardly ever posted or re-tweeted anything.

My theory is, making life easier means I have to trust someone, but I should trust as few companies as possible - just one in this case. So Google has my cloud data - I wouldn't be opposed to adding Apple, but I've always been annoyed by itunes and beyond an original iphone and ipad haven't been wooed back. I just got a new android phone I love for $250! (moto x4) and on project Fi it's ~$35/mo for service internationally. so just can't see paying a fortune for an iphone, and I wouldn't use an iwatch.

I should also note that I have a decent awareness of Google's privacy and security policies for search and they're immense. I would be stunned if any of this facebook stuff came up with Google.

Further I would say, not at all trying to be religious, that

Google is a secure data services company that has branched into devices, but at their core they're data centers and cloud services, which means high security on data that then opens outward. Google itself runs analytics on our data, but internally for the purposes of serving ads, and all of those analytics and data is and always has been on their site since it's their IP.

So culturally, Google is a high security cloud data and advertising company from day 1.

Facebook, however, is a data SHARING company from day 1. Their business model is to collect data from users and facilitate sharing of that data with others. Worse, IMO, they've never understood that they're an advertising company. They talk about connecting the world blah blah blah, but they don't talk about advertising which is where they get their money. That tells me they don't know what they are. So they're a company built on data sharing with an identity crisis. Not a good recipe for security.

Apple is a PC and devices company from day 1. From there they've branched into cloud and data services which, if we're all being honest, they haven't done that well. Further, they realize that ultimately devices will become a commodity and disappear so they must transition into services, but that's not their core. So I would also say Apple has a bit of an identity crisis and that may ultimately risk data.

Amazon is a cloud data services company from day 1 - unlike Google who sells advertising to businesses, Amazon sells consumer stuff and then business services, but they're similar in that at their core, Amazon is a secure cloud data service company. For that reason I would also be stunned if Amazon had security issues.

Anyway, that's why I've settled on Google for now: at their core they're a secure cloud data services company, and they have every consumer service I need, most of which are best in class.

Regardless of what you say, all of your information is out there on the blackwebb. I have a couple friends in the credit card business. One works for a company that does software for banks, the other does programming and set up for certain credit cards. They both say that no matter how secure you the no your info is, it's already been taken. It will just be a matter of time before it is used.

I was just informed last week that my info was stolen by using Orbitz. They are offering 1 yr of "Lifelock" type credit watch program.

All of the employees at my wife's company had their info stolen from a third party payroll company. They filed false tax returns on probably half of the company before we even received her w2's

The thieves are getting very sophisticated now. Much of the money laundering is being done through iTunes gift cards and I have had my stuff stolen from my credit card that way also.

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by Kidscollege$

Regardless of what you say, all of your information is out there on the blackwebb.

Probably.

[GrussGott]

Hey Everybody, guess what?? America has a state propaganda service now!

Sinclair Broadcast Group, owner or operator of nearly 200 television stations in the U.S., would be forcing its news anchors to record a promo about “the troubling trend of irresponsible, one sided news stories plaguing our country.” The script, which parrots Donald Trump’s oft-declarations of developments negative to his presidency as “fake news,” brought upheaval to newsrooms already dismayed with Sinclair’s consistent interference to bring right-wing propaganda to local television broadcasts.

The sad thing is, not one single anchor refused to read it.

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

Hey Everybody, guess what?? America has a state propaganda service now!

Sinclair Broadcast Group, owner or operator of nearly 200 television stations in the U.S., would be forcing its news anchors to record a promo about “the troubling trend of irresponsible, one sided news stories plaguing our country.” The script, which parrots Donald Trump’s oft-declarations of developments negative to his presidency as “fake news,” brought upheaval to newsrooms already dismayed with Sinclair’s consistent interference to bring right-wing propaganda to local television broadcasts.

The sad thing is, not one single anchor refused to read it.

I saw that earlier, but didn't really see enough there to comment.

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by Real Dodger

I saw that earlier, but didn't really see enough there to comment.

The whole part about a private corporation forcing a political message out through it's federally licensed media networks nationwide didn't seem like a big deal?

Cause that would be like if apple pushed out a "Joe Biden 2022!" commercial to every iphone in America.

I dunno, kinda seems like a big deal?

Oh and there's also that whole Constitution thing about "free press" blah blah blah or something

[F83]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

The whole part about a private corporation forcing a political message out through it's federally licensed media networks nationwide didn't seem like a big deal?

Cause that would be like if apple pushed out a "Joe Biden 2022!" commercial to every iphone in America.

I dunno, kinda seems like a big deal?

Oh and there's also that whole Constitution thing about "free press" blah blah blah or something

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by F83

[ john oliver ]

john oliver is fucking hilarious!

I wish the underlying topic wasn't so dystopian and reminiscent of, say, 1970s Bulgaria.

[Real Dodger 2.0]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

The whole part about a private corporation forcing a political message out through it's federally licensed media networks nationwide didn't seem like a big deal?

Cause that would be like if apple pushed out a "Joe Biden 2022!" commercial to every iphone in America.

I dunno, kinda seems like a big deal?

Oh and there's also that whole Constitution thing about "free press" blah blah blah or something

I don't think this impinges on free press. Quite the contrary, these organizations are free to say and report what they want. It doesn't make it right, but the "free press" thing I believe relates more to govt censorship.

There has been much more coverage on this story since I read the article I 1st saw yesterday afternoon. Why are "republican" organizations so gung ho on spreading misinformation(Koch bros) and being anti-democratic? I agree that this does smell of "Russia Today" more than a reputable news organization. I have always assumed "democrat" backed organizations were more susceptible to this sort of thing. If the Kasich/Hickenlooper Unity ticket becomes a real thing, sign me up. The choices for president for republicans and democrats being floated around now make me sick.

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by Real Dodger 2.0

I don't think this impinges on free press. Quite the contrary, these organizations are free to say and report what they want. It doesn't make it right, but the "free press" thing I believe relates more to govt censorship.

If a private company owed 80% of media outlets and forced all outlets to repeat pro-government talking points, and suppressed alternative views at any given station, would you call that de facto censorship?

[Real Dodger 2.0]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

If a private company owed 80% of media outlets and forced all outlets to repeat pro-government talking points, and suppressed alternative views at any given station, would you call that de facto censorship?

Sure.
The problem might also be that of breaking up a monopoly, if one organization is trying to corner the market in that scenario. Neither the GOP or dems have been to keen on helping the average american in that regard lately.

[minn19]

Originally Posted by Real Dodger 2.0

Sure.
The problem might also be that of breaking up a monopoly, if one organization is trying to corner the market in that scenario. Neither the GOP or dems have been to keen on helping the average american in that regard lately.

What's with the 2.0?

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by Real Dodger 2.0

Sure.
The problem might also be that of breaking up a monopoly, if one organization is trying to corner the market in that scenario.

Exactly - and this is why Sinclair is a free press issue ... because it's the FCC who controls such things, and the White House controls the FCC.

More broadly, journalism as a profession has always been based on free thinking: even Fox News has Shep. It was seen as shameful to break that unwritten rule ... but now we're lead by people with no shame.

No leader has risked our Constitutional Democracy more than Trump, and I say that without fear of hyperbole.

As an example, when Gen Ralph Peters quits Fox News, we have HUGE problems:

Retired United States Army lieutenant colonel and longtime Fox News analyst Ralph Peters recently severed ties with the network, which he accused on Tuesday of "wittingly harming our system of government for profit."

Peters was highly critical of President Barack Obama's administration, was suspended from Fox for a short period in 2015 for calling Obama a "total pussy" while on the Fox Business Network.

In a lengthy email to his colleagues first obtained by BuzzFeed, the foreign-policy hawk argued that the cable news network had been transformed from a "legitimate and much-needed outlet for conservative voices" into a "propaganda machine for a destructive and ethically ruinous administration."

"Four decades ago, I took an oath as a newly commissioned officer. I swore to 'support and defend the Constitution,' and that oath did not expire when I took off my uniform," Peters wrote. "Today, I feel that Fox News is assaulting our constitutional order and the rule of law, while fostering corrosive and unjustified paranoia among viewers."

Peters, a former Russia analyst, warned that the network's hosts are advancing Russian President Vladimir Putin's agenda "by making light of Russian penetration of our elections and the Trump campaign."

[Real Dodger 2.0]

Originally Posted by minn19

What's with the 2.0?

I can get on with my regular handle on my phone, but not my laptop. But maybe I should have gone "Real Dodger 3.0 turbo dct". More representative of who I am . Until I have to sell the darn car (I'll hit 100k miles on the way home today).

[F83]

Letter I sent to Peloton today. They are on the list of companies "still advertising with Laura Ingraham". I'm done with this shit. Politics is one thing but for a media celebrity to use a multi-million person platform to bully a minor who survived a school shooting? When did that become ok? Time to start punching back with our money.

Have already received a flurry of responses (perhaps in part because I copied the CEO - John Foley (john@pelotoncycle.com).

Carlos thank you for the quick reply to my phone call;

Yes, let me reiterate that I am cancelling my "Peloton Tread" order, specifically because of the Laura Ingraham situation. I also have a bike and software subscription which I will keep for the time being.

My concern is that Peloton is still advertising on Laura's show after she bullied one of the Parkland survivors. And that's important - bullying is the key issue here. This isn't about left or right - or even about gun control. I don't expect Peloton to take a stand on such things.

However it IS about whether you want to support a national media celebrity who chooses to use her platform to mock an underage school shooting survivor about getting rejected by the college of his choice.

It's completely shameful and I won't be a part of it.

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by F83

Letter I sent to Peloton today.

[Real Dodger 2.0]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

Exactly - and this is why Sinclair is a free press issue ... because it's the FCC who controls such things, and the White House controls the FCC.

More broadly, journalism as a profession has always been based on free thinking: even Fox News has Shep. It was seen as shameful to break that unwritten rule ... but now we're lead by people with no shame.

No leader has risked our Constitutional Democracy more than Trump, and I say that without fear of hyperbole.

As an example, when Gen Ralph Peters quits Fox News, we have HUGE problems:

Retired United States Army lieutenant colonel and longtime Fox News analyst Ralph Peters recently severed ties with the network, which he accused on Tuesday of "wittingly harming our system of government for profit."

Peters was highly critical of President Barack Obama's administration, was suspended from Fox for a short period in 2015 for calling Obama a "total pussy" while on the Fox Business Network.

In a lengthy email to his colleagues first obtained by BuzzFeed, the foreign-policy hawk argued that the cable news network had been transformed from a "legitimate and much-needed outlet for conservative voices" into a "propaganda machine for a destructive and ethically ruinous administration."

"Four decades ago, I took an oath as a newly commissioned officer. I swore to 'support and defend the Constitution,' and that oath did not expire when I took off my uniform," Peters wrote. "Today, I feel that Fox News is assaulting our constitutional order and the rule of law, while fostering corrosive and unjustified paranoia among viewers."

Peters, a former Russia analyst, warned that the network's hosts are advancing Russian President Vladimir Putin's agenda "by making light of Russian penetration of our elections and the Trump campaign."

I don't think he went far enough. We are in a new "cold war" with russia, and to a lesser extant, China. I think as much as people want to call it something new, like "unconventional" or "hybrid", or whatever, its still war. They are trying to attack our nation to make it weaker. And Trump is doing NOTHING! And Obama didn't do much more than that. I'll bet Teddy Roosevelt or Truman or some of the other better presidents would have handled this very differently. Though the tactics are the different, our response should be the same.

[Real Dodger 2.0]

Originally Posted by F83

Letter I sent to Peloton today. They are on the list of companies "still advertising with Laura Ingraham". I'm done with this shit. Politics is one thing but for a media celebrity to use a multi-million person platform to bully a minor who survived a school shooting? When did that become ok? Time to start punching back with our money.

Have already received a flurry of responses (perhaps in part because I copied the CEO - John Foley (john@pelotoncycle.com).

Carlos thank you for the quick reply to my phone call;

Yes, let me reiterate that I am cancelling my "Peloton Tread" order, specifically because of the Laura Ingraham situation. I also have a bike and software subscription which I will keep for the time being.
.

I have to say this: Every time I see your heading with "ruthless" on it, I think of one of my favorite old "Dilbert" jokes.
Dilbert: I thought we were going to be ruthless.
Pointy Haired Boss: We are ruthless. I've never hired anyone named Ruth.

[Kidscollege$]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

If a private company owed 80% of media outlets and forced all outlets to repeat pro-government talking points, and suppressed alternative views at any given station, would you call that de facto censorship?

But if 80% of the news outlets (alphabet news, papers, etc) are left leaning that's ok?

[Kidscollege$]

Breaking news...

[Captain Blood]

Originally Posted by Kidscollege$

But if 80% of the news outlets (alphabet news, papers, etc) are left leaning that's ok?

Leaning and controlled are different.

[GrussGott]

this is fucked up. I'm DEFINITELY never letting this guy dance with my wife.