This is a result of Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies claiming that they're "just a platform" when it comes to allowing users to distribute information, whether it's true or made up. The second they got into the business of filtering information (whether noble or not), they became a media organization, and as such they should be held to the same standards that others in broadcasting (TV and radio) and newspapers (if there are any left) are held to, such as checking facts and trying to be objective. I know the barn door has been opened here and you can't get the horses back in, but at the very least they should just stop trying to filter the information and just let the firehose loose. Users will be able to filter out the real news from the fake news, and if they can't do that, they're probably the same type of people that used to read the Weekly World News and think that Elvis was still alive and aliens live among us.
"any instance that is clearly a statistical anomaly (and the more obscure, the better), such MUST be weighted the same as the rest of the dataset and considered accordingly – this to such an extent that if one cannot prove that something does not exist, then the only "reasonable" conclusion is that there is every possibility that it is does"
Despite what I know to be the meaning of _outlier_ , I ... I think that this is true. Did somebody say STOCHASTIC?
"Sticks and stones will break my bones but words can never hurt me."
- Pi's Mama
Where did we lose this nugget of compulsory child-rearing wisdom?
I can't put my finger on the original but I recall someone reading somewhere, "Democracy helps prevent violence." I think they meant that, as a result of accepting results, we accept that there were likely the Guy I Didn't Vote For won instead of simply revolting.
I think you're correct that democracy cannot survive if we ignore the tenets that make democracy possible.
I think that what Zuck admitted to is grounds for a lawsuit, either by a state or a class action? I don't know, I'm not a lawyer I'm a duck. I just know that FB is acting as an agent of the state, and they violated 1A on it's face, obviously and openly. If they are not sued into oblivion, then there is no justice in this world.
I know the 1A applies as a restraint on The State, including The Deep State which the FBI is party to. Where does one go to rectify this? Obviously, that horse has left the barn, and is in the next state over.
I dunno. I guess the real solution here is to #DefundTheFBI
There's a meme says something like, "Not that I'm keeping track but the conspiracy theorists are 19-0." And I like it because they were, in fact, largely correct.
Trump was right a lot, too, but I don't think that people have to like him. I didn't vote at all in 2016 because I couldn't bring myself to vote for either an Power-hungry Grifter or a Media Clown. But I changed my mind about Trump and voted for him in 2020. I don't love him but he opened some eyes and made some really good moves but I'm really more Anti-Anti-Trump. I do wish he had been a little less abrasive, though.
OTOH, Mrs. Pi who is also not a Dem nor a Repub, like me, hates him with the intensity of a thousand suns. And she still sees he did some good things. But not _my_ president. *shrugs*
The question - not much unlike the Ben Shapiro story - is, can we find a way to live together despite these differences? Of course we can. Because we're adults.
*re-reads last sentence, discovers problem with premise*
One thing I really like about Jim, and why I sub to him, is because he gets to the point. Our man is here saying in one sentence what others blather on about for two or three paragraphs and todays "news" "letter" was a perfect example of that. Thanks, Jim, you really nailed it today.
Yes, they absolutely lied to us about The Laptop. And Zuck is a cuck for going along with the FBI's request. If his wife didn't have his balls in a Mason jar on the kitchen table, Zuck would have simply said FOAD, and been done with it. But, no, the reason he went along with the request, and reason he is explaining it here, is because he wanted to and he wanted a reason to do it. Simple as that. If he cared about the free flow of information, and if thought for a half a god damn second that there is no such thing as Mis-Dis-Mal information, it's just information, then we would not be in the state of near collapse we see now. He should have seen that from the start.
But, remember this, the dude poured MILLIONS and MILLIONS of dollars into the fortification of the 2020 election. Supressing The Laptop was necessary, and he knows.
We all know that. They all know that. They all know that we know that. We know that they know we know.
The Laptop was real, it is real, and it remains real.
BUT!! What do I know? I'm a god damned duck. I ride a Rodeo-Labs TrailDonkey bike. Have you ever heard of such a thing? A duck on a carbon fiber Donkey?
And, basically, Zuck absolutely does not care if you know he knows. He only cares about information in once sense, basically: and that is the ability to monetize your information. Basically.
I basically did not think it was possible to dislike Zuck more than I already did, and basically I found a way. But it's a dislike rooted in, basically, disgust. The same way I am basically disgusted by anyone in positions of power, basically. And that, basically, includes zuck.
Zuckerberg is a weasel (or alien lizard) and this doesn't do anything to change that assumption. The FBI influenced an election? Wow. In other news, water is wet.
You ever see a word blow up as fast as "stochastic?" I mean, one day The Left decided that was THE WORD they needed to use all of a sudden. As I understand the word, it means that if I say or do something (anything, really) that could statistically produce a violent response from anyone ... well, then I should be cancelled. Am I getting this right?
Which is an amazing feat, really. If there is a statistical chance of a bad outcome, I need to shut my f**king mouth. Is that right? Since statistically, *anything* can happen, it's the reverse Uno card of any debate.
Man, gotta hand it to The Left... they find these brand new "damned if you do, damned if you don't, damned just because I said so" sort of things all the time. Like a nickel on the sidewalk.
When I taught stats and was trying to show that Bell curves don't reach the y-axis zero line, and that "interpretations" at the far end of the the distributions are not very useful, I used the following example. "There are roughly 7.5 B people alive now. The average (mean) of death for healthy individuals in roughly 80 around the world. The standard deviation of the average of death is about 5 years. That means somewhere in the world someone, statistically, will never die. Might as well be me."
The numbers are not really hard data, but close enough, and some of them got the point.
Stochastic really only means relatively unpredictable specifically, not overall. But doesn't it sound awesome? And it can be used by people with no idea of the meaning to shut up people they don't like, sometimes. (And that's a statistical prediction with some accuracy.)
As mentioned by other commentators, that Zuckerberg is real comfortable with telling about how the sausage was made on this one is a an indicator that Biden will be jettisoned AFTER the midterms, when all loses can be firmly pinned on him and not the DNC faithful who trod the shadows or the limelight to move the progressive agenda ever-forward. Then, once the old scapegoat is sacrificed, they can move on to 2024.
After the midterms, Prezzydizzle Commala gets to be selected for two full terms. After which, assuming we haven't been nuked by someone, she'll be Prezzydizzle por vida!
So instead of celebrating what they have in common - podcasting - and thinking, "Wow - this guy's made $Gazillion talking to his cell phone. Maybe we should ask him if he has any advice for how _WE_ could be gazillionaires, too." #notfanboijustwannamakemadmoney
But, Nope. "Any organization not explicitly and constitutionally right-wing will sooner or later become left-wing." Conquest's 2nd Law. Ergo, _he_ hates _them_. ... ... Wait - wut? *Rectal-Cranial Inverston Alert*
Once they squeeze the Intersectionality Lemon enough they'll end up with a Happy Hour in the Holiday Inn Sherbet Room With all 7 Members of the Asian Tranny Midget Amateur Radio Operators Who Like Pineapple on their Pizza Club.
This is where we're headed., my friends No group will ever number enough followers to qualify for bulk discounts on the bumper stickers.
Even Ace (over at Ace of Spades) is re-thinking his Shapiro snootiness as a result of this breakdown.
Can conservatives somehow go back to the consensus of the 1980s when the rule of thumb was 70-80% agreement was enough to get along? I don't want or need purity tests.
Somehow SocialCons, EconoCons, and DefenseCons were able to hold their noses long enough to win one of the greatest election victories in American History. Now everyone is too pure and delicate to tolerate any dissent. I think that this attitude was a contagion of the Left and the Right was virgin soil with little to no immunity.
You don't have to vote for Trump or anybody else for that matter. I was revolted by him in 2016 and voted for McMuffin. But in 2020 I bought a MAGA hat and wore it around my Seattle-area neighborhood, not because I found him any more appealing as a candidate, but because in four years he had made all the right enemies.
If he runs in 2024, I will hold my nose, bite my tongue, and vote for the Republican candidate. The blood of the Benghazi 4 and the Kabul 13 won't let me stand aside for this election.
I think there is a lot to be said for how he was able to out the worst of the worst on the left. The progressives have nailed themselves to some fairly terrible positions and actions. But the downside was that in doing what he did to draw that response and to also please key parts of his own base, he pissed off just enough white college educated men to cost him the election. I may be with you in 24, FPTP being what it is. A binary of choices forces one to essentially pick the lesser of two evils. Such is the state of our society. But, I hope beyond hope that is not necessary as I don't have high prospects for a positive outcome.
I must admit that I am hoping that he doesn't need a re-election victory as some kind of emotional vindication. I am wishing on a lucky star that someone who is competent in picking out a functional team cough*DeSantis*cough can win the nomination and Trump retires to Mar-a-Lago to play golf and grab p*ssy.
This is a result of Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies claiming that they're "just a platform" when it comes to allowing users to distribute information, whether it's true or made up. The second they got into the business of filtering information (whether noble or not), they became a media organization, and as such they should be held to the same standards that others in broadcasting (TV and radio) and newspapers (if there are any left) are held to, such as checking facts and trying to be objective. I know the barn door has been opened here and you can't get the horses back in, but at the very least they should just stop trying to filter the information and just let the firehose loose. Users will be able to filter out the real news from the fake news, and if they can't do that, they're probably the same type of people that used to read the Weekly World News and think that Elvis was still alive and aliens live among us.
We should also talk about the moon landing, I suppose...
"any instance that is clearly a statistical anomaly (and the more obscure, the better), such MUST be weighted the same as the rest of the dataset and considered accordingly – this to such an extent that if one cannot prove that something does not exist, then the only "reasonable" conclusion is that there is every possibility that it is does"
Despite what I know to be the meaning of _outlier_ , I ... I think that this is true. Did somebody say STOCHASTIC?
PS: Kafka sucks. Been there. Sorry, man.
"When Is Speech Violence?"
- Lisa Feldman Barrett, NYT 7/14/17
"Sticks and stones will break my bones but words can never hurt me."
- Pi's Mama
Where did we lose this nugget of compulsory child-rearing wisdom?
I can't put my finger on the original but I recall someone reading somewhere, "Democracy helps prevent violence." I think they meant that, as a result of accepting results, we accept that there were likely the Guy I Didn't Vote For won instead of simply revolting.
I think you're correct that democracy cannot survive if we ignore the tenets that make democracy possible.
I think that what Zuck admitted to is grounds for a lawsuit, either by a state or a class action? I don't know, I'm not a lawyer I'm a duck. I just know that FB is acting as an agent of the state, and they violated 1A on it's face, obviously and openly. If they are not sued into oblivion, then there is no justice in this world.
I know the 1A applies as a restraint on The State, including The Deep State which the FBI is party to. Where does one go to rectify this? Obviously, that horse has left the barn, and is in the next state over.
I dunno. I guess the real solution here is to #DefundTheFBI
Oh, I disabused myself a long time ago that there is justice in this world. Justice? Ain't no justice this side of heaven.
I'm hoping for mercy, not justice providing there is a Heaven.
There's a meme says something like, "Not that I'm keeping track but the conspiracy theorists are 19-0." And I like it because they were, in fact, largely correct.
Trump was right a lot, too, but I don't think that people have to like him. I didn't vote at all in 2016 because I couldn't bring myself to vote for either an Power-hungry Grifter or a Media Clown. But I changed my mind about Trump and voted for him in 2020. I don't love him but he opened some eyes and made some really good moves but I'm really more Anti-Anti-Trump. I do wish he had been a little less abrasive, though.
OTOH, Mrs. Pi who is also not a Dem nor a Repub, like me, hates him with the intensity of a thousand suns. And she still sees he did some good things. But not _my_ president. *shrugs*
The question - not much unlike the Ben Shapiro story - is, can we find a way to live together despite these differences? Of course we can. Because we're adults.
*re-reads last sentence, discovers problem with premise*
When did I say he was wrong about that?
So if he's right about something, I have to vote for him?
I didn't say he's right about most things I want.
Glad I read your comment before posting.
One thing I really like about Jim, and why I sub to him, is because he gets to the point. Our man is here saying in one sentence what others blather on about for two or three paragraphs and todays "news" "letter" was a perfect example of that. Thanks, Jim, you really nailed it today.
Yes, they absolutely lied to us about The Laptop. And Zuck is a cuck for going along with the FBI's request. If his wife didn't have his balls in a Mason jar on the kitchen table, Zuck would have simply said FOAD, and been done with it. But, no, the reason he went along with the request, and reason he is explaining it here, is because he wanted to and he wanted a reason to do it. Simple as that. If he cared about the free flow of information, and if thought for a half a god damn second that there is no such thing as Mis-Dis-Mal information, it's just information, then we would not be in the state of near collapse we see now. He should have seen that from the start.
But, remember this, the dude poured MILLIONS and MILLIONS of dollars into the fortification of the 2020 election. Supressing The Laptop was necessary, and he knows.
We all know that. They all know that. They all know that we know that. We know that they know we know.
The Laptop was real, it is real, and it remains real.
BUT!! What do I know? I'm a god damned duck. I ride a Rodeo-Labs TrailDonkey bike. Have you ever heard of such a thing? A duck on a carbon fiber Donkey?
And, basically, Zuck absolutely does not care if you know he knows. He only cares about information in once sense, basically: and that is the ability to monetize your information. Basically.
I basically did not think it was possible to dislike Zuck more than I already did, and basically I found a way. But it's a dislike rooted in, basically, disgust. The same way I am basically disgusted by anyone in positions of power, basically. And that, basically, includes zuck.
Basically,.
A member of The British "Well Basically" Club.
Wow -- a lot of Python fans out tonight. Thanks for the likes.
"I basically did not think it was possible to dislike Zuck more than I already did . . ."
"Life finds a way." - Jeff Goldbloom in that first, great dinosaur movie.
" there is no such thing as Mis-Dis-Mal information, it's just information"
- Ciclista Pato
"Truth is singular. Its versions are mistruths."
- Sonmi 451
I love that quote.
Zuckerberg is a weasel (or alien lizard) and this doesn't do anything to change that assumption. The FBI influenced an election? Wow. In other news, water is wet.
"TGIF (Thor’s Girdle Is Filthy)"
Ew. But I still think I'm gonna steal it.
<Whisper> "The stochastic terrorism is coming from *inside* the White House!" </Whisper>
You ever see a word blow up as fast as "stochastic?" I mean, one day The Left decided that was THE WORD they needed to use all of a sudden. As I understand the word, it means that if I say or do something (anything, really) that could statistically produce a violent response from anyone ... well, then I should be cancelled. Am I getting this right?
Which is an amazing feat, really. If there is a statistical chance of a bad outcome, I need to shut my f**king mouth. Is that right? Since statistically, *anything* can happen, it's the reverse Uno card of any debate.
Man, gotta hand it to The Left... they find these brand new "damned if you do, damned if you don't, damned just because I said so" sort of things all the time. Like a nickel on the sidewalk.
"If there is a statistical chance of a bad outcome"
You can get any outcome you want from a stochastic model if you pick the right seed number. But you're getting it right.
Plus _stochastic_ sounds all sciency and We Believe In Science and Stuff! *genuflects*
Are we back to Humpty Dumpty? Or is it the Orwell "fascist" quote?
I miss a day and I lose track.
I think it's just Duck tossing out a line and me waxing geeky.
But I'll start keeping a log, just in case someone asks again.
That's a perfectly cromulent thing to do.
When I taught stats and was trying to show that Bell curves don't reach the y-axis zero line, and that "interpretations" at the far end of the the distributions are not very useful, I used the following example. "There are roughly 7.5 B people alive now. The average (mean) of death for healthy individuals in roughly 80 around the world. The standard deviation of the average of death is about 5 years. That means somewhere in the world someone, statistically, will never die. Might as well be me."
The numbers are not really hard data, but close enough, and some of them got the point.
Stochastic really only means relatively unpredictable specifically, not overall. But doesn't it sound awesome? And it can be used by people with no idea of the meaning to shut up people they don't like, sometimes. (And that's a statistical prediction with some accuracy.)
You make my head hurt. Nothing like reading blog comments to reinforce an intellectual inferiority complex.
Sciency and stuff!
As mentioned by other commentators, that Zuckerberg is real comfortable with telling about how the sausage was made on this one is a an indicator that Biden will be jettisoned AFTER the midterms, when all loses can be firmly pinned on him and not the DNC faithful who trod the shadows or the limelight to move the progressive agenda ever-forward. Then, once the old scapegoat is sacrificed, they can move on to 2024.
*nods* Fact Check: da Truth
After the midterms, Prezzydizzle Commala gets to be selected for two full terms. After which, assuming we haven't been nuked by someone, she'll be Prezzydizzle por vida!
“ What else are they lying to you about? If this doesn’t matter to you, what will you say when they lie about something that does?”
Preach brother! Preach!
Every single item just a gut-punch. Thanks a lot, Jim. I am now thoroughly depressed. I'll be spending the weekend under the covers. See you Monday...
"Every single item just a gut-punch. Thanks a lot, Jim."
L'Chayim!
Just last week, they told us that whataboutism is wrong. But now it's good.
It will be bad again, don't you worry.
The FBI lied to me? Again? animatedCaptKirkshocked.gif
Re: Ben Shapiro at Podcast Movement
So instead of celebrating what they have in common - podcasting - and thinking, "Wow - this guy's made $Gazillion talking to his cell phone. Maybe we should ask him if he has any advice for how _WE_ could be gazillionaires, too." #notfanboijustwannamakemadmoney
But, Nope. "Any organization not explicitly and constitutionally right-wing will sooner or later become left-wing." Conquest's 2nd Law. Ergo, _he_ hates _them_. ... ... Wait - wut? *Rectal-Cranial Inverston Alert*
Once they squeeze the Intersectionality Lemon enough they'll end up with a Happy Hour in the Holiday Inn Sherbet Room With all 7 Members of the Asian Tranny Midget Amateur Radio Operators Who Like Pineapple on their Pizza Club.
This is where we're headed., my friends No group will ever number enough followers to qualify for bulk discounts on the bumper stickers.
Everything, and I mean everything, is political to The Left. And that is why we can't have nice things.
Well, that and the fact that I know a few pawn shops where they don't ask many questions.
"Best I can do is $20 and these two front-row tickets to the Stryper Reunion Tour at The Y."
Yeah, but is REALLY Stryper or one of those 'Tribute' bands?
*hands behind back, looks skyward, whistles, kicks pebble*
Propaganda is only successful if it is all encompassing.
Even Ace (over at Ace of Spades) is re-thinking his Shapiro snootiness as a result of this breakdown.
Can conservatives somehow go back to the consensus of the 1980s when the rule of thumb was 70-80% agreement was enough to get along? I don't want or need purity tests.
Somehow SocialCons, EconoCons, and DefenseCons were able to hold their noses long enough to win one of the greatest election victories in American History. Now everyone is too pure and delicate to tolerate any dissent. I think that this attitude was a contagion of the Left and the Right was virgin soil with little to no immunity.
Once they're in there, can we do the Chinese Commie thing and weld the door shut? Asking for a friend.
You don't have to vote for Trump or anybody else for that matter. I was revolted by him in 2016 and voted for McMuffin. But in 2020 I bought a MAGA hat and wore it around my Seattle-area neighborhood, not because I found him any more appealing as a candidate, but because in four years he had made all the right enemies.
If he runs in 2024, I will hold my nose, bite my tongue, and vote for the Republican candidate. The blood of the Benghazi 4 and the Kabul 13 won't let me stand aside for this election.
I think there is a lot to be said for how he was able to out the worst of the worst on the left. The progressives have nailed themselves to some fairly terrible positions and actions. But the downside was that in doing what he did to draw that response and to also please key parts of his own base, he pissed off just enough white college educated men to cost him the election. I may be with you in 24, FPTP being what it is. A binary of choices forces one to essentially pick the lesser of two evils. Such is the state of our society. But, I hope beyond hope that is not necessary as I don't have high prospects for a positive outcome.
I must admit that I am hoping that he doesn't need a re-election victory as some kind of emotional vindication. I am wishing on a lucky star that someone who is competent in picking out a functional team cough*DeSantis*cough can win the nomination and Trump retires to Mar-a-Lago to play golf and grab p*ssy.
At this point, it's like we're living some remake of Orwell's 1984.
*Slaps knee repeatedly* That's what I said!
Kepp your receipts, ladies and gentlemen.
"If they don’t like the game, they shouldn’t have established the rules."
The rules are: Democrats can say and do anything they want, and Republicans have to shut up, bend over and take it.