US Politics

Perhaps he's talking about FOX news

A bit more on the Cambridge Analytica stuff

https://twitter.com/RVAwonk/status/918199063752970240

Trump’s Nuclear Meltdown

"Presidents have easy access to the most highly classified information and, if they want, the most knowledgeable experts, in or out of government, on any subject. Yet Trump learns most of what he knows from Fox News and Breitbart."

I'm just imagining a world where Fox News is replaced by John Craven's Newsround. Not only would the world be presented to Trump in simple language that he might be able to understand, but there was always the "And finally..." section that ended on a cheerful note, and may have diverted his thoughts away from instigating Armageddon. Sigh...

I think we could all breathe a lot easier if Fox News were more like John Craven's Newsround, but sadly it just seems to push a particular type of negative right-wing polemic :)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DL594lIVAAADgSw.jpg

So republican leadership knows Trump is unhinged and could quite possibly start a nuclear war, but they want to wait until after they get a tax cut before they impeach him.

Sounds fair.

You say that almost like you sound a bit surprised.

being handed out in trump hotels. possibly nonsense.

I must have missed this yesterday but Trump has just pulled the US out of UNESCO.

Along with TPP, Paris Climate Accord, Iran deal, NAFTA he is just isolating the US more and more.

MAGA

I heard that,
Reagan did it first, and Clinton didn't bother to return, but Dubya did.

Talking voice on BBCR4, suggested it was an unproductive move from a blunt pro-Israel adminstration, as there would now be no country to veto any UNESCO proposal deemed anti-Israel

Gorka... Oh dear

https://twitter.com/abcpolitics/status/919221080945856512

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/14/porn-publisher-larry-flynt-offers-10-million-dirt-impeach-donald/

A really interesting (and quite long) piece.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/10/what-facebook-did/542502/

You could argue that Facebook faces, at least in theory, some kind of existential crisis. How do they address the evolving issues for society/democracy that are being driven by their platform while protecting their massive (and doubtless increasing) ad income? Obviously, the cynical view might be that they will talk a good game, while not actually doing much of substance, thereby continuing to rake in the money.

I've not read the article, so forgive me - but this isn't an new problem, what's new is that the impact is massively increased as is the speed by the technology in use.

Facebook can resolve this quite simply - by investment in for e.g. vetting every post before it goes up, which they do to an extent as witnessed by trying to post a picture of a breast feeding mother, but seem to miss if it's something calling for Jews to be exterminated.

They just don't want to grasp this particular nettle.

Pre-approving all posts really isn't an easy or fast matter...even moderating much more quiet places like big forums is a total headache as it is. And that's AFTER the fact moderation, like Facebook.

...still they have cash and should cut the "we only provide a content platform" crap. A bit more effort might a long way.

We live in an age of automation- posts can be approved at line speed (pretty much), have a go at posting a Swastika on Instagram and see how long it stays there for- that's after the fact automated moderation, throw more cpu etc at it and do it during upload.

Alt-right Fauxdiers already "tall crypto" but it's fairly straightforward to train machine learning platforms to recognise these things.

They'll just get more cryptic- but already (see Mich Stuchberry's Twitter) they've already had to get so far into their own gibberish that their insults are only meaningful to other spine-free white boys.

Facebook won't do much/enough about it because their business model depends on sharing. Interested parties pay Facebook a lot of money to reach their target audience, drawing on both the global scale of Facebook, as well as Facebook's ever-improving ability to target individual people/groups more effectively. Facebook and their investors are not going to allow that to stop. Only regulation - or, to a lesser extent, reputational damage (as we are seeing now) - are likely to prompt them into taking any form of corrective action.

And some of Facebooks investors are alt-right douche bags, which is something of a problem in this space.

I think facebook take that libertarian-esque view that they just provide the tech, if someone wants to harness their tools to overthrow a government, then it's not their problem.

Of course they do, all the money and none of the responsibility.

Obviously the question then is who decides what should and shouldn't be allowed to propagate?

Well, if the tech is there Facebook has no excuse.

So then it boils down to the $$$$ and if companies will start boycotting them, it may lead to some action?

Yeah, the article I posted above mentions how Breitbart owe their rapid growth to Facebook.

But they pay taxes, so .... no, wait...