|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 12 2015 01:39 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2015 01:05 Mohdoo wrote:On December 12 2015 00:58 Plansix wrote:
That article is way longer and people should read it. It is a little unnerving how willing Cruz is to gain an edge in race and profile people without approval. I will be interested to see if Facebook shuts them down, because I know Facebook has talked about the servicing being used for political profiling directly hurts them in marketing and retention. IMO, anything public on the internet has assumed permission. When someone decides to put something on the internet, it is essentially public record. And so ends the only point in my life that I can imagine myself defending Cruz. This is pretty much correct. The data that Facebook collects could be considered proprietary trade secret data if it was kept confidential and secure. But because it's not, it's fair game for people like Cruz to collect.
They are not data mining public facing profiles. They are using an online survey that people agreed take and it collected data from both the users and their friends, mostly without approval. But the company isn't scrubbing data public webpages, they are using Facebook's systems to collect it, which you and I don't have access to. Of course it is completely legal currently, but I wouldn't call it public record since everyone cannot gain access to it.
|
On December 12 2015 01:48 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2015 01:39 xDaunt wrote:On December 12 2015 01:05 Mohdoo wrote:On December 12 2015 00:58 Plansix wrote:
That article is way longer and people should read it. It is a little unnerving how willing Cruz is to gain an edge in race and profile people without approval. I will be interested to see if Facebook shuts them down, because I know Facebook has talked about the servicing being used for political profiling directly hurts them in marketing and retention. IMO, anything public on the internet has assumed permission. When someone decides to put something on the internet, it is essentially public record. And so ends the only point in my life that I can imagine myself defending Cruz. This is pretty much correct. The data that Facebook collects could be considered proprietary trade secret data if it was kept confidential and secure. But because it's not, it's fair game for people like Cruz to collect. They are not data mining public facing profiles. They are using an online survey that people agreed take and it collected data from both the users and their friends, mostly without approval. But the company isn't scrubbing data public webpages, they are using Facebook's systems to collect it, which you and I don't have access to. Of course it is completely legal currently, but I wouldn't call it public record since everyone cannot gain access to it.
So what's your point?
|
On December 12 2015 01:49 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2015 01:48 Plansix wrote:On December 12 2015 01:39 xDaunt wrote:On December 12 2015 01:05 Mohdoo wrote:On December 12 2015 00:58 Plansix wrote:
That article is way longer and people should read it. It is a little unnerving how willing Cruz is to gain an edge in race and profile people without approval. I will be interested to see if Facebook shuts them down, because I know Facebook has talked about the servicing being used for political profiling directly hurts them in marketing and retention. IMO, anything public on the internet has assumed permission. When someone decides to put something on the internet, it is essentially public record. And so ends the only point in my life that I can imagine myself defending Cruz. This is pretty much correct. The data that Facebook collects could be considered proprietary trade secret data if it was kept confidential and secure. But because it's not, it's fair game for people like Cruz to collect. They are not data mining public facing profiles. They are using an online survey that people agreed take and it collected data from both the users and their friends, mostly without approval. But the company isn't scrubbing data public webpages, they are using Facebook's systems to collect it, which you and I don't have access to. Of course it is completely legal currently, but I wouldn't call it public record since everyone cannot gain access to it. So what's your point?
That it is data they paid to have access to. I also don't see a problem if the terms of service were clear, which might not be the case.
|
LE BOURGET, France — With a deadline to reach a major global climate change pact slipping into the weekend, President Barack Obama and his negotiating team are pressing China and India to bridge stubborn disagreements over the shape of a plan to curb pollution from fossil fuels and help the poorest nations cope with the effects of a warming planet.
Obama took matters into his own hands on Friday, personally calling Chinese President Xi Jinping to sort through the biggest issues standing in the way of an ambitious agreement among the nearly 200 nations gathered here, according to a source, who confirmed the news first reported by Chinese media.
Obama, who has made fighting climate change a top priority during his second term in office, joined dozens of other world leaders at the opening of the conference nearly two weeks ago before returning to Washington. He also spoke by phone with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi earlier this week to press the case for a strong global deal.
Secretary of State John Kerry and his lieutenants at the conference here in a suburb of Paris have been holding a stream of bilateral meetings in recent days with Indian and Chinese negotiators, according to a person familiar with the issue. The person described the meetings as productive and said officials are largely focused on the two most contentious components of the draft text: financial support for poor nations and transparency of the domestic actions the countries will take to trim their emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas blamed for raising the Earth's temperature and lifting sea levels.
The president and his senior staff have spent more than a year trying to build good will with India and China, who together with the United States are the three largest greenhouse gas emitters. That early-stage diplomacy yielded a breakthrough last year with Beijing, which committed to domestic measures to tackle climate change under an agreement with the U.S. The administration has also made inroads with India, though that progress has been slower.
China and India are not threatening to block a deal, which is a big step forward from past climate negotiations. But they are raising sharp objections to key portions of the draft text that the U.S. and its allies like the European Union see as essential.
Source
|
On December 12 2015 01:48 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2015 01:39 xDaunt wrote:On December 12 2015 01:05 Mohdoo wrote:On December 12 2015 00:58 Plansix wrote:
That article is way longer and people should read it. It is a little unnerving how willing Cruz is to gain an edge in race and profile people without approval. I will be interested to see if Facebook shuts them down, because I know Facebook has talked about the servicing being used for political profiling directly hurts them in marketing and retention. IMO, anything public on the internet has assumed permission. When someone decides to put something on the internet, it is essentially public record. And so ends the only point in my life that I can imagine myself defending Cruz. This is pretty much correct. The data that Facebook collects could be considered proprietary trade secret data if it was kept confidential and secure. But because it's not, it's fair game for people like Cruz to collect. They are not data mining public facing profiles. They are using an online survey that people agreed take and it collected data from both the users and their friends, mostly without approval. But the company isn't scrubbing data public webpages, they are using Facebook's systems to collect it, which you and I don't have access to. Of course it is completely legal currently, but I wouldn't call it public record since everyone cannot gain access to it.
Except that it's not without approval. While Facebook's approval is a pretty shitty system, the moment you click "okay" when you install one of those survey app thingies, you grant permission to the owner of the survey app to whatever you clicked okay on. Most of these data mining survey things require access to your private info, all your friends' data, your timeline history, etc. etc.
And yeah, that includes all the stupid "do this free survey to find out which rock star you resemble" trash apps that exist ONLY to collect your data.
|
WASHINGTON — More than seven in 10 residents of Kentucky want their new governor, Matt Bevin, to keep the state’s expanded Medicaid program as it is, according to a new poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation. And more than half of respondents described Medicaid as important for themselves and their families, underscoring the program’s substantial reach in the state and the challenges Mr. Bevin may face if he seeks to scale back or modify it.
Mr. Bevin, a Republican who took office Tuesday, is an opponent of the Affordable Care Act who earlier this year called for reversing the Medicaid expansion on the grounds that it was unaffordable for the state. He has since backpedaled to say he will seek changes requiring Medicaid enrollees to have “skin in the game,” such as by charging them monthly premiums.
NYTTimes
Sooooooo why did you vote for him?
|
On December 12 2015 03:11 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +WASHINGTON — More than seven in 10 residents of Kentucky want their new governor, Matt Bevin, to keep the state’s expanded Medicaid program as it is, according to a new poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation. And more than half of respondents described Medicaid as important for themselves and their families, underscoring the program’s substantial reach in the state and the challenges Mr. Bevin may face if he seeks to scale back or modify it.
Mr. Bevin, a Republican who took office Tuesday, is an opponent of the Affordable Care Act who earlier this year called for reversing the Medicaid expansion on the grounds that it was unaffordable for the state. He has since backpedaled to say he will seek changes requiring Medicaid enrollees to have “skin in the game,” such as by charging them monthly premiums. NYTTimesSooooooo why did you vote for him?
What, wait?
Medicaid exists for the poor who cannot afford healthcare on their own. How exactly are you going to charge them a monthly premium they cannot afford?
|
On December 12 2015 03:17 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2015 03:11 ticklishmusic wrote:WASHINGTON — More than seven in 10 residents of Kentucky want their new governor, Matt Bevin, to keep the state’s expanded Medicaid program as it is, according to a new poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation. And more than half of respondents described Medicaid as important for themselves and their families, underscoring the program’s substantial reach in the state and the challenges Mr. Bevin may face if he seeks to scale back or modify it.
Mr. Bevin, a Republican who took office Tuesday, is an opponent of the Affordable Care Act who earlier this year called for reversing the Medicaid expansion on the grounds that it was unaffordable for the state. He has since backpedaled to say he will seek changes requiring Medicaid enrollees to have “skin in the game,” such as by charging them monthly premiums. NYTTimesSooooooo why did you vote for him? What, wait? Medicaid exists for the poor who cannot afford healthcare on their own. How exactly are you going to charge them a monthly premium they cannot afford?
His plan is not a viable one. Its the standard "We shouldn't be giving this away! They should pay something," argument. The poor paying premiums makes other people feel good because the poor people on medicaid aren't getting something for free, even if those premiums aren't helpful.
|
United States44300 Posts
On December 12 2015 03:17 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2015 03:11 ticklishmusic wrote:WASHINGTON — More than seven in 10 residents of Kentucky want their new governor, Matt Bevin, to keep the state’s expanded Medicaid program as it is, according to a new poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation. And more than half of respondents described Medicaid as important for themselves and their families, underscoring the program’s substantial reach in the state and the challenges Mr. Bevin may face if he seeks to scale back or modify it.
Mr. Bevin, a Republican who took office Tuesday, is an opponent of the Affordable Care Act who earlier this year called for reversing the Medicaid expansion on the grounds that it was unaffordable for the state. He has since backpedaled to say he will seek changes requiring Medicaid enrollees to have “skin in the game,” such as by charging them monthly premiums. NYTTimesSooooooo why did you vote for him? What, wait? Medicaid exists for the poor who cannot afford healthcare on their own. How exactly are you going to charge them a monthly premium they cannot afford?
The Medicaid expansion was also paid for by the Feds, not the State.
|
On December 12 2015 01:48 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2015 01:39 xDaunt wrote:On December 12 2015 01:05 Mohdoo wrote:On December 12 2015 00:58 Plansix wrote:
That article is way longer and people should read it. It is a little unnerving how willing Cruz is to gain an edge in race and profile people without approval. I will be interested to see if Facebook shuts them down, because I know Facebook has talked about the servicing being used for political profiling directly hurts them in marketing and retention. IMO, anything public on the internet has assumed permission. When someone decides to put something on the internet, it is essentially public record. And so ends the only point in my life that I can imagine myself defending Cruz. This is pretty much correct. The data that Facebook collects could be considered proprietary trade secret data if it was kept confidential and secure. But because it's not, it's fair game for people like Cruz to collect. They are not data mining public facing profiles. They are using an online survey that people agreed take and it collected data from both the users and their friends, mostly without approval. But the company isn't scrubbing data public webpages, they are using Facebook's systems to collect it, which you and I don't have access to. Of course it is completely legal currently, but I wouldn't call it public record since everyone cannot gain access to it.
It said they used MTurk for the surveys so they were probably paid surveys. Plus it said the users were asked to open up thie profile to the researchers. It all sounds legit, and pretty benign besides.
|
I was listening to a segment on NPR about how good China is at shift policy and avoiding stuff like what we're seeing in Kentucky regarding medicaid, although the topic they were discussing were shifts in climate policy. There are certainly some pretty compelling arguments against democracy. This whole deal with Medicaid is going to be extremely expensive and likely end up going back to how it was before. Knee jerk responses and emotional appeals created a big problem that was pushed forward by voters. In a Chinese system, this wouldn't happen. Now, I'm not saying democracy is all around worse, but it is interesting to see instances where it really is creating problems in areas that can't afford even more problems.
|
This is not about democracy, Its about widespread missinformation and/or blatant lying.
|
(CNN)One of the women assaulted by former Oklahoma City police officer Daniel Holtzclaw said she feared for her life when he pulled her over and forced her to perform a sex act on him.
"In my mind, all I could think of was he was going to shoot me, he was going to kill me," the woman told reporters at a news conference Friday. "I kept pleading, 'Don't make me do this, sir.'
"All I could see was my life flashing before my eyes and the holster on his side," she said.
Holtzclaw told her he wasn't going to kill her but he made her perform oral sodomy, she said.
She was one of two victims who addressed the media a day after a jury found Holtzclaw guilty of 18 of the 36 charges he faced, including four counts of rape in the first degree and four counts of forced oral sodomy.
The jury deliberated for more than 40 hours before reaching its verdict late Thursday.
For about six months, Holtzclaw preyed on women -- all African-American -- in one of Oklahoma's poorest neighborhoods, exploiting his police badge to intimidate them into keeping quiet.
Prosecutors say the Oklahoma City officer selected his victims based on their criminal histories, figuring their drug or prostitution records would undermine any claims they might make against him.
Then, he would subject them to assaults that escalated from groping to oral sodomy and rape
Source
On a separate note, I'm not the least bit surprised NH's* police union endorsed Trump. I expect there will be more to follow...
|
Its was NH, not NY. But I agree there are a lot of shitty unions out there.
|
On December 12 2015 03:35 Velr wrote:
This is not about democracy, Its about widespread missinformation and/or blatant lying.
Democracy is extremely vulnerable to widespread missinformation and blatant lying.
|
The American Dream seems to have turned into "free healthcare and education so one can man a McDonalds counter for his whole life".
|
United States44300 Posts
On December 12 2015 03:44 Soap wrote:
The American Dream seems to have turned into "free healthcare and education so one can man a McDonalds counter for his whole life".
In what way is education incompatible with the American dream? Education is the great equalizer, the tool that a man uses to work hard to provide for his family and to better himself. The American dream cannot exist in a society in which limited access to education condemns members of society to serfdom from birth.
Provision of education and healthcare are not socialist, they are part of a framework for providing social justice, equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.
|
I support cheap education, healthcare and other social services despite the fact that I'll derive little direct benefit from them. I already paid a ton for college, and I'm not going to be on Medicare/Medicaid unless something very unforeseen happens. I'm at a good place in life and had to work for it, and I'd like that to be possible for everyone.
It'd be nice if we could turn the boat on policy a little easier... but state's rights and democracy are hard. It's kind of interesting that our system is designed to prevent the tyranny of the majority by empowering minorities, but it's kind of had the opposite effect and now we're held hostage by radical minorities.
|
On December 12 2015 03:31 Mohdoo wrote:
I was listening to a segment on NPR about how good China is at shift policy and avoiding stuff like what we're seeing in Kentucky regarding medicaid, although the topic they were discussing were shifts in climate policy. There are certainly some pretty compelling arguments against democracy. This whole deal with Medicaid is going to be extremely expensive and likely end up going back to how it was before. Knee jerk responses and emotional appeals created a big problem that was pushed forward by voters. In a Chinese system, this wouldn't happen. Now, I'm not saying democracy is all around worse, but it is interesting to see instances where it really is creating problems in areas that can't afford even more problems.
I'd take issue with that. China's been having huge issues keeping provinces in line and policies have been in stutter-step over the last decade due to infighting and dissent. You don't always hear about it though - China's censors are powerful!
|
On December 11 2015 14:03 Doraemon wrote:
do you have muslim friends? 1/2 are radical?
Don't think this was addressed to me, but I have an answer:
Yes I do have Muslim friends. They are mostly secular, and I'm pretty sure one of them is actually an agnostic, but they call themselves Muslim and I won't contradict them. I don't know their geo-political opinions because I mostly talk about books and other interests with them. None of them are "radical" as far as I know.
However, I think you're second question pretty much illustrates the huge problem (seen on both the left and the right) we have right now with the way we deal with Muslims, Islam, and more generally "multi-cultural-ism."
Define your terms. If you're asking about Muslims inside a Salifist mosque in Saudi Arabia, the likelihood is that 50% or more of them are jihadists or support jihad. If you're asking about moderate Muslims in Kansas who go to a moderate mosque, the likelihood is that none of them are jihadist or support jihad.
Islam is not monolithic, and neither are Muslims. Many on the right seem to have this knee-jerk "All Muslims are bad!" attitude, which is silly and counter-productive. Likewise, many on the left seem to have this knee-jerk "There is no radical Islam!" attitude that is equally silly, and funnily enough, incredibly bigoted against Muslims! It presumes a monolithic generality about Muslims and is actually not multi-cultural at all. It lumps them all as "Islam" and doesn't take into account the many sects and philosophies among the world's second largest religion. It also ignores the vast differences between Muslims of one culture and Muslims in another culture.
I agree that we should not bar all Muslims from entering the country. I do not agree that we should pretend there is no radical Islamist threat, especially when there are many moderate Muslims who are speaking out against that very same threat, at great risk to themselves, and they are being ignored.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
