EPTI think the big thing to be considered is the way Facebook's API works with 3rd party developers where basically someone giving consent to a company means they consent to your semi-private information being handed over (and this isn't exclusive to Facebook, the same privacy concern would be there if one of your friends gives an app access to their contacts list for example).
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
I think the big thing to be considered is the way Facebook's API works with 3rd party developers where basically someone giving consent to a company means they consent to your semi-private information being handed over (and this isn't exclusive to Facebook, the same privacy concern would be there if one of your friends gives an app access to their contacts list for example). | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6223 Posts
On March 21 2018 01:30 Mohdoo wrote: Similar to patient confidentiality. Certain things you can and can not sell or give out. There's two ways I think to see this. 1. What metrics/demographics/data is permissible to advertise against, or selectively advertise against. For example, advertising against gender, age, location etc is fine, but for example, people who recently performed a lot of searches for a specific disease is not. 2. What data can be sold, and what aggregation level this data is released at. I don't think data should ever be sold at the individual level, especially given how proficient FB is at scraping it. The minimum set of users which it should be grouping at should be at least 25 users,with none of the users in that group being directly identifiable (ex. Can release that 75% of people that visit xyz store in the last week are between ages of 18-25, and incomes between 25-50k, sample size 285 unique users, cannot release that Joe visited xyz store 4 times in the last 9 days). | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
And on the topic of phones, I think there needs to be some real regulations about phone data and GPS. I'm coming to the opinion that location data should only be collected if we approve the collection each time. None of this passive consent to ongoing collection and sale because I use the Ways app to avoid traffic. | ||
|
brian
United States9641 Posts
On March 20 2018 22:00 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: following up on this, the only death so far is the shooter. an officer posted at the school stopped him in the hallways just before classes started, and the shooter later died at the hospital. two other injuries both students, one critical. no news about the shooter, other than he was using a handgun. apparently security had been a little higher than usual after the principal had recently been investigating threats of a shooting, according to our favorite news outlet. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/20/shooting-at-great-mills-high-school-in-maryland-school-confirms.amp.html The House Minority whip represents this district, and planned a press conference for 1p. his press release amounts to unspecified promises of action. https://www.democraticwhip.gov/content/hoyer-statement-shooting-great-mills-high-school | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12467 Posts
On March 20 2018 22:26 Excludos wrote: He has stated that he is uninterested in running again. That said I'd be completely ok with him changing his mind on this one. If the situation doesn't change (wrt his health and stuff like that) I'll be very surprised if he doesn't run again | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 21 2018 00:37 ShoCkeyy wrote: "This article is tagged under Personal Opinion" Are you absolutely sure you aren't shitposting? Is it the personal opinion of the author that a poll was conducted and these were the results? What specifically in the article do you disagree with because it goes to far into opinion journalism? | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On March 21 2018 01:54 Plansix wrote: I would also like to see a full blown discussion about regulating data mining/usage for elections. Given the accuracy of data and the fact that we call carry around tracking devices these days, there needs to be a discussion about how data can be purchased by people trying to influence voters. And on the topic of phones, I think there needs to be some real regulations about phone data and GPS. I'm coming to the opinion that location data should only be collected if we approve the collection each time. None of this passive consent to ongoing collection and sale because I use the Ways app to avoid traffic. Yeah GPS data more so than other phone permission data seems leaky as hell. | ||
|
Amui
Canada10567 Posts
On March 21 2018 02:52 Danglars wrote: Are you absolutely sure you aren't shitposting? Is it the personal opinion of the author that a poll was conducted and these were the results? What specifically in the article do you disagree with because it goes to far into opinion journalism? Personally, that sample size is small, and there's no data on where they conducted that poll, before extrapolating the data to cover the entire country. I have a hard time believing that a quarter of the people in the US believe in a shadow government. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
The other thing, of course, is that the wording of the specific question + Show Spoiler + The term Deep State refers to the possible existence of a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy. Do you think this type of Deep State in the federal government definitely exists, probably exists, probably does not exist, or definitely does not exist? It also applies equally as much to an intelligence conspiracy as it does Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner pulling dear father's strings. Kind of how to write a bad poll question 101. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 21 2018 02:59 Amui wrote: Personally, that sample size is small, and there's no data on where they conducted that poll, before extrapolating the data to cover the entire country. I have a hard time believing that a quarter of the people polled believe in a shadow government. The link is in the article. Read the entire polling methodology if you want to dig deep. On March 21 2018 03:05 TheTenthDoc wrote: Amusingly, if you read the actual poll results, 63% were not familiar and 24% were somewhat familiar with the term Deep State before the pollster provided the definition for the follow-up question. The other thing, of course, is that the wording of the specific question + Show Spoiler + The term Deep State refers to the possible existence of a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy. Do you think this type of Deep State in the federal government definitely exists, probably exists, probably does not exist, or definitely does not exist? Kind of how to write a bad poll question 101. I'm of the opposite opinion. "...who secretly manipulate or direct national policy" flows from "unelected government and military officials" and flows straight from "deep state." Basically, if you've heard "unelected government and military officials" you're already clued in after also hearing "Deep State." I don't believe a significant number of respondents got snookered into thinking the term meant policy made transparently by public officials in the government. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
Amazing, Great, Good, Other | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 21 2018 03:09 ShoCkeyy wrote: I just don't like when personal opinions get posted, it's just easy to muck the waters, especially when they hardly add any value to the article. Oh ok, only 800 people polled actually believe in a shadow government, and here's why, "more alt right things about Hillary"... It's already old. If you want a legit sample size, I say 300,000 people across the US, not some small town they polled in the middle. It's crazy they say "majority" right in the first line, then 803 in the second... the large gap between the two is just hilarious. It states the normal error margins. Statistics shows you don't need "300,000" for a "legit sample size" and it's likely that you've never read a poll with that legit sample size in your entire life. Past polling with about that sample size was largely correct about Clinton's popular vote totals in all but Wisconsin. Monmouth earns the coveted A+ rating from Nate Silver's outfit. If you have your doubts, zoom in on the questions, or incorporate the error margin in your answers. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 21 2018 03:16 ShoCkeyy wrote: The poll is literally structured on how Trump polls his users on how he's doing. Amazing, Great, Good, Other The poll literally does nothing of the kind. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
Technically anyone un-elected handing over a piece of classified information would fit "secretly manipulating the government" and there is definitely a group of people who hand classified information over to government officials. (Edit: In another way it technically fits, the question doesn't specify the group as organized so you could take it to mean there are unelected officials that do things to secretly manipulate the government which is also verifiably true in the sense of unelected government officials taking bribes) It just seems like a bit of an over abstraction of the definition of deep state that could influence the responses from people who are not familiar with the concept. The information I'd want to see is of people who were familiar with the deep state as a term, how many of them actually believes it exists. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 21 2018 03:26 Logo wrote: It still seems like a bad poll even without snookering. Technically anyone un-elected handing over a piece of classified information would fit "secretly manipulating the government" and there is definitely a group of people who hand classified information over to government officials. It just seems like a bit of an over abstraction of the definition of deep state that could influence the responses from people who are not familiar with the concept. The information I'd want to see is of people who were familiar with the deep state as a term, how many of them actually believes it exists. The deep state legitimately describes civil servants who break the law to leak classified information to the public in order to manipulate the government. I see no over abstraction there. The main conclusion is that this understanding is pretty widespread, though the term used is not as understood on its face. In my view, it’s one of the biggest post-2016 changes in the country. Faith in our institutions is extremely low. The security and intelligence forces, that yesteryear were believed to ward of threats, are turned more inwardly (own citizens questions) for personal and political reasons. There’s not much that can be done about it. | ||
|
A3th3r
United States319 Posts
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-calls-putin-to-congratulate-russian-president-on-election-win-1521564314 | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On March 21 2018 03:14 Danglars wrote: The link is in the article. Read the entire polling methodology if you want to dig deep. I'm of the opposite opinion. "...who secretly manipulate or direct national policy" flows from "unelected government and military officials" and flows straight from "deep state." Basically, if you've heard "unelected government and military officials" you're already clued in after also hearing "Deep State." I don't believe a significant number of respondents got snookered into thinking the term meant policy made transparently by public officials in the government. I think you drastically overestimate the attention people pay to telephone surveys especially when 63% of them just said they weren't even familiar with the term "deep state." On March 21 2018 03:37 Danglars wrote: The deep state legitimately describes civil servants who break the law to leak classified information to the public in order to manipulate the government. I see no over abstraction there. The main conclusion is that this understanding is pretty widespread, though the term used is not as understood on its face. In my view, it’s one of the biggest post-2016 changes in the country. Faith in our institutions is extremely low. The security and intelligence forces, that yesteryear were believed to ward of threats, are turned more inwardly (own citizens questions) for personal and political reasons. There’s not much that can be done about it. Alternatively, they're so disgusted by the pathetic incompetent scumbags in charge that they wish there was someone in the government actively working against it. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On March 21 2018 03:37 Danglars wrote: The deep state legitimately describes civil servants who break the law to leak classified information to the public in order to manipulate the government. I see no over abstraction there. The main conclusion is that this understanding is pretty widespread, though the term used is not as understood on its face. In my view, it’s one of the biggest post-2016 changes in the country. Faith in our institutions is extremely low. The security and intelligence forces, that yesteryear were believed to ward of threats, are turned more inwardly (own citizens questions) for personal and political reasons. There’s not much that can be done about it. This is a ridiculous response? You're completing ignoring that most people don't know the term deep state and we're talking about how the poll question inadequately described the concept. | ||
| ||
