I posted not long ago about the Russian social media account posing as a British person. Over the course of a number of years the 137,000 posts on that account had gathered 100,000 followers - not bad for a random unknown person starting from nothing. I suspect that single account could have had a measurable impact on attitudes in the UK.
I've also seen studies suggesting that getting on for half of right-wing oriented posts in the US are actually from Russia. The money spent on these posts may well have been helpful in reinforcing attitudes of the many people whose news comes almost entirely from social media - and also pushing certain topics (such as the dreaded Antifa) up the mainstream agenda.
Do you also find it ironic that paranoid people are quite gullible? Once you decide science/experts are unreliable, any huckster can convince you of nearly anything, with no need for evidence really.
Saw something about the hypocrisy of Trump/Fox News/right wing snowflakes.
When it comes to White Supremacists it's "many sides" and "both sides" are wrong but when it comes to police violence and Black Lives Matter it's "one side" is wrong despite many well documented examples of police abuses of power and violence.
Do you also find it ironic that paranoid people are quite gullible? Once you decide science/experts are unreliable, any huckster can convince you of nearly anything, with no need for evidence really.
Humans will always decide what they want to believe first, then look for evidence to support it.
It's a natural instinct that even scientists (and I am one) need to be aware of and actively counter.
I posted not long ago about the Russian social media account posing as a British person. Over the course of a number of years the 137,000 posts on that account had gathered 100,000 followers - not bad for a random unknown person starting from nothing. I suspect that single account could have had a measurable impact on attitudes in the UK.
I've also seen studies suggesting that getting on for half of right-wing oriented posts in the US are actually from Russia. The money spent on these posts may well have been helpful in reinforcing attitudes of the many people whose news comes almost entirely from social media - and also pushing certain topics (such as the dreaded Antifa) up the mainstream agenda.
Antifa was not pushed up the mainstream agenda at all, they were buried as a story for about a year, given free reign and mainstream left approval to assault people until the video evidence become so overwhelming that they couldn't ignore it or deny it as a problem anymore. A disavowal was all put pried from the unwilling mouths of the left establishment by common people.
Do you have that study? Half of right wing posts being Russian bots sounds crazy to me. Conservatives have been a majority in this country for decades, despite the prolific use in recent years of all forms of intimidation, social and physical and financial, to suppress it. I think that alone explains right wing posts.
"The company says $100,000 (£77,000) was spent on about 3,000 ads over a two-year period, ending in May 2017.
The ads did not back any political figures specifically but instead posted on topics including immigration, race and equal rights.
Facebook said it was co-operating with a US investigation into the matter.
It is handing over its evidence to special prosecutor Robert Mueller, who is overseeing an inquiry into alleged Russian interference in last year's US presidential election.
The advertisements directed users towards around 470 accounts that spread false information or were otherwise in breach of Facebook’s terms and conditions, the site said. "
What I want to know is- Why would the Russians have an interest in U.S immigration policy? I can't see how it would be of major import to them.
The Russians aren't "interested in US immigration policy". They are interested in destabilising the USA (and any other country that they perceive as a competitor for international influence). With the USA diminished on the world stage, the influence of Russia is increased.
They did this by fostering division and driving a wedge into the faultlines in US society. One of which happens to be immigration policy.
And they did this by, allegedly, a very low level campaign of facebook ads, that have the vaguest of connections with actually being Russian agents in the first place. These Russians are awfully bad at their jobs. For one thing, who gets significantly influenced politically by internet ads? Does anybody even click on these things?
"In Wednesday's post, Mr Stamos went into detail about how the campaign was uncovered.
"[We] looked for ads that might have originated in Russia, even those with very weak signals of a connection and not associated with any known organised effort.
"This was a broad search, including, for instance, ads bought from accounts with US IP addresses but with the language set to Russian - even though they didn't necessarily violate any policy or law.
"In this part of our review, we found approximately $50,000 in potentially politically related ad spending on roughly 2,200 ads."
You said it yourself: a lot of conservatives were afraid to speak out. This is normal human bevavior: as a tribal animal, humans don't like to express views contrary to those of the tribe. Unless, that is, they see a bunch of other people expressing similar opinions. The beauty of the internet (from the point of view of the spook) is it's very difficult to tell if the person who is expressing the opinions you where afraid to talk about is actually Hank from Montana or Nicolai from Moscow. The point is not to change people's opinions, but to reinforce opinions they already have, and encourage them to speak out rather than support the party line.
You might argue that those particular agents where incompetant for getting caught (how many more did Zuckerberg not detect?) but actually it doesn't matter: all evidence of Russian meddling helps to further destabilise the USA. It's a real life Xantos gambit: any outcome leads to Russian advantage.
And it helps to understand the Russian mentality. I've known quite a few Russians. They are very big on chess. They understand the value of putting in a lot of effort to achieve even a tiny advantage. Because every tiny advantage adds up.
And they did this by, allegedly, a very low level campaign of facebook ads, that have the vaguest of connections with actually being Russian agents in the first place.
You're reducing a large and complex claim to a very simple one, and reducing the evidence to the weakest type.
Like many prominent and lifelong conservatives like John McCain, I and other folks in this thread generally agree with the findings of the intelligence report on Russian involvement, issued by the conservative-leaning CIA, the conservative-leaning NSA, and the FBI:
Russian trolls and RT had little impact on American media, as Russia does not have nearly as strong a hold in the U.S. as it does in European countries. The most important and impactful acts of interference by Russia involved selective hacking and selective leaking of documents, either to improve Trump's chances of winning the election or simply to damage Clinton, the presumed winner, before she entered office.
You're acting as if liberals are saying conservative voices on social media are nothing but Russian agents, and that that is why Trump won the election. But that is not our argument.
Russians did what they did. This is fact. Why they did it is the only thing that is debatable.
Personally, I think it is very unlikely that the Russian interference had a significant affect on the election result. But it didn't need to have. The gradual release of "evidence" is enough to undermine the the US administration, and keep Americans too busy fighting each other to notice what is going on in Eastern Europe.
Do you have that study? Half of right wing posts being Russian bots sounds crazy to me.
I've had a quick look, but must admit I can't find the reference I saw before. I remember a figure of 45% though and thus far the only place I've found quoting that is this study. However, the 45% referred to here is the proportion of content from bots in Russia as opposed to US. If that's the same 45% then either the reference I saw before was wrong or my memory of it was (given my memory the latter seems more probable ).
The study linked above did an analysis of social media posts in a number of countries. In the US they reviewed 17 million tweets in November 2016, concluding that over 10% of them were from bots. Trump-related hashtags were also 3 times more likely to be from bots than Clinton-related hashtags, so bots were still responsible for a significant proportion of right wing posts.
"These places that got flooded, like Texas, okay, they have a low tax base," Maher said on his show "Real Time" on Friday. "So, the federal government bails them out. Their governors, their legislators they don’t believe in climate science."
"It seems like the responsible folks in this country, the people who pay a little more taxes and the people who believe in climate change are bailing out the people who hate government, except when they need government when they’re in trouble," he continued. "That seems a little unfair."
“Suddenly, socialism is not such a bad idea when you’re standing in toxic floodwater.”
Yeah. When I was a contractor building on the coast I kept pushing to restrict building in the same spot after hurricanes washed land and houses away. We would not build on the beach front at all. The towns just keep replenishing beaches for what will just keep happening over and over again, millions just keeps washing out to sea. Same with other things in the building codes. Every time that happens, the over and over again in the same places,the insurance companies raise rates for anyone near the coast within a radius that might even be in a safer spot. Alot of money and politics were involved at the local lvl there. Tourism, property rights, etc. That's one of the things that I define as insanity.
I blame those running the towns more so than regular folks themselves. Those in charge should know and act in a more responsible fashion, esp. for poorer folks or those that just don't understand building science and nature.
I know it doesn't but sometimes it sure seems like money makes the world go round.
Yeah. When I was a contractor building on the coast I kept pushing to restrict building in the same spot after hurricanes washed land and houses away. We would not build on the beach front at all. The towns just keep replenishing beaches for what will just keep happening over and over again, millions just keeps washing out to sea. Same with other things in the building codes. Every time that happens, the over and over again in the same places,the insurance companies raise rates for anyone near the coast within a radius that might even be in a safer spot. Alot of money and politics were involved at the local lvl there. Tourism, property rights, etc. That's one of the things that I define as insanity.
I blame those running the towns more so than regular folks themselves. Those in charge should know and act in a more responsible fashion, esp. for poorer folks or those that just don't understand building science and nature.
I know it doesn't but sometimes it sure seems like money makes the world go round.
I think everyone realizes it's nice to build close to the beach but hey things are going to happen. You have to recognize that and be smart. Instead of just rebuilding again and again how about invest in some preventative measures. A giant sandbar, cement walls , something.
They've figured this stuff out in the Netherlands. Instead of relying on faith and laziness to protect it, put some science to work.
@smeagolheart Yup.They like throwing money at it more here, unfortunately. Fill out a paper, pass the buck on to the govt. and the whole of the tax base in the area to pay for more of these crazy sand re-nourishment projects. After speaking with many in top lvls of state and local emergency management here I know they to feel like beatin their heads against a wall when making recommendations for change after big storms. I think the whole darn lot of these town officials need to travel over to places like the Netherlands and various other places in Europe in order to kick start their decades old way of thinking about the coastline.
I blame those running the towns more so than regular folks themselves. Those in charge should know and act in a more responsible fashion, esp. for poorer folks or those that just don't understand building science and nature.
I know it doesn't but sometimes it sure seems like money makes the world go round.
I read an article about Mar-a-lago resort and how it was built (not by Trump). The walls are 3 feet thick and the house is anchored into the Coral rock below with steel and concrete.
Yes it may cost more money to make all buildings like this, but it save millions in the long run since damages after any hurricane won't be as severe*. It starts at the municipal level. The science and know-how has been here since the early '20s. People need to start acting on it.
*Unless you have a state full of Trumps, who will claim $17 million in damages even though minimal damage was done to the property.
The Federal NDPs are choosing a new leader and there was an ugly incident involving one's campaign event.
His response to the heckler during and after the event was beautiful. Not beautiful enough to swing way left, but enough to garner much respect from myself and others. If only more politicians acted this way. One could dream.
"These places that got flooded, like Texas, okay, they have a low tax base," Maher said on his show "Real Time" on Friday. "So, the federal government bails them out. Their governors, their legislators they don’t believe in climate science."
"It seems like the responsible folks in this country, the people who pay a little more taxes and the people who believe in climate change are bailing out the people who hate government, except when they need government when they’re in trouble," he continued. "That seems a little unfair."
“Suddenly, socialism is not such a bad idea when you’re standing in toxic floodwater.”
Part of the continuing overall trend in this country: brand blue states as being full of elitist snobs, then use the tax dollars they contribute to national coffers to bail out red states who refuse to tax their own citizens on the state level. They all hate government right up until the point when they need it. At least liberals don't engage in the hypocrisy that it's the ultimate evil in the universe. Ted Cruz is of course the ultimate example of this, who refused to vote for Hurricane relief for Sandy, yet is of course demanding it now that it is HIS state. This is what happens to conservatives. They don't think about abortion rights until THEIR daughter gets pregnant at 16. They don't believe in government healthcare, but don't you dare touch their parent's Medicare. They don't believe in federal relief until the flood hits their town. The core problem at the heart of the conservative movement in this country is a massive lack of empathy for anything that doesn't affect them directly, or their immediate family or friends. For the record, I WANT all the aid to go to the red states across this country. I just wish they would stop bitching about how out of the touch the blue states (who pay for the majority of it) are.
Yeah, when it hits on a more personal lvl folks against are then all in for aid. I still remember Christi catchin backlash for touring and talking nice with Obama after Sandy. I remember liking him then at the time for throwing all that crap from republicans to the side and just doing what he did, getting aid for his state. Helped him to of course but was more 'focus on the issue at hand and not on sticking to a position'.
I mean what did they expect him to do, ignore and snub the pres when he needs help just to support the party line? Jeeze. He had his issues but I respected that at the time.
I blame those running the towns more so than regular folks themselves. Those in charge should know and act in a more responsible fashion, esp. for poorer folks or those that just don't understand building science and nature.
I know it doesn't but sometimes it sure seems like money makes the world go round.
I read an article about Mar-a-lago resort and how it was built (not by Trump). The walls are 3 feet thick and the house is anchored into the Coral rock below with steel and concrete.
Yes it may cost more money to make all buildings like this, but it save millions in the long run since damages after any hurricane won't be as severe*. It starts at the municipal level. The science and know-how has been here since the early '20s. People need to start acting on it.
*Unless you have a state full of Trumps, who will claim $17 million in damages even though minimal damage was done to the property.
Not necessarily. It may work out cheaper to use very cheep construction and simply replace the building every couple of years.
I blame those running the towns more so than regular folks themselves. Those in charge should know and act in a more responsible fashion, esp. for poorer folks or those that just don't understand building science and nature.
I know it doesn't but sometimes it sure seems like money makes the world go round.
I read an article about Mar-a-lago resort and how it was built (not by Trump). The walls are 3 feet thick and the house is anchored into the Coral rock below with steel and concrete.
Yes it may cost more money to make all buildings like this, but it save millions in the long run since damages after any hurricane won't be as severe*. It starts at the municipal level. The science and know-how has been here since the early '20s. People need to start acting on it.
*Unless you have a state full of Trumps, who will claim $17 million in damages even though minimal damage was done to the property.
I built above and beyond standards when on the coast. Your allowed to run a double row of nails attaching the plyboard on the sides of the house to a double row of 2x's that are bolted to the floor in a High Wind Zone. We actually attached steel rods from the the concrete foundation and ran them all the way up to the top plate that was bolted to the rafters and roof.
Another example being in a new development that was built up from sand dredged up from the intracoastal waterway. My family knew this from living there so long and we always had a soil foundation survey done to see what extra was needed to support the house properly. Often it was 6'deep and wide footers compared to the standard 2'wide/1' deep concrete footer. We were the only onea because it was not required by law.
Later, those other builders started having major problems with settling within a year; drywall cracking, foundations cracking, cabinets and crown molding coming off the walls. Sheer stupidity and I thought there should have been major lawsuits against those guys.
My operating style was build it the best you can and don't cut corners, even if it costs a little more as its better to rest easy at night than be worrying about hundreds of homes you have out there, which for at least the first year, a contractor is basically responsible for everything.
Part of the continuing overall trend in this country: brand blue states as being full of elitist snobs, then use the tax dollars they contribute to national coffers to bail out red states who refuse to tax their own citizens on the state level. They all hate government right up until the point when they need it. At least liberals don't engage in the hypocrisy that it's the ultimate evil in the universe.
That is quite true--liberals engage in different forms of hypocrisy. *laugh*
Seriously, though, what you are describing is the "us versus them" mentality which both major parties are using to tear this country apart. If they keep us divided by petty political differences then not enough of us can get together to elect leaders who will actually solve problems and do the things we need them to do. We are Babylon 5 while the Republicans and Democrats are the Shadows and the Vorlons--you decide for yourself which is which, but remember that ultimately it doesn't matter which way you associate them because *both* of them were the problem and they both still need to get the hell out of our galaxy.
Comments
I've also seen studies suggesting that getting on for half of right-wing oriented posts in the US are actually from Russia. The money spent on these posts may well have been helpful in reinforcing attitudes of the many people whose news comes almost entirely from social media - and also pushing certain topics (such as the dreaded Antifa) up the mainstream agenda.
When it comes to White Supremacists it's "many sides" and "both sides" are wrong but when it comes to police violence and Black Lives Matter it's "one side" is wrong despite many well documented examples of police abuses of power and violence.
Fox & Friends 'War On Cops' Hypocrisy EXPOSED
It's a natural instinct that even scientists (and I am one) need to be aware of and actively counter.
Do you have that study? Half of right wing posts being Russian bots sounds crazy to me. Conservatives have been a majority in this country for decades, despite the prolific use in recent years of all forms of intimidation, social and physical and financial, to suppress it. I think that alone explains right wing posts.
The ads did not back any political figures specifically but instead posted on topics including immigration, race and equal rights.
Facebook said it was co-operating with a US investigation into the matter.
It is handing over its evidence to special prosecutor Robert Mueller, who is overseeing an inquiry into alleged Russian interference in last year's US presidential election.
The advertisements directed users towards around 470 accounts that spread false information or were otherwise in breach of Facebook’s terms and conditions, the site said. "
What I want to know is- Why would the Russians have an interest in U.S immigration policy? I can't see how it would be of major import to them.
They did this by fostering division and driving a wedge into the faultlines in US society. One of which happens to be immigration policy.
I know, I know, but, c'mon... easiest joke ever.
"In Wednesday's post, Mr Stamos went into detail about how the campaign was uncovered.
"[We] looked for ads that might have originated in Russia, even those with very weak signals of a connection and not associated with any known organised effort.
"This was a broad search, including, for instance, ads bought from accounts with US IP addresses but with the language set to Russian - even though they didn't necessarily violate any policy or law.
"In this part of our review, we found approximately $50,000 in potentially politically related ad spending on roughly 2,200 ads."
You might argue that those particular agents where incompetant for getting caught (how many more did Zuckerberg not detect?) but actually it doesn't matter: all evidence of Russian meddling helps to further destabilise the USA. It's a real life Xantos gambit: any outcome leads to Russian advantage.
And it helps to understand the Russian mentality. I've known quite a few Russians. They are very big on chess. They understand the value of putting in a lot of effort to achieve even a tiny advantage. Because every tiny advantage adds up.
Like many prominent and lifelong conservatives like John McCain, I and other folks in this thread generally agree with the findings of the intelligence report on Russian involvement, issued by the conservative-leaning CIA, the conservative-leaning NSA, and the FBI:
Russian trolls and RT had little impact on American media, as Russia does not have nearly as strong a hold in the U.S. as it does in European countries. The most important and impactful acts of interference by Russia involved selective hacking and selective leaking of documents, either to improve Trump's chances of winning the election or simply to damage Clinton, the presumed winner, before she entered office.
You're acting as if liberals are saying conservative voices on social media are nothing but Russian agents, and that that is why Trump won the election. But that is not our argument.
Personally, I think it is very unlikely that the Russian interference had a significant affect on the election result. But it didn't need to have. The gradual release of "evidence" is enough to undermine the the US administration, and keep Americans too busy fighting each other to notice what is going on in Eastern Europe.
The study linked above did an analysis of social media posts in a number of countries. In the US they reviewed 17 million tweets in November 2016, concluding that over 10% of them were from bots. Trump-related hashtags were also 3 times more likely to be from bots than Clinton-related hashtags, so bots were still responsible for a significant proportion of right wing posts.
"It seems like the responsible folks in this country, the people who pay a little more taxes and the people who believe in climate change are bailing out the people who hate government, except when they need government when they’re in trouble," he continued. "That seems a little unfair."
“Suddenly, socialism is not such a bad idea when you’re standing in toxic floodwater.”
Alot of money and politics were involved at the local lvl there. Tourism, property rights, etc.
That's one of the things that I define as insanity.
I blame those running the towns more so than regular folks themselves. Those in charge should know and act in a more responsible fashion, esp. for poorer folks or those that just don't understand building science and nature.
I know it doesn't but sometimes it sure seems like money makes the world go round.
They've figured this stuff out in the Netherlands. Instead of relying on faith and laziness to protect it, put some science to work.
After speaking with many in top lvls of state and local emergency management here I know they to feel like beatin their heads against a wall when making recommendations for change after big storms.
I think the whole darn lot of these town officials need to travel over to places like the Netherlands and various other places in Europe in order to kick start their decades old way of thinking about the coastline.
http://www.businessinsider.com/hurricane-irma-fema-disaster-relief-fund-for-texas-florida-empty-2017-9
Yes it may cost more money to make all buildings like this, but it save millions in the long run since damages after any hurricane won't be as severe*. It starts at the municipal level. The science and know-how has been here since the early '20s. People need to start acting on it.
*Unless you have a state full of Trumps, who will claim $17 million in damages even though minimal damage was done to the property.
The Federal NDPs are choosing a new leader and there was an ugly incident involving one's campaign event.
His response to the heckler during and after the event was beautiful. Not beautiful enough to swing way left, but enough to garner much respect from myself and others. If only more politicians acted this way. One could dream.
I mean what did they expect him to do, ignore and snub the pres when he needs help just to support the party line? Jeeze. He had his issues but I respected that at the time.
Another example being in a new development that was built up from sand dredged up from the intracoastal waterway. My family knew this from living there so long and we always had a soil foundation survey done to see what extra was needed to support the house properly. Often it was 6'deep and wide footers compared to the standard 2'wide/1' deep concrete footer. We were the only onea because it was not required by law.
Later, those other builders started having major problems with settling within a year; drywall cracking, foundations cracking, cabinets and crown molding coming off the walls.
Sheer stupidity and I thought there should have been major lawsuits against those guys.
My operating style was build it the best you can and don't cut corners, even if it costs a little more as its better to rest easy at night than be worrying about hundreds of homes you have out there, which for at least the first year, a contractor is basically responsible for everything.
Seriously, though, what you are describing is the "us versus them" mentality which both major parties are using to tear this country apart. If they keep us divided by petty political differences then not enough of us can get together to elect leaders who will actually solve problems and do the things we need them to do. We are Babylon 5 while the Republicans and Democrats are the Shadows and the Vorlons--you decide for yourself which is which, but remember that ultimately it doesn't matter which way you associate them because *both* of them were the problem and they both still need to get the hell out of our galaxy.