• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ac30

Member
Oct 30, 2017
14,527
London
If the report isn't damning towards Trump, I can't imagine what the tactic of withholding it from the public is for. There is nobody getting saved at the 11th hour like this besides Trump. It would be a bluff that serves no purpose.

Barr's already said he won't release
Information that's "disparaging" but not actionable - and since the DoJ is of the opinion that the President can't be indicted anyways, even if he did obstruct justice they'll never announce it.

Barr's got him covered basically
 

corasaur

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,988
One of the worst things about the Mueller report --if it determines that Trump didn't conspire with Russia to swing the election -- is that people are going to have to accept that tens of millions of American voters chose to elect Trump.

russian interference only even worked because the margins were already so thin. Tens of millions did genuinely want what he was selling, unfortunately.
 

Aaron

I’m seeing double here!
Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,077
Minneapolis
Sorry mate, we don't need the Mueller report for that. With or without Russian interference, millions of Americans were down with what Trump sold. This is how mad they got that America elected a black man to the White House twice (and he did a good job!)
It's not even like that's a super controversial statement either. Obama had 53% approval the week before the election (according to Gallup) and Clinton got 48% of the vote. 5% - which would have turned a close PV win/EC loss into a landslide win - either voted for Trump, voted third party or didn't vote at all.

Look, we just suck sometimes. Look at the Reagan 84 map. The Nixon 72 map. Mondale and McGovern would have been infinitely superior presidents, but they're regarded as jokes because we don't want to admit the American majority bought into Republican propaganda.

To bring up a point from the other day, look at Kerry. Plenty of liberals will gripe about how weak-ass John Kerry couldn't beat the buffoonish George W. Bush as if it would have been this slam dunk victory, but Kerry did better than he should have. If 60,000 Bush voters in Ohio had gone to Kerry instead, he would have won despite Bush having a positive approval rating.
 

Antrax

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,291
Lols Clinton was close to people like Kissinger who from Sanders history is as bad as that?

I think their point was about people who would actually be hired.

Ya they definitely deserve criticism, but i feel they are preferable to other media outlets since they dont both sides issues and cover a more relevant range, for example CNN just covering Smollet. Some one being associated with them shouldnt be painted as a faux progressive, especially when they are not taking any real estate money in NYC.

Do they still have Dore on? That kinda seals them as long as he's there. Just like we give CNN shit for hiring Trump stooges, people like Dore should be instantly damning.



Does this remind anybody else of Venezuela?


Yeah, it's exactly how Chavez ran the place and got so popular. Just do gov't bribes to get people to like you, and hope you're gone or dead by the time the bill comes.
 

AnotherNils

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,936
Finally watched that Tucker interview. I'm always in awe of people who are unflappable (or near-enough). Between Bregman and a few british pol interviews I'm seen, I feel like the US could use some of that poise. I think Russert and Dickerson are the closest thing we've had recently.
 

Amibguous Cad

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,033
I would imagine moderating content for something the size of Youtube would be a daunting task that takes multiple layers to even tackle.

The Kraft news is insane. All these Trump supporters seem to really be bad apples.

I don't disagree that it would be a huge undertaking, but so is, you know, putting together a website where millions of people can upload their videos, watch them, and comment on them.

Like, the entire problem here is that tech companies are treating moderation as important somewhere a couple rungs below support for legacy browsers. They don't treat it like a core, fundamental part of the business like security or streaming speeds or anything like that. They want to use inadequate automated methods because it's dramatically cheaper, and we shouldn't let them get away with it.

There's no way they'd ever do this. That's tantamount to literally endorsing everything ever posted. Things will g et through and they'd be roasted for it. Possibly liable in court for something, who knows. And paying people that aren't native speakers is a good way to really fuck things up. Isn't that partially what happened with Facebook in Myanmar as far as moderation?

Fine, you can pay people in the US and UK minimum wage to do it, they can still afford it.

FOSTA/SESTA means, at least in the United States, that you endorse everything that is posted on your website, whether by you or by someone else. Or, at least, you're criminally liable for such. So Google had damn well better get their pedophile problem under control, because otherwise they're looking at legal repercussions.
 

poklane

Member
Oct 25, 2017
27,948
the Netherlands
I'd figure this may fit here: according to a non-governmental group Venezuelan soldiers have killed two people in a clash over aid on the border with Brazil


AFP: #BREAKING Venezuelan soldiers have killed two people in a clash over aid on the border with Brazil, a non-governmental group says
How to get the US to intervene 101: kill civilians.

Edit: Emilio Gonzalez, mayor of the Venezuelan town of Gran Sabana, has confirmed to CNN that 1 woman was killed and at least 12 were injured after the civilians were trying to facilitate the transfer of aid from Brazil into Venezuela. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/22/americas/woman-killed-venezuela-aid-scli-intl/index.html
 
Last edited:

Mercurial

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
985
Google is a company who built a system to scan every page of every book. They also created a system to take high resolution photos of every inch of every road in the world. They are now sending out people with backpacks to walk every inch of every sidewalk in the country. They are a company that has absolutely tackled "boil the ocean" problems before. Scaling up a proper moderating staff would not make the top ten of difficult projects for them. They choose not to because it won't help them generate revenue.

Just as many of those "boil the ocean" projects have failed. Maybe more. Google+ ring a bell? Orkut? Hell, they're flunking out of Louisville in a pretty spectacular way with Fiber as we speak and their Kansas City infrastructure isn't going that great either. Google isn't some unstoppable force that can solve any problem they decide to solve and that has been proven out in both high and low-profile ventures over the years.

You're not just talking about "scaling up a proper moderating staff". A million moderators is 10x their current FTE workforce but it's more complicated still. Who ensures that the moderators aren't biased? How many people are reviewing the activities of the moderating staff? What kind of SLA, if any, will they offer for the curation of a video? How will live content be managed? And as RDreamer astutely pointed out, how do they navigate the complicated reality that such a system would effectively mean that every piece of content on their platform was directly endorsed by an employee of Google?

I'm not a conservative. I don't believe that complicated problems can be approached with the "Just do $x" throwaway arguments.
 

BigWinnie1

Banned
Feb 19, 2018
2,757
I'd figure this may fit here: according to a non-governmental group Venezuelan soldiers have killed two people in a clash over aid on the border with Brazil



How to get the US to intervene 101: kill civilians.


ok What the fuck. Just let us feed your citizens you assholes!! If they had any self-introspection they could accept help and then make reforms.
 

Rover

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,421
Barr's already said he won't release
Information that's "disparaging" but not actionable - and since the DoJ is of the opinion that the President can't be indicted anyways, even if he did obstruct justice they'll never announce it.

Barr's got him covered basically

Yep, "disparaging" is also a word tinted with an implicit bias towards the president. But indictable isn't the same thing as impeachable. At least, it shouldn't be.

If only the law matters in whether a president should be impeached, but the president also wields massive power in enforcing laws and punishment, a president could then never be impeached i.e. what we're witnessing now.
 
Last edited:

Teiresias

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,227
Just as many of those "boil the ocean" projects have failed. Maybe more. Google+ ring a bell? Orkut? Hell, they're flunking out of Louisville in a pretty spectacular way with Fiber as we speak and their Kansas City infrastructure isn't going that great either. Google isn't some unstoppable force that can solve any problem they decide to solve and that has been proven out in both high and low-profile ventures over the years.

You're not just talking about "scaling up a proper moderating staff". A million moderators is 10x their current FTE workforce but it's more complicated still. Who ensures that the moderators aren't biased? How many people are reviewing the activities of the moderating staff? What kind of SLA, if any, will they offer for the curation of a video? How will live content be managed? And as RDreamer astutely pointed out, how do they navigate the complicated reality that such a system would effectively mean that every piece of content on their platform was directly endorsed by an employee of Google?

I'm not a conservative. I don't believe that complicated problems can be approached with the "Just do $x" throwaway arguments.

Honestly, I don't even delve this deep into it. It's not our job to come up with a workable solution that can be implemented by Youtube or Facebook. I'm not interested in proposing solutions, I'm only interested in leveling the need for a solution on the corporations. Perhaps a solution doesn't exist. Oh well, then they shouldn't either. So sad.

Silicon Valley is full of people that try to say they alone are the ones smart enough to save the world they are currently driving into the ground. Let them put that brain power to work and propose a solution to the mess they've made with no regard to societal harm.
 
Oct 27, 2017
5,887


stop_dont_come_back_willy_wonka.gif
 

Royalan

I can say DEI; you can't.
Moderator
Oct 24, 2017
11,968
So, according to a dummy on my Facebook wall, there's a conspiracy theory going around on the far left that Jussie Smollett staged his assault...as a joint scheme with Kamala Harris to gain traction for her anti-lynching bill to add to her profile for 2020.

I just, didn't think Black History Month 2019 could get any worse.
 
Oct 25, 2017
10,326
Google is a company who built a system to scan every page of every book. They also created a system to take high resolution photos of every inch of every road in the world. They are now sending out people with backpacks to walk every inch of every sidewalk in the country. They are a company that has absolutely tackled "boil the ocean" problems before. Scaling up a proper moderating staff would not make the top ten of difficult projects for them. They choose not to because it won't help them generate revenue.

It's not just a revenue issue, they want to be a publisher and distributor without the liability of being both. They won't take actions that can argue liability for the content on their platforms.
 

Sandstar

Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,745
So, according to a dummy on my Facebook wall, there's a conspiracy theory going around on the far left that Jussie Smollett staged his assault...as a joint scheme with Kamala Harris to gain traction for her anti-lynching bill to add to her profile for 2020.

I just, didn't think Black History Month 2019 could get any worse.

I'm sure he's enjoying ruining his career, and potentially facing criminal charges, and taking the fall for Kamala, while never, ever revealing her part in this nefarious scheme for the rest of his life.
 

Stinkles

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
20,459
Will the report discuss obstruction of justice or would that be seperate?

Any crimes may simply be mentioned in the report and point to evidence of those for further consideration by Barr and then the congress and apparently lots of potential fed/ state sharing is also matrixed in. Mueller will not be prosecuting anything - just laying it all out
 
Oct 25, 2017
13,136
So, according to a dummy on my Facebook wall, there's a conspiracy theory going around on the far left that Jussie Smollett staged his assault...as a joint scheme with Kamala Harris to gain traction for her anti-lynching bill to add to her profile for 2020.

I just, didn't think Black History Month 2019 could get any worse.
This is a popular hotep theory. It's been fueled by Tariq Nasheed complimented with circles on images! A unanimous Senate bill with Republican cosponsor needed a D List actor to get passed. please.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,877
This is a popular hotep theory. It's been fueled by Tariq Nasheed complimented with circles on images! A unanimous Senate bill with Republican cosponsor needed a D List actor to get passed. please.

So, remember when you asked me who I thought that Kamala Harris would have issues with re: the vote, and I mentioned young black men as one of the demos that she'd struggle with? Here is why.

Tariq Nasheed points out double-standards between treatment of white and black people that is true and then has the credibility among his audience that he can then mix in this sort of thing and it gets taken seriously. He's a firebrand and gives voice to legit grievances that black men specifically have with this country. He's also a good troll (like when he was trolling white people at Mayweather/McGregor for not being patriotic and for disrespecting America since they were rooting for McGregor). He's very effective. And his audience is young black men, so...

(And I don't think that it's just him who is going to do this sort of thing to Kamala re: young black men, but he is the best at doing this sort of thing and carries popularity and credibility. He's the best example of this sort of thing.)
 

Kaitos

Tens across the board!
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
14,708
So, according to a dummy on my Facebook wall, there's a conspiracy theory going around on the far left that Jussie Smollett staged his assault...as a joint scheme with Kamala Harris to gain traction for her anti-lynching bill to add to her profile for 2020.

I just, didn't think Black History Month 2019 could get any worse.
Honestly the face I just made...............
 

plagiarize

It's not a loop. It's a spiral.
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
27,569
Cape Cod, MA
One of the worst things about the Mueller report --if it determines that Trump didn't conspire with Russia to swing the election -- is that people are going to have to accept that tens of millions of American voters chose to elect Trump.
The Mueller report isn't going to contradict the already existing finding of the IC that Russia were responsible for things like the DNC hack, and the hack of people within Clinton's campaign, and the targeted disinformation campaign on social media.

Whether Trump is complicit in conspiring with Russia to assist in the illegal interference in the election process, doesn't mean his campaign wasn't complicit.

And it doesn't magically rewrite the past so that Trump didn't directly benefit from that illegal interference.
 

PantherLotus

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,900
You guys all get that the scope of the Mueller report and how to navigate the law, the tectonic forces preventing it from being realized, the politics, and everything each of the above is equivalent to putting humans on the moon? How does one investigation, independent but subject to the DOJ, survive? How do they get what is supposed to be a private report in front of the American people when it will likely be supressed by a complicit Attorney General? How do they fight an entire political party representing 33%-51% of the American public at a given time?
 

plagiarize

It's not a loop. It's a spiral.
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
27,569
Cape Cod, MA
You guys all get that the scope of the Mueller report and how to navigate the law, the tectonic forces preventing it from being realized, the politics, and everything each of the above is equivalent to putting humans on the moon? How does one investigation, independent but subject to the DOJ, survive? How do they get what is supposed to be a private report in front of the American people when it will likely be supressed by a complicit Attorney General? How do they fight an entire political party representing 33%-51% of the American public at a given time?
I'd love to know how anyone thinks the Trump admin can keep secrets. Mueller can. But the Trump admin? Yeah.... I'm thinking it's a safe bet that it leaks.
 

studyguy

Member
Oct 26, 2017
11,282


Kraft is a fucking billionaire, owner to one of the biggest names in the NFL... how is someone a bigger catch than this?
 

AndyD

Mambo Number PS5
Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,602
Nashville
I wonder if the girls had their mouths taped and were smuggled over the border? Maybe this is where Trump gets his sick fantasies from?
I think it's pretty clear that was the Sicario movie. All his quotes were in a short period of time and all were misrepresentations from that movie. The tape, the fast armored cars...
 

cameron

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
23,832
Second building in two days:


The Washington Post @washingtonpost

For the second time in two days, a building called "Trump Place" decides to take down the president's name https://wapo.st/2SUmiaP

1:09 PM - Feb 22, 2019


WaPo: For the second time in two days, a building called 'Trump Place' decides to take down the president's name

On Election Day 2016, six residential buildings called "Trump Place" stood in a row on Manhattan's Upper West Side — a legacy of Donald Trump's efforts to develop that site, and a sign of the Trump name's enduring value in New York.
Soon, Trump's name will be gone from all of them.
On Friday, the last building holding on to the name "Trump Place" announced that it would take down the president's name, according to an email obtained by The Washington Post.
That email, sent out by the condo board at 220 Riverside Boulevard, said that it had held a vote of building owners, and that owners representing 83 percent of the building had cast votes.
"Of the 83 percent [that] voted, 74.7 percent voted to remove the signage, and 25.3 percent voted not to remove the signage," the email said.
"Over the next several weeks, we will select a company to carry out the required work" of removing the signs, the board said.
----------------
One day earlier, the condo board at the second-to-last Trump Place building — at 120 Riverside — had announced its own decision to remove the president's name from the facade.
These decisions signal how Trump's politics has become a weight on his brand in some of the foreign countries and liberal U.S. cities, particularly Manhattan, the city that gave him his start. At both of these buildings, residents were willing to spend money to remove any trace of Trump's name from their facades.
----------------
The first to remove the Trump Place signs, just a week after the 2016 election, were three apartment buildings.
Then, in 2017, a condo building at 200 Riverside also considered the idea. Before they made a decision, they got a letter from the Trump Organization, which said the building was required to keep up the sign, by a licensing agreement signed in 2000.
If it was removed, Trump lawyer Alan Garten said, the company "will have no choice but to commence appropriate legal proceedings."
The building at 200 Riverside sued the Trump Organization instead, and a judge ruled it could remove the sign if it wanted. Last October, it did.
That left just two "Trump Place" buildings — the ones that voted to remove the sign this week.
Elsewhere, President Trump's name has also come down from three hotels, in Toronto, Panama and Manhattan's SoHo neighborhood.
 

Stinkles

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
20,459
Second building in two days:


The Washington Post @washingtonpost

For the second time in two days, a building called "Trump Place" decides to take down the president's name https://wapo.st/2SUmiaP

1:09 PM - Feb 22, 2019


WaPo: For the second time in two days, a building called 'Trump Place' decides to take down the president's name

On Election Day 2016, six residential buildings called "Trump Place" stood in a row on Manhattan's Upper West Side — a legacy of Donald Trump's efforts to develop that site, and a sign of the Trump name's enduring value in New York.
Soon, Trump's name will be gone from all of them.
On Friday, the last building holding on to the name "Trump Place" announced that it would take down the president's name, according to an email obtained by The Washington Post.
That email, sent out by the condo board at 220 Riverside Boulevard, said that it had held a vote of building owners, and that owners representing 83 percent of the building had cast votes.
"Of the 83 percent [that] voted, 74.7 percent voted to remove the signage, and 25.3 percent voted not to remove the signage," the email said.
"Over the next several weeks, we will select a company to carry out the required work" of removing the signs, the board said.
----------------
One day earlier, the condo board at the second-to-last Trump Place building — at 120 Riverside — had announced its own decision to remove the president's name from the facade.
These decisions signal how Trump's politics has become a weight on his brand in some of the foreign countries and liberal U.S. cities, particularly Manhattan, the city that gave him his start. At both of these buildings, residents were willing to spend money to remove any trace of Trump's name from their facades.
----------------
The first to remove the Trump Place signs, just a week after the 2016 election, were three apartment buildings.
Then, in 2017, a condo building at 200 Riverside also considered the idea. Before they made a decision, they got a letter from the Trump Organization, which said the building was required to keep up the sign, by a licensing agreement signed in 2000.
If it was removed, Trump lawyer Alan Garten said, the company "will have no choice but to commence appropriate legal proceedings."
The building at 200 Riverside sued the Trump Organization instead, and a judge ruled it could remove the sign if it wanted. Last October, it did.
That left just two "Trump Place" buildings — the ones that voted to remove the sign this week.
Elsewhere, President Trump's name has also come down from three hotels, in Toronto, Panama and Manhattan's SoHo neighborhood.


Womp
 
Oct 27, 2017
5,887
So, according to a dummy on my Facebook wall, there's a conspiracy theory going around on the far left that Jussie Smollett staged his assault...as a joint scheme with Kamala Harris to gain traction for her anti-lynching bill to add to her profile for 2020.

I just, didn't think Black History Month 2019 could get any worse.
A guy I work with who is almost incomprehensibly tuned out of everything that has ever happened in the world for his entire life is completely obsessed with the Smollett story
 

Blader

Member
Oct 27, 2017
26,623
Who cares if Trump's name is taken off the buildings as long he still makes money from them? I'd rather people know a Trump property and avoid it, than end up paying into a building that is unbeknownst to them filling Trump's pockets.



Kraft is a fucking billionaire, owner to one of the biggest names in the NFL... how is someone a bigger catch than this?

Well it's not that far from Mar-a-Lago, so...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.