Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped?

[diana_eva]

True.

 

This year I came back to BBO after several years off. I couldn't log into the forums with my old username so I used this one. My name is not Kaitlyn Smith. However, I would have no problem posting any of the same posts in the Water Cooler under my real name. However, I would not have been able to post honestly about bridge experiences, at least about negative ones.

 

My spouse works for the ACBL. We have, in the last year, been told that speaking badly about any of ACBL's products or services is unacceptable. This makes it impossible to speak about my true feelings about tournament bridge under my real name without compromising my spouse's position.

 

I think I'd be allowed to type: ♥ The masterpoint :♥ is such ♥ a wonderful ♥ thing! ♥ Everybody ♥ should try ♥ to get ♥ as many ♥ as possible! ♥

 

If someone thinks I'm trolling, you'll have to trust me when I tell you that I posted much more obnoxiously under my old username which identified me. In fact, one of the people calling Kaitlyn S a troll likely called my real name a troll also! However, the ACBL didn't have as many issues with free speech then so I was able to post opinions with abandon.

 

So, as long as anybody can link my ideas to Kaitlyn Smith's ideas, I will not be likely to be posting on BridgeWinners.

 

You didn't have to explain yourself about your private life and stuff. It's OK to post under an alias on BBF, especially if you're not doing so exclusively about controversial topics in the WC. I appreciate your sincerity.

[Kaitlyn S]

You didn't have to explain yourself about your private life and stuff. It's OK to post under an alias on BBF, especially if you're not doing so exclusively about controversial topics in the WC. I appreciate your sincerity.

It seemed like Richard & cherd were pushing hard for the truth. I thought I would make it easy for them 'cause they're such cool awesome dudes :D

[mike777]

LOL why would we get different hits with that search? There's nothing political there and we might agree.

 

But in any event, my top five are:

 

http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-1.html

 

http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-2.html

 

http://nautil.us/issue/18/genius/super_intelligent-humans-are-coming

 

http://marvin.cs.uidaho.edu/About/quotes.html

 

http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/files/1450667434_Belsky_RO669_PNAS%202015_Quantification%20Of%20Biologica%20Aging%20inYoungAdults.pdf

 

 

fair enough but you claim no politics or close to zero?

 

 

again so what? you post links but say nothing as to your view point or truth.

 

 

you state you might agree so do you or not??

[mike777]

I think he's just posting a mike777 aphorism about AI (how google's search engine is optimized to show you search results that are likely to be relevant to you based on previous searches and visits), not suggesting that you search that phrase.

 

 

hmmm not sure your point

 

 

yes I suggest that phrase. In fact I advocate that phrase for years and years on these forums.

 

 

If you feel the phrase or advocate is nonsense....fair enough and why?

[diana_eva]

hmmm not sure your point

 

 

yes I suggest that phrase. In fact I advocate that phrase for years and years on these forums.

 

 

If you feel the phrase or advocate is nonsense....fair enough and why?

 

You missed the point completely. The experiment is this:

 

 

Google search shows different results to different people.

Give me a topic to search

I search that topic on google on my browser

You search that topic on google on your browser

We each post top 5 links, the results that appear first in the list

 

So she went ahead and posted the 5 links that google showed her.

 

Is this what you wanted to do with your phrase? Run it through a search engine? If so, she just gave you the experiment results and you should give yours to compare.

[mike777]

You missed the point completely. The experiment is this:

 

 

Google search shows different results to different people.

Give me a topic to search

I search that topic on google on my browser

You search that topic on google on your browser

We each post top 5 links, the results that appear first in the list

 

So she went ahead and posted the 5 links that google showed her.

 

Is this what you wanted to do with your phrase? Run it through a search engine? If so, she just gave you the experiment results and you should give yours to compare.

 

no that was not the experiment.

 

 

what I did was the experiment...we disagree :)

 

 

If we cannot agree what we test, Houston we have a problem.

 

 

please see my posts not yours. :)

 

--------------------

 

nOw if you wish to forget your experiment and test what I did fair enough.

 

 

as for your test as you post it, not testable...you need to rephrase.

[diana_eva]

no that was not the experiment.

 

 

what I did was the experiment...we disagree :)

 

 

If we cannot agree what we test, Houston we have a problem.

 

 

please see my posts not yours. :)

 

Please see the post you quoted and read it carefully. Kaitlyn's post, the one you quoted just before your AI phrase. I was simply trying to explain what she meant coz you seem confused.

[helene_t]

the percentage of Muslims in the USA that wanted Sharia law.

I know that "sharia law" means "throwing gay men off the roof of tall buildings, and counting a male witness as equal two too female witnessess, and execute people who leave islam" to most of us who are not muslims.

 

I am sure it means similarly sinister things to some muslims. But not to all. So the % may well depend on how the question is phrased, and in any case a more specific question would probably be more interesting.

[kenberg]

Did you know that Google shows you what they think you want to see? A poster on another site challenged me as you are now to look something up. He told me to look up, as he had, the percentage of Muslims in the USA that wanted Sharia law. I posted my top 10 hits. He thought I was full of crap since every one of my top 10 hits said that 51% or more of Muslims in the USA wanted Sharia law. Not surprisingly, he got different results. One of the other posters pointed out to him that I was not full of crap, but I was getting sites that Google thought I wanted to see. (I have since been to some more liberal sties so I don't think I would get those 10 hits anymore.)

 

They do the same with their autofill. He typed in Muslim and got suggestions like Muslim women. I typed in Muslim and all my suggestions had to do with jihad.

 

So I could indeed follow your suggestion to do a simple Google search on things and they would simply back up my preconceived notions. In fact, a few months ago I did Google "Clinton murders." Nine of the top ten hits all were alt-right wing sites which said that they happened and not to believe any clueless liberals that tell you otherwise. I'm dead serious! The tenth one was Snopes that said that many of the rumors were proven false but many of them have not been checked yet. (Of course some of the other sites claimed that Snopes was a liberal front. What am I supposed to think? I did my research, and that's what came up. Honestly. My bias was already cooked into the search engine.)

 

By the way, your bias is also reflected in your Google searches.

 

If you'd like, I'd try an experiment, Give me any hot-button search term and we'll each post our top five links I'll bet mine are alt-right and yours are alt-left.

I tried both "Clinton murders" with the quotation marks and Clinton murders without the quotation marks. The results were different. I have come to expect this. With the quotes, Google treats the two words as one phrase, without the quotes it treats it as two separate words. Or at least that's what I figure is the explanation. The latter is for people interested in both Clinton and in murders, the former for people specifically interested in Clinton murders.

 

Ok

For "Clinton murders"

http://www.huffingto...4b007c36e4f5ffa

http://www.wnd.com/2...triguing-cases/

http://www.whatreall...p#axzz4Ry7TCZ8m

http://www.thepoliti...ount-increases/

http://townhall.com/...ly-die-n2203000

 

Oops! I am going to stop here. Except for possibly the first one, this looks more than a little nutty. I am getting concerned about my computer. Some websites are more difficult than others to dismiss, I already am finding this to be the case with these sites. And I will probably be getting weird ads now when I log onto bbo to play. From Becky's online shopping I already get ads for women's dresses, swimsuits and so on. And sometimes for some very strange men's clothing. I can't explain that last part. Anyway, I find it best to stay off of weird sites. That's not because I can't stand reading their content, although that can also be an issue. It is because the internet is not an entirely safe place.

 

Anyway, I suppose Google does take into account perceived interests. But when I typed in U/U to see stuff about Unusual over Unusual I got stuff about the University of Utah and, for some reason, the Central Board of Film Certification. So I wouldn't push this idea too hard.

[diana_eva]

 

Anyway, I suppose Google does take into account perceived interests. But when I typed in U/U to see stuff about Unusual over Unusual I got stuff about the University of Utah and, for some reason, the Central Board of Film Certification. So I wouldn't push this idea too hard.

 

Google does take into account previous search history and browser cookies if any. If I search for bridge on my mom's computer I get mostly people jumping off bridges and famous bridge news. On my computer google knows already which bridge I'm referring to and it shows me some contract bridge results, if not 1st hit, at least among top 10, not on page 3 like on a diff computer.

[sfi]

I tried both "Clinton murders" with the quotation marks and Clinton murders without the quotation marks.

 

Oddly, Planet Money just published a podcast on the fake news concept yesterday, and used this "story" as the basis of the report. Interesting listening.

 

Link to podcast

[hrothgar]

If you'd like, I'd try an experiment, Give me any hot-button search term and we'll each post our top five links I'll bet mine are alt-right and yours are alt-left.

 

Kaitlyn, the expression "Alt Right" is a politically correct way to say "Neo - Nazi".

 

1. If your google feed is has identified that you want to hear a steady stream of alt right memes, then you're a nasty piece of work

2. You are setting up a false equivalence between the "alt right" and Mike's beliefs which you are describing as alt left

[diana_eva]

Kaitlyn, the expression "Alt Right" is a politically correct way to say "Neo - Nazi".

 

1. If your google feed is has identified that you want to hear a steady stream of alt right memes, then you're a nasty piece of work

2. You are setting up a false equivalence between the "alt right" and Mike's beliefs which you are describing as alt left

 

This is unfair. It's not that much of a big deal to click and read the extremist stuff posted by others in support of their ideas, how can one debate without seeing why they say what they say? Doesn't mean you're a nasty piece yourself it simply means you clicked some of those websites. My own results are mixed, and after going through some of Jon's lists they look downright scary.

 

Edit: what google thinks I want to know about "clinton murders"

 

 

The Clinton Chronicles - The Bill Clinton Murders - YouTube

STRANGE DEATHS CONNECTED TO THE CLINTON CRIME FAMILY So what did Bill Clinton do, when he ...

 

Clinton Body Count +5 in Just 6 Weeks - YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xb_N02-vh8M

Hillary will stop at nothing to claw her way into the White House; unfortunately, people are dropping dead left ...

 

Conspiracy Theorists Won't Stop Accusing The Clintons Of Murder ...

www.huffingtonpost.com/.../hillary-clinton-seth-rich_us_57...

15 aug. 2016 - WASHINGTON ― The woman on the verge of becoming the next president is part of a crime family that has left a trail of dozens of dead bodies

 

The Clinton Chronicles - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clinton_Chronicles

The Clinton Chronicles: An Investigation into the Alleged Criminal Activities of Bill Clinton is a 1994 film that accused Bill Clinton of a range of crimes. The video

 

Clinton Body Count-Clinton friends who've ended up dead-Truth! and ...

https://www.truthorfiction.com/clintonfriends/

The People President Clinton Didn't Have to Pardon…Because They're All Dead-Truth! & Fiction! Summary of eRumor:This a list of people associated with Bill

 

Clinton Body Bags : snopes.com

www.snopes.com › Fact Check

Edited December 5, 2016 by diana_eva

[PassedOut]

There are many republican prosecutors in the US. There are a number of republican former prosecutors in congress. There was a special prosecutor investigating the Clintons during the 1990s, and Bill Clinton was impeached. Quite a few FBI agents have made it clear that they loathe the Clintons.

 

With all this, how could anyone even begin to entertain the idea that the Clintons have avoided prosecution for actual murder? Monica Lewinsky, Benghazi, emails, but not murder? C'mon people, be serious.

[hrothgar]

 

Edit: what google thinks I want to know about "clinton murders"

 

 

Kaitlyn claimed that she would be presented by a steady stream of Alt Right content regardless of what she entered into Google.

 

You are specific googling a fringe theme

 

Please note: I don't associate "Clinton Murders" with the Alt Right

[kenberg]

Oddly, Planet Money just published a podcast on the fake news concept yesterday, and used this "story" as the basis of the report. Interesting listening.

 

Link to podcast

 

Thank you, I read the intro, I have not yet listened to the story.

 

Sorting out the truth is becoming tricky. For example

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/11/29/that-shopping-app-you-downloaded-might-be-fake/?utm_term=.3b8547270732

 

I stay off Facebook, I don't download apps onto my phone, I don't tweet. But I am retired and my life is pretty simple, so I have no real need for those things. I think I have a reasonably healthy skepticism. For example, when winston said he had heard that Bannon said only property owners should have the right to vote, I was skeptical. It's an unhappy fact of our current political scene that I cannot totally dismiss it, but I seriously doubt it is true.

 

Sometime back I said cynicism is bad, skepticism is good. This applies to politics, to buying a car, to statistics, and to quite a few other things.We need to vote, we need transportation, we need data. But! Look before you leap, still water runs deep the song says.

[andrei]

the Internet police is out, looking.

 

By the way Kaitlyn, I can't help but notice that you have a user ID set up on Bridgewinners but that you are blocked from posting because you haven't been able to provide any kind of verifiable ID.

 

Btw, what is Kaitlyn's prior account name?

 

 

LOL.

 

Guys, I forgot if I have a BW account, would you check and let everybody know?

[kenberg]

There are many republican prosecutors in the US. There are a number of republican former prosecutors in congress. There was a special prosecutor investigating the Clintons during the 1990s, and Bill Clinton was impeached. Quite a few FBI agents have made it clear that they loathe the Clintons.

 

With all this, how could anyone even begin to entertain the idea that the Clintons have avoided prosecution for actual murder? Monica Lewinsky, Benghazi, emails, but not murder? C'mon people, be serious.

 

Exactly.

 

Some things I can see now people get suckered in. This one?

 

i asked Kailyn (The bridge player who used to be known as Kaitlyn?) just who these people were that were feeding her this. Over the years, I have known some very odd people. We all have, I suppose.

[Kaitlyn S]

Kaitlyn, the expression "Alt Right" is a politically correct way to say "Neo - Nazi".

 

1. If your google feed is has identified that you want to hear a steady stream of alt right memes, then you're a nasty piece of work

2. You are setting up a false equivalence between the "alt right" and Mike's beliefs which you are describing as alt left

Really! On my other forum, when I quote such sites as Fox News and Breitbart, they call them "alt-right".

[PassedOut]

Over the years, I have known some very odd people. We all have, I suppose.

This reminds me of something that happened back in 2008 while I was still volunteering at our local elections. We had a couple of meetings with the democrats and republicans together to make sure we were all on the same page regarding poll workers from both parties at each precinct, and so on.

 

After the first of these, I noticed the democrat organizer, a nice young woman, looking uncomfortable in conversation with a very intense middle-aged man, so I walked over to join them. It seems that he was one of her volunteers for making phone calls and going door-to-door, but he had this video tape that he thought proved that 9/11 was an inside job and was pressuring her to take it. I could see that she didn't want to take it but didn't want offend him, so I piped up and offered to take it, view it, and discuss it with him after the next meeting. He was happy and she was happy.

 

When I got home I got Constance and put the tape on. As you'd expect, it was a sleaze job put out to take money from suckers. A narrator with a deep, somber voice went on and on, pushing absolute foolishness. One of the pieces of "evidence" offered was that the hole in the pentagon was the wrong shape for being hit by a plane, but the right shape for being hit by a missile. The government was covering up the missile attack.

 

After the next meeting, I handed the guy back the tape and he asked what I thought. I chuckled and asked him what he thought had happened to the plane, if it didn't hit the pentagon. He lowered his voice, looked around, and said, "You tell me!"

 

When I told him, "It hit the pentagon," he looked disgusted, raised his arms, and walked away.

 

It doesn't surprise me to find odd people now and then, but I'm starting to be surprised by the sheer number of them. It's sobering.

[Elianna]

Really! On my other forum, when I quote such sites as Fox News and Breitbart, they call them "alt-right".

 

Fox News is rightwing/conservative but not what I would consider "alt-right".

 

Breitbart is alt-right (even according to the creator).

[mikeh]

Leaving the previous issues to one side, is anyone else here as frightened about China as I am?

 

Trump's pre-arranged call from the President of Taiwan might have been a calculated poke in the eye at China, altho given that he has taken similar calls from some very unusual, and unsavoury, people in the last few weeks it seems to me likely to have been approved by Trump out of ignorance.

 

China, predictably, issued a Formal Note...a tool of diplomacy usually addressed by a diplomatic message. Typically that message would have admitted to no wrongdoing, but would have stressed that the US sees China as a valuable player on the international scene.

 

Instead, Trump unleashes a twitter rant!

 

I very much doubt that he has any insight into how others, let alone the type of person who has been able to prevail in the intensely competitive environment of Chinese politics, actually think. This is a man who has, many times, boasted that the most important approach to business is that if anyone does you wrong (in your mind), you go back and do worse to him..far worse...you destroy your opponent who did you wrong.

 

He refuses to attend intelligence briefings, apparently preferring to watch and tweet about SNL. He seems to have never had any interest in history or indeed any subject other than Donald Trump.

 

WWI came about by mischance, as a result of the interplay of certain individuals, a combination of circumstance, and an inability to communicate. I have read several histories of WWI, and of the era laading up to it, including (most recently) The War that ended Peace.

 

Trump's apparent inability to understand the problems that the Chinese leaders have, and the difficulty I expect the Chinese leadership to have understanding Trump, create a potential for a horrific misunderstanding over Taiwan.

 

While I would not expect this to happen, it seems to me that the more Trump pushes China, the more likely it is that China will start to sabre-rattle over Taiwan, and Trump's self-image won't let him back down, at least not when he sees himself as Commander in Chief of the strongest military in the world.

 

Remember, this is a man who knows war better than his generals, and spurns briefings and won't allow the State Department to help him communicate with foreign leaders.

 

This is a man who is so ignorant that in conversation with the English PM, he invited her to 'drop by' should she ever 'be in town'. He priised the Phillipino President for his death squad/mass murder approach to fighting drugs, he praised the dictator of Kazhstan in a recent phone call, he admires Hussein, respects the North Korean dictator as a strong man (for murdering his uncle on ascension to power), and slavers over Putin.

 

Now he is having a pissing contest with China, and should the Chinese fail to learn, quickly, how to manipulate him, we could end up very close to the brink.

[diana_eva]

Leaving the previous issues to one side, is anyone else here as frightened about China as I am?

 

Trump's pre-arranged call from the President of Taiwan might have been a calculated poke in the eye at China, altho given that he has taken similar calls from some very unusual, and unsavoury, people in the last few weeks it seems to me likely to have been approved by Trump out of ignorance.

 

China, predictably, issued a Formal Note...a tool of diplomacy usually addressed by a diplomatic message. Typically that message would have admitted to no wrongdoing, but would have stressed that the US sees China as a valuable player on the international scene.

 

Instead, Trump unleashes a twitter rant!

 

I very much doubt that he has any insight into how others, let alone the type of person who has been able to prevail in the intensely competitive environment of Chinese politics, actually think. This is a man who has, many times, boasted that the most important approach to business is that if anyone does you wrong (in your mind), you go back and do worse to him..far worse...you destroy your opponent who did you wrong.

 

He refuses to attend intelligence briefings, apparently preferring to watch and tweet about SNL. He seems to have never had any interest in history or indeed any subject other than Donald Trump.

 

WWI came about by mischance, as a result of the interplay of certain individuals, a combination of circumstance, and an inability to communicate. I have read several histories of WWI, and of the era laading up to it, including (most recently) The War that ended Peace.

 

Trump's apparent inability to understand the problems that the Chinese leaders have, and the difficulty I expect the Chinese leadership to have understanding Trump, create a potential for a horrific misunderstanding over Taiwan.

 

While I would not expect this to happen, it seems to me that the more Trump pushes China, the more likely it is that China will start to sabre-rattle over Taiwan, and Trump's self-image won't let him back down, at least not when he sees himself as Commander in Chief of the strongest military in the world.

 

Remember, this is a man who knows war better than his generals, and spurns briefings and won't allow the State Department to help him communicate with foreign leaders.

 

This is a man who is so ignorant that in conversation with the English PM, he invited her to 'drop by' should she ever 'be in town'. He priised the Phillipino President for his death squad/mass murder approach to fighting drugs, he praised the dictator of Kazhstan in a recent phone call, he admires Hussein, respects the North Korean dictator as a strong man (for murdering his uncle on ascension to power), and slavers over Putin.

 

Now he is having a pissing contest with China, and should the Chinese fail to learn, quickly, how to manipulate him, we could end up very close to the brink.

 

Yeah, I mentioned the Taiwan call too upthread. Frightening. I hope Trump will soon be forbidden access to Twitter.

[hrothgar]

Fox News is rightwing/conservative but not what I would consider "alt-right".

 

Breitbart is alt-right (even according to the creator).

 

This very much corresponds to my understanding

[diana_eva]

LOL.

 

Guys, I forgot if I have a BW account, would you check and let everybody know?

 

If you would constantly refuse to back up silly claims and keep posting new ones, completely ignoring the previous arguments after others spent time researching for you, yeah.