Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 486 posts

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#231

Post by omginternets »

iamdave wrote: post #14

This is interesting. I was up drinking beer with a friend until 5am this morning talking about the very phenomenon of breaking news coming from social media and sites such as Reddit. He pointed to the Boston bombing and Dallas shooter situations as reasons why the press should "just ignore" social media; his entire argument boiled down to 'bad data exists along side good data, therefore throw it all out" I didn't nec…

I don't have a real conclusion to offer, but I'd like to suggest that his argument might be a tad more nuanced than that.

The claim may not just be that bad data is mixed in with the good. It might rather be that we can't verify sources and facts on social media effectively. In other words, I question the assumption that traditional journalistic methods are effective when examining social media.

To be clear: I haven't formed an opinion on this. Thanks for the thought-provoking question, in any case.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#232

Post by [deleted] »

elgenie wrote: post #122
TillE wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the most experienced presidential candidate of the last couple of decades George H. W. Bush was a two term vice president, director of the CIA, etc. I've been following this election pretty closely for more than a year, and I seriously couldn't tell you what Clinton's positive message is besides "I'm experienced". Nobody cares. Americans don't elect technocratic planks of wood. This is the worst, most inept preside…

HW won in 1988 and lost in 1992. 1996 was two decades ago.

[deleted]

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#233

Post by imron »

EpicEng wrote: post #208
imron wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is why the NSA collecting all data on everyone should have people worried. Sure, it's just pictures of your cat and 'my life is boring, they can spy on me all they want because they won't find anything interesting" And then 2 years later your post on an internet forums about your missing dog helps tie you the destruction of evidence.

I mean, yeah, but first and foremost you should probably strive to avoid committing felonies.

I agree 100% with that too!

The point is that even if you are posting innocuous things, it builds up a profile that can identify you in ways you do not expect. This example was for something serious.

Who knows what the next example will be like.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#234

Post by dgnnmdhn »

peteretep wrote: post #32

> Citation needed if you're > going to "correct the record." This is not Reddit, and it is not a place for accusing people of being paid shills. Please desist.

Occam's razor doesn't apply when the involved party has made malicious intent explicitly clear. Her own campaign has made it quite clear that they're doing this.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#235

Post by PostOnce »

cloakandswagger wrote: post #119
imron wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> huh? It's horrifying https://www.hillaryclinton.com/post/donald-trump-pepe-the-fr... Edit: In response to your edit, she's attacking a cartoon frog . In seriousness. Not only that, but she's trying to attribute characteristics to that frog that simply aren't any core part of why people post Pepe memes. All of that questions the sensibilities of her campaign. Basically her campaign is going all out trying to paint T…

I especially love the pop-up modal asking me "Is Trump unfit to be President?" on that site. There's only a single button (I Agree), and clicking the X in the corner to close the modal causes the button to be pushed at the same time. For someone as "experienced" as Clinton, her campaign is astoundingly incompetent.

Literally the first thing you see visiting her site is an attack that you are forced to join in on, rather than talk of what she's going to do for the country.

"Guy B is bad, elect me." is not as strong an argument as "I can and will do X to improve Y, guy B can't." And you still get to attack in B!

How can I in good conscience vote either party? I would be infinitely amused if everyone without talking about it voted for a third party out of spite and it was a total shock the day after. "Green party, bafflingly, wins election", or whatever.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#236

Post by douche »

bcg1 wrote: post #176
thatswrong0 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he's said anything about having a problem with legal immigrants.

Incorrect. He wants to end the H1B visa program (despite the fact that he uses for seasonal work at his club in Florida) and he does not want to accept political refugees attempting to come to the US legally.

Fixing a broken, oft-abused system is contemptible now?

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#237

Post by [deleted] »

MichaelGG wrote: post #196
bcg1 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'"Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are little short guys that wear yarmulkes every day." (Trump called the things written about him in the book "probably true.")' http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/8-of-the-sleaziest... Also Trump was the President of the Trump organization when the DOJ fined the company for illegal housing discrimination, doing things l…

That sounds more pro-Jewish than anti-black.

[deleted]

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#238

Post by generj »

mozumder wrote: post #223
generj wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, a private email account which was used extensively for official government business. With no work email account ever setup. It's a matter of law that any and all work related emails on a personal email address are to be handed over for future FOIA requests, etc. upon leaving office. If I used my personal email address for all communication with my companies clients for work, they'd demand all of those emails wh…

> If I used my personal email address for all communication with my companies clients for work, they'd demand all of those emails when I left the company. But they wouldn't be able to get them, no matter how hard they demanded. Personal email addresses exist. Companies have to deal with that fact.

Oh, yes they could.

The easiest route would simply be to refuse me referrals. If I had a golden parachute deal, it would be invalidated by such an action. Any vested stocks I had would be in jeopardy. They can try to blackball me. They can cut off insurance benefits unexpectedly.

And all that before lawyers get involved...

If you do work on a personal email, your employer may later demand access to those emails. So don't do it.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#239

Post by iamdave »

omginternets wrote: post #231
iamdave wrote: post #14

This is interesting. I was up drinking beer with a friend until 5am this morning talking about the very phenomenon of breaking news coming from social media and sites such as Reddit. He pointed to the Boston bombing and Dallas shooter situations as reasons why the press should "just ignore" social media; his entire argument boiled down to 'bad data exists along side good data, therefore throw it all out" I didn't nec…

I don't have a real conclusion to offer, but I'd like to suggest that his argument might be a tad more nuanced than that. The claim may not just be that bad data is mixed in with the good. It might rather be that we can't verify sources and facts on social media effectively. In other words, I question the assumption that traditional journalistic methods are effective when examining social media. To be clear: I haven'…

It might rather be that we can't verify sources and facts on social media effectively.

Believe me when I say we went down that rabbit hole as well. I even asked if perhaps there was something to the notion as to the unreliability of sources on social media and if that was the case, how do we create incentives for or otherwise insulate journalism beyond the baked-in expectation that journalists will perform with more earnest intent to disseminate to verify and seek out sources. We expect a journalist to dig for qualitative sources; we expect integrity; what do we do when that doesn't happen? What's next?

He directly said "We ignore it. We ignore the problem and it will stop being one". I couldn't find a way to agree with that, I tried providing a subsequent argument that if there were a problem with social media mucking a story-where was the inherent problem in pointing to a fixed point in time where it happened (using examples he offered to the debate) as a means of understanding what went wrong in the process, and working to do better. That didn't get far. Trust me, I was there.

At the end of the day, I had to rest the argument because he just didn't think social media had any bearing for journalists, and I had to try even harder to avoid saying things that were just plain rude after my position was continuously mischaracterized and parroted back as ideological soundbytes.

Still, I think it's a critical conversation the journalism world ought to be having, and I don't think "Well just tell journalists to ignore social media" will solve that.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#240

Post by douche »

dang wrote: post #156
Mao_Zedang wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be nice to see an explanation from our moderating overlords

You mean your moderating servants? At the time, there were multiple posts of the same story competing for attention, so a mod marked all but one as a dupe. But then that surviving one got heavily flagged. We reduced them at one point ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12534542 ) but the flags kept coming. I think what's going on here (and what I just told the other moderators) is that this is one of those times w…

This happens with every single story that touches on this subject. Over the course of the summer it's happened time after time - the flag brigade gets almost all of them.

After the flag-killed story today was reset, it still never showed up on the main page, despite hundreds of votes, although it did show up on /classic.

Post reply on HN