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

Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–436 of 436 posts

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#431

Post by artificial »

watwut wrote: post #376
mistermann wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PS: And the democrats weaponize starry eyed, well-intentioned young progressive millennial and gen-xers. Why do you think the Russia-did-everything story sells so well when they were a bit player at most? Sorry to burst your bubble, but everyone is in on it .

Democrats are moving to the center (e.g. right) while conservatives move further right. Meanwhile, young progressive millennial and gen-xers are trying to move democrats to the left and are in large power struggle. Not the same.

Conservatives haven’t really moved anywhere since 2010. Most of the political movement is on the Left with many Democrats being targeted for things like intersectional politics, gender. This season of America is not one to miss.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#432

Post by jrimbault »

mygo wrote: post #428
jrimbault wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Question from a [mostly] ignorant person (me, about these subjets): Why would russian intelligence use an oil company as a shell ? Does Russia sell oil to the US ? If so do they market directly to individuals in the US ?

you must not understand how deeply tied the oil companies in Russia are to their government. They are essentially the same entity.

That I understand, but it seems like oil companies don't market directly to _people_, that they would collect data on individuals they don't market to seems highly suspicious in and of itself.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#433

Post by khazhoux »

bpicolo wrote: post #149
khazhoux wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very different. CA offered an unethical and possibly illegal service for sale. Show me where Spez did that and I'll agree with you.

Blackmailing politicians is definitively on the illegal side.

I'd love to read up on spez blackmailing politicians, if you could please provide a link.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#434

Post by jjeaff »

rifung wrote: post #348
jjeaff wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a disingenuous transcript. "They're rapists" is much more likely to be, "their rapists". And it makes a big difference. (as in, "...they're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, their rapists.") In other words, they aren't sending their best, they are sending drug dealers, criminals, rapists, etc. That's completely different than that transcript's implication, which would be like saying, "they aren't sending…

> Unless you aren't a native speaker, I'm inclined to believe that you are being willfully disingenuous by spreading that the latter was what he meant to say. I'm a native speaker but "they're" makes sense to me here? > They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. The way I read it, at this sentence the first "they" refers to Mexico, while the second refers to the pe…

Well, I'm not 100% sure I understand what you are saying, but I believe you are saying that "they're rapists" makes sense if you assume that the verb is dropped. If that's the case then yes, it could be:

"They're [sending their] rapists."

Which is essentially the same meaning as ", their rapists".

But the ridiculous interpretation that many people have extrapolated from "they're rapists". Is, "They [are all] rapists. Which is absurd, even for Trump.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#435

Post by jjeaff »

mattnewton wrote: post #304
jjeaff wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a disingenuous transcript. "They're rapists" is much more likely to be, "their rapists". And it makes a big difference. (as in, "...they're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, their rapists.") In other words, they aren't sending their best, they are sending drug dealers, criminals, rapists, etc. That's completely different than that transcript's implication, which would be like saying, "they aren't sending…

Sorry, he wasn’t calling all Mexicans rapists, just the ones immigrating to the United States. Much better.

No, you missed the point. They are sending drugs, crime, rapists; does not imply that everyone is a rapist. All it implies is that at least more than 1 rapist has come across the border illegally. Which is probably true.

Re: Facebook Security Chief Said to Leave After Clashes Over Disinformation

#436

Post by jjeaff »

dictum wrote: post #390
jjeaff wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a disingenuous transcript. "They're rapists" is much more likely to be, "their rapists". And it makes a big difference. (as in, "...they're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, their rapists.") In other words, they aren't sending their best, they are sending drug dealers, criminals, rapists, etc. That's completely different than that transcript's implication, which would be like saying, "they aren't sending…

I agree on the bigly-level stuff (it's very similar to the facile jokes about George W. Bush being dumb) but this quote specifically is clear cut. Of course Trump is not calling Mexico/Mexicans rapists (though he does disparage Mexico shortly before it) but he was calling most Mexican-Americans criminals and rapists: since the ones Mexico sends into the US are "their rapists" and Mexico isn't "sending their best", it…

Wrong. It only means that at the very least, more than 1 rapist has come across the border illegally from Mexico. I'll wager that's probably true.
Post reply on HN