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

If Then: How the Simulmatics Corporation Invented the Future

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 68 posts

Re: If Then: How the Simulmatics Corporation Invented the Future

#41

Post by rtx »

dsaavy wrote: post #18
dominotw wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember media singing praises for Obama campaign about how effective they were with social media. Using that to contrast him to mccain who apprently didn't know how to use email.

This realization really pushed me away from mainstream media entirely. I explicitly remember and can still find articles about Obama's campaign being cutting edge by using "behavioral data" ( https://theweek.com/articles/451328/how-obama-won-internet ). Yet when the same actions were taken by conservative candidates it was ridiculed. As an independent I just couldn't trust these sources any longer. Yes the methods of…

I remember them too. I am OK with bias in writing, what disturbs me is the conviction with which its presented.

Re: If Then: How the Simulmatics Corporation Invented the Future

#42

Post by rtx »

dominotw wrote: post #37
slg wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does someone not being in jail somehow prove what they did is legal? Is someone always held individually liable for corporate misdeeds? There have been multiple fines related to this scandal from multiple governments. There have been Congressional hearings on it in the US. There have been numerous lawsuits. I did say "potentially" in that first comment because I can't say definitively that they acted illegally, but t…

the phrase "potentially illegal" makes no sense to me. I can claim that your comment is "potentially illegal" ..means nothing. > There have been Congressional hearings on it in the US. There have been numerous lawsuits. doesn't mean its illegal. Its just politics to discredit opposition's election victory. This is equivalent to "hillary's emails" which also had lawsuits and congressional hearings. Now no one cares ab…

>potentially illegal

Sounds like a dog whistle

Re: If Then: How the Simulmatics Corporation Invented the Future

#43

Post by slg »

dx87 wrote: post #31
slg wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't a double standard. The criticism of CA is not that data use is bad. It is that they did it in unethical and potentially illegal ways.

The Obama administration was praised for gathering the same information about users without their consent. Obama's campaign manager said that Facebook told them that if it was anyone else gathering that much information, they would have blocked it, but that Facebook was "on their side". There's absolutely a double standard.

Do you have a source for that? Your comment is the top Google result when I search for that "on their side" quote with various nouns about Obama and Facebook data collection.

EDIT: This was a few spots down in the search results and explains how Obama's data collection was different than CA.

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2018/03/21/no-obama-didnt-empl...

Re: If Then: How the Simulmatics Corporation Invented the Future

#44

Post by xienze »

specialist wrote: post #24
fsflover wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it did work: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22466733 Cambridge Analytica were the tip of the iceberg (graphcommons.com)

Thanks, I somehow missed this, will read shortly. Meanwhile, one aspect of the 2016 presidential coverage that drives me nuts is the omission that HRC's voter file was stolen and likely used by GOP, Trump, Russia. Meaning they knew exactly who to target. A campaign's voter file is it's Crown Jewels, it's secret sauce. It is the campaign. HRC knew they had a problem in MN, WI, PA. They just couldn't figure out what wa…

> HRC knew they had a problem in MN, WI, PA. They just couldn't figure out what was going on in time.

Yeah, the problem is that they took those states (and it’s MI not MN) for granted as safe blue states (which they had been for decades) and bought into the “Hillary is so far ahead in the polls she doesn’t even think about Trump anymore”[0] hype that they didn’t see the need to campaign there.

0: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/23/hillary-clinton-...

Re: If Then: How the Simulmatics Corporation Invented the Future

#45

Post by slg »

dominotw wrote: post #37
slg wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does someone not being in jail somehow prove what they did is legal? Is someone always held individually liable for corporate misdeeds? There have been multiple fines related to this scandal from multiple governments. There have been Congressional hearings on it in the US. There have been numerous lawsuits. I did say "potentially" in that first comment because I can't say definitively that they acted illegally, but t…

the phrase "potentially illegal" makes no sense to me. I can claim that your comment is "potentially illegal" ..means nothing. > There have been Congressional hearings on it in the US. There have been numerous lawsuits. doesn't mean its illegal. Its just politics to discredit opposition's election victory. This is equivalent to "hillary's emails" which also had lawsuits and congressional hearings. Now no one cares ab…

I like how you pulled out that one piece that is politically motivated without addressing the more apolitical fines or lawsuits. None of that has existed in relation to Obama as far as I'm aware. And it isn't like Republicans would let Obama slide on something if there was any chance to call him out for it.

Re: If Then: How the Simulmatics Corporation Invented the Future

#46

Post by macspoofing »

fsflover wrote: post #10
hardlianotion wrote: post #4

Apologies for not reading the article, but the key feature of Cambridge Analytica seems to have been that their stuff didn’t appear to work.

Yes, it did work: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22466733 Cambridge Analytica were the tip of the iceberg (graphcommons.com)

This doesn't show it worked. It shows that CA is connected to other similar companies either through a direct relationship or a tortured, barely tenuous connection (the slide on how some employees went to work for other companies in the same space is silly). Regardless, at no point does it attempt to even show that anything that CA did made one lick of a difference or that anything they did was even unprecedented in the space. For example, I don't believe for a second that Democratic campaigns haven't been using similar social media aggregation techniques in present and past elections. I even remember glowing articles written about how the Obama campaign was able to harness social media for purposes of political targeting and messaging.

So what are we talking about here?

And the entire thing is even more ridiculous in the larger context of how incompetent and disorganized the Trump 2016 campaign was.

Re: If Then: How the Simulmatics Corporation Invented the Future

#47

Post by jgalt212 »

Her podcast, The Last Archive is good.

I enjoyed the following episodes. I have not listed to the entire season, so the list below is not comprehensive.

https://www.thelastarchive.com/season-1/episode-5-project-x

https://www.thelastarchive.com/season-1/episode-7-the-comput...

https://www.thelastarchive.com/season-1/episode-10-tomorrowl...

Re: If Then: How the Simulmatics Corporation Invented the Future

#48

Post by richardwhiuk »

xxpor wrote: post #40
loceng wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is to not allow targeting for political ads. Costs will go up as you'll be competing for same eyes, and you'll have to spend more to reach everyone you want - plus has added benefit of allowing to see what messaging and narratives opposition is perpetuating.

How is this even remotely practical? You're only allowed to have political ads on nationally shown TV programs? Choosing to show an ad in Wisconsin and not California is "targeting".

I think only allowing the advert to be targeted at the level that the campaign is being run in is reasonable.

i.e. if you are campaigning for Governor of NY, you can target New York state, but you can't target Manhattan, or Long Island, or men over 50, or people who liked the NRA.

Re: If Then: How the Simulmatics Corporation Invented the Future

#49

Post by dillondoyle »

richardwhiuk wrote: post #48
xxpor wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this even remotely practical? You're only allowed to have political ads on nationally shown TV programs? Choosing to show an ad in Wisconsin and not California is "targeting".

I think only allowing the advert to be targeted at the level that the campaign is being run in is reasonable. i.e. if you are campaigning for Governor of NY, you can target New York state, but you can't target Manhattan, or Long Island, or men over 50, or people who liked the NRA.

that would kill list building and fundraising which are large digital expenditures. non-presidentials barely spend on digital persuasion but they will spend on fundraising if it raises

Re: If Then: How the Simulmatics Corporation Invented the Future

#50

Post by naiveprogrammer »

mc32 wrote: post #2

What’s fascinating is that prior to CA helping targeting in the previous election cycle, this capability was kind of embraced by politicians and industry as the next evolution in political campaigning... but few recognized an issue with that kind of data usage at the time...

Even if we accept the idea that CA was decisive to Trump's victory (I don't think it was, not even close), I think that you are absolutely on point here. I do think democrats were caught by surprise in 2016 and, instead of blaming themselves for their debacle, they sourced it elsewhere.
Post reply on HN