Just imagine what they have planned that they aren’t telling us.

My question: Would we (the US) be able to ween ourselves of this platform and hurt them where it hurts the most, in their pockets. I don't really think we can. Even I'm guilty of going into FB.

(07-01-2019 07:47 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  My question: Would we (the US) be able to ween ourselves of this platform and hurt them where it hurts the most, in their pockets. I don't really think we can. Even I'm guilty of going into FB.

It's easy, just deactivate your account and don't look back. I deactivated mine about two months ago and almost logged in last night out of boredom but resisted that particular siren call. I do miss the family and friends pics but my life has continued pretty much unaffected.

Does that mean I am now beyond the reach of the effects of FB? Probably not, but I feel better knowing I am no longer voluntarily participating.

(07-01-2019 05:23 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Just imagine what they have planned that they aren’t telling us.

Are you using dissenter?

(07-01-2019 07:47 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  My question: Would we (the US) be able to ween ourselves of this platform and hurt them where it hurts the most, in their pockets. I don't really think we can. Even I'm guilty of going into FB.

It’s not just one platform. Google and facebook own and/or provide service to the entirety of the mainstream internet. There’s no simple weening off them. The competition (that they allow to exist) relies on google more than we do. It’s a vertical monopoly.

Then there’s mobile, where’s it’s all google and apple. Where you aren’t allowed to publish an app unless they say so.

Lawmakers foresaw this, that’s why they wrote the laws the way they did. Google simply no longer seems to care, and they are doing whatever they want.

Google’s power, coupled with the democrats’ pleasure in seeing it be used against their political opponents, coupled with GOP ignorance/apathy, and there’s no wonder why nothing is being done. It’s going to take Trump losing in 2020 for them to get it, and at that point, it will be too late.

(07-02-2019 08:59 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 05:23 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Just imagine what they have planned that they aren’t telling us.

Are you using dissenter?

I was when I was using chrome, but I recently switched to brave and haven’t installed the extension yet or even looked to see if it’s available. I’ll check.

Edit: I see dissenter has their own browser now. Interesting. I really like brave, so maybe I'll just stick with it + the dissenter extension.

(07-03-2019 12:48 AM)Kronke Wrote:  

(07-02-2019 08:59 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 05:23 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Just imagine what they have planned that they aren’t telling us.

Are you using dissenter?

I was when I was using chrome, but I recently switched to brave and haven’t installed the extension yet or even looked to see if it’s available. I’ll check.

Edit: I see dissenter has their own browser now. Interesting. I really like brave, so maybe I'll just stick with it + the dissenter extension.

Yeah I've been using the dissenter browser also. I have brave but haven't used it that much. Dissenter appears to be yahoo or MSN in reverse in terms of what they feed. I'm ok with most of it but I do like a little balance. I like the feeling of relative anonymity even if it may only be an illusion.

I do find it a bit odd Tom, that you've repeatedly claimed that people insist that you provide links to support your claims...
and that somehow justifies you insisting that they provide links...

and yet here is a thread where links 'from the right' are clearly provided... and you call them lies without offering proof of that claim... ...

and not one person has insisted that you provide a link as you claim the standard you are always held to and demanding others do so SIMULTANEOUSLY in another thread.

You've been laid bare.

(07-03-2019 02:01 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I do find it a bit odd Tom, that you've repeatedly claimed that people insist that you provide links to support your claims...
and that somehow justifies you insisting that they provide links...

and yet here is a thread where links 'from the right' are clearly provided... and you call them lies without offering proof of that claim... ...

and not one person has insisted that you provide a link as you claim the standard you are always held to and demanding others do so SIMULTANEOUSLY in another thread.

You've been laid bare.

Oh STFU. I was making a point. Good Lord. I guess I'll start putting my clear sarcasm inside some of type of sarcasm tag just for you.

(07-01-2019 01:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So, what's a trump situation? Why not just say trump victory...or trump election? Because she's referring to the Russian use of American social media, of which Google is a huge part, to influence our election.

This is a very good question. They probably wouldn't say Trump victory because they don't believe he was victorious. They don't even really believe it's a valid election. I think calling his 'election' a 'situation' is precisely what they meant.... but it's true that we don't know what they meant. I couldn't disagree more on her meaning Russian use of American social media because that very obviously more accurately would be a Russian situation, not a Trump situation. The implication is clearly that Trump was illegitimately elected. Had they instead helped Hillary, it seems unclear that they would call that a Hillary situation. Since Obama was one of the first to really do this (target and manipulate social media) why don't we call it an Obama situation?

The entire premise of her clarification is that this all would be okay if they weren't foreign... and Google isn't foreign... so it's perfectly okay for them to manipulate social media? That's what Obama did. That's what Bernie did. That's what Trump did. Hillary did as well. That's what the Russians did.....

So again, why would you call that a Trump situation if all you meant was the Russians?

(07-03-2019 02:55 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 02:01 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  You've been laid bare.

Oh STFU. I was making a point. Good Lord. I guess I'll start putting my clear sarcasm inside some of type of sarcasm tag just for you.

I was just making a point as well... and I did it in one post, not 30. When you repeat the same thing over and over, it's no longer sarcasm.

Interestingly, my point proves your point to be false... so sarcasm really doesn't remotely describe what you were doing.

(07-01-2019 03:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:40 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:17 PM)appst89 Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 12:57 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Imagine believing a CYA blog written by the lawyers at google and posted in her name, debunks what she was caught saying on tape.

So, what's a trump situation? Why not just say trump victory...or trump election? Because she's referring to the Russian use of American social media, of which Google is a huge part, to influence our election.

But yeah...I'll believe the non criminal over a criminal with a track record of lies, edited videos and failed scams.

You'll believe whatever promotes your Orange Man Bad narrative.

^^It really is that simple.

For simpletons like you two, yes, it is that simple. Sad.

So I see you've resorted to name calling. You're better than that.

(07-05-2019 12:32 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 03:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:40 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:17 PM)appst89 Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So, what's a trump situation? Why not just say trump victory...or trump election? Because she's referring to the Russian use of American social media, of which Google is a huge part, to influence our election.

But yeah...I'll believe the non criminal over a criminal with a track record of lies, edited videos and failed scams.

You'll believe whatever promotes your Orange Man Bad narrative.

^^It really is that simple.

For simpletons like you two, yes, it is that simple. Sad.

So I see you've resorted to name calling. You're better than that.

You are more generous than I am.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

(07-05-2019 02:02 PM)appst89 Wrote:  

(07-05-2019 12:32 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 03:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:40 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:17 PM)appst89 Wrote:  You'll believe whatever promotes your Orange Man Bad narrative.

^^It really is that simple.

For simpletons like you two, yes, it is that simple. Sad.

So I see you've resorted to name calling. You're better than that.

You are more generous than I am.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

I appreciate the discussion brought to the table by everyone. I guess some folks emotions get the best of them sometimes. I know I find myself deleted stuff I just typed before posting because after rereading I realize its more flame than substance.

(07-05-2019 12:32 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 03:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:40 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:17 PM)appst89 Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So, what's a trump situation? Why not just say trump victory...or trump election? Because she's referring to the Russian use of American social media, of which Google is a huge part, to influence our election.

But yeah...I'll believe the non criminal over a criminal with a track record of lies, edited videos and failed scams.

You'll believe whatever promotes your Orange Man Bad narrative.

^^It really is that simple.

For simpletons like you two, yes, it is that simple. Sad.

So I see you've resorted to name calling. You're better than that.

As are you. You can do better than this or your TDS you used to continually post as a reply to every criticism of trump.

(07-08-2019 01:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-05-2019 12:32 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 03:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:40 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:17 PM)appst89 Wrote:  You'll believe whatever promotes your Orange Man Bad narrative.

^^It really is that simple.

For simpletons like you two, yes, it is that simple. Sad.

So I see you've resorted to name calling. You're better than that.

As are you. You can do better than this or your TDS you used to continually post as a reply to every criticism of trump.

Well, given the left's antics during the last two years I was correct, it is mental. No other way to explain it. Even the left admits to it.

Anyway, always best to skip the name calling.

(07-08-2019 01:58 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 01:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-05-2019 12:32 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 03:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 01:40 PM)VA49er Wrote:  ^^It really is that simple.

For simpletons like you two, yes, it is that simple. Sad.

So I see you've resorted to name calling. You're better than that.

As are you. You can do better than this or your TDS you used to continually post as a reply to every criticism of trump.

Well, given the left's antics during the last two years I was correct, it is mental. No other way to explain it. Even the left admits to it.

Anyway, always best to skip the name calling.

Except I didn't call anyone a name. If you provide a simple answer, I can call you a simpleton. So, it's an observation, not a slight.

(07-03-2019 12:48 AM)Kronke Wrote:  

(07-02-2019 08:59 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 05:23 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Just imagine what they have planned that they aren’t telling us.

Are you using dissenter?

I was when I was using chrome, but I recently switched to brave and haven’t installed the extension yet or even looked to see if it’s available. I’ll check.

Edit: I see dissenter has their own browser now. Interesting. I really like brave, so maybe I'll just stick with it + the dissenter extension.

I'm considering jumping over to Brave.. is it any good?

As for why do they call it a "Trump situation"? I'll give you what I think it is.

===========
Google wants to control the narrative, you know they want to do anything they can do to control the narrative.

But what happens when someone comes along (in this case, Trump), who is so overwhelmingly popular (or you can argue polarizing) that you cannot shut him down with bringing attention to your process without proving that you try to shut out some opinions.

With Barrack Obama, it didn't matter, because he was on the same thought process as the Google higher-ups and sent out "their" message. Trump isn't "their' message, but they can't shut him down because it's too obvious.

Project Veritas? They _could_ shut down and only a small percentage would notice.
Crowder? Again, it's still a _small_ percentage of people.

Shut those examples down and someone would defend le to say "it's not partisan, it's shutting down hatred".

Any other 'smaller' source, and they can clamp down on. Trump not so much and it bugs the hell out of them, particularly if someone as populist comes along later as well.

Name any other personality on the right side of the spectrum, now that has the influence, that Google / Twitter CANNOT shut down without everyone taking notice and asking "If someone in the position of Trump was quieted down, the President of the US, who can't be shut down?"

It's been going on for a LONG time, but they know that there are certain personalities (on the right) they can't shut down without raising the OBVIOUS red flag about what Google/Amazon/Twitch is doing (there's been a lot of red flags, but most of them are getting ignored).

(07-08-2019 02:03 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 01:58 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 01:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-05-2019 12:32 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-01-2019 03:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  For simpletons like you two, yes, it is that simple. Sad.

So I see you've resorted to name calling. You're better than that.

As are you. You can do better than this or your TDS you used to continually post as a reply to every criticism of trump.

Well, given the left's antics during the last two years I was correct, it is mental. No other way to explain it. Even the left admits to it.

Anyway, always best to skip the name calling.

Except I didn't call anyone a name. If you provide a simple answer, I can call you a simpleton. So, it's an observation, not a slight.

Just curious as to how you would feel being called a simpleton as it is and always has been considered an insult.

Also consider that it isn't unusual for the simplest solution, or in this case answer, to be correct.

(07-08-2019 03:37 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 02:03 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 01:58 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 01:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-05-2019 12:32 PM)VA49er Wrote:  So I see you've resorted to name calling. You're better than that.

As are you. You can do better than this or your TDS you used to continually post as a reply to every criticism of trump.

Well, given the left's antics during the last two years I was correct, it is mental. No other way to explain it. Even the left admits to it.

Anyway, always best to skip the name calling.

Except I didn't call anyone a name. If you provide a simple answer, I can call you a simpleton. So, it's an observation, not a slight.

Just curious as to how you would feel being called a simpleton as it is and always has been considered an insult.

Also consider that it isn't unusual for the simplest solution, or in this case answer, to be correct.

I'd rather be called that for giving a dismissive or simple answer rather than being called something I'm not, like a Communist.

(07-09-2019 09:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 03:37 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 02:03 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 01:58 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 01:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  As are you. You can do better than this or your TDS you used to continually post as a reply to every criticism of trump.

Well, given the left's antics during the last two years I was correct, it is mental. No other way to explain it. Even the left admits to it.
Anyway, always best to skip the name calling.

Except I didn't call anyone a name. If you provide a simple answer, I can call you a simpleton. So, it's an observation, not a slight.

Just curious as to how you would feel being called a simpleton as it is and always has been considered an insult.
Also consider that it isn't unusual for the simplest solution, or in this case answer, to be correct.

I'd rather be called that for giving a dismissive or simple answer rather than being called something I'm not, like a Communist.

You’re not a communist. But you have expressed support for people who are.