(08-21-2019 10:36 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  And note that hacking the DNC and Podesta is not "hacking our election" or "hacking our democracy."

Americans owe whomever hacked the DNC and Podesta a tremendous gratitude.

(08-21-2019 09:39 AM)solohawks Wrote:  This guy better hire a private bodyguard

This...and stay inside with a pistol aimed at the door.

(08-21-2019 10:36 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Note that "attempted to hack" is not synonymous with "hacked." And note that hacking the DNC and Podesta is not "hacking our election" or "hacking our democracy."

According to some, it's the same because we didn't see the GOP emails..

So however the information got out whether by flash drive, hacking into the emails by being technical, or Podesta clicking on a link for d*ck pills, the GOP doesn't have to release anything.. Are they crooked as well? I'm sure there's info in their emails they don't want out but it's not their fault they haven't been "hacked".

(08-21-2019 10:36 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-21-2019 08:28 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 05:06 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  2) The claim was that they HACKED our election, implying that votes were changed. That people who voted for one candidate, their votes were somehow changed. That did NOT happen.

Has anyone specifically claimed that votes were actually changed?
And they most certainly hacked us. Whether they did anything with votes, etc. is irrelevant.

Quote:“[However,] a small number of the networks were successfully exploited. They made it through the door.” For the states that Moscow was successfully able to infiltrate, though, the report found that there isn't any evidence that any votes or voter data were actually changed. In Illinois, which “experienced the first known breach by Russian actors of state election infrastructure during the 2016 election,” the Kremlin gained the ability to manipulate voter data, and DHS staff said that with “the level of access that they gained, they almost certainly could have done more.” “Why they didn't... is sort of an open-ended question,” DHS staff told the committee. “I think it fits under the larger umbrella of undermining confidence in the election by tipping their hand that they had this level of access or showing that they were capable of getting it.”

SENATE REPORT FINDS RUSSIANS ATTEMPTED TO HACK THE 2016 ELECTION IN ALL 50 STATES

And they attempted to hack 2012 and 2008 and as far back as hacking has existed. And we do the same to them. What it does mean is that they almost certainly hacked Hillary's non-secure server. It's how business is done in spy-land. No news there.

Note that "attempted to hack" is not synonymous with "hacked." And note that hacking the DNC and Podesta is not "hacking our election" or "hacking our democracy."

Isn't the term "hacking" in this context normally referring to illegally breaking into ones computer system?

Quote:Computer Hacking
Computer hacking, on one hand, describes the activities practiced by individuals, organizations, and nations, in order to gain unauthorized access to computer and technology dependent systems. These activities may involve the modification or alteration of system's software and hardware in order to perform activities neither purposed by the creator nor in line with the creator's original intentions.

https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is...story.html

(08-21-2019 12:26 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-21-2019 10:36 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-21-2019 08:28 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 05:06 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  2) The claim was that they HACKED our election, implying that votes were changed. That people who voted for one candidate, their votes were somehow changed. That did NOT happen.

Has anyone specifically claimed that votes were actually changed?
And they most certainly hacked us. Whether they did anything with votes, etc. is irrelevant.

Quote:“[However,] a small number of the networks were successfully exploited. They made it through the door.” For the states that Moscow was successfully able to infiltrate, though, the report found that there isn't any evidence that any votes or voter data were actually changed. In Illinois, which “experienced the first known breach by Russian actors of state election infrastructure during the 2016 election,” the Kremlin gained the ability to manipulate voter data, and DHS staff said that with “the level of access that they gained, they almost certainly could have done more.” “Why they didn't... is sort of an open-ended question,” DHS staff told the committee. “I think it fits under the larger umbrella of undermining confidence in the election by tipping their hand that they had this level of access or showing that they were capable of getting it.”

SENATE REPORT FINDS RUSSIANS ATTEMPTED TO HACK THE 2016 ELECTION IN ALL 50 STATES

And they attempted to hack 2012 and 2008 and as far back as hacking has existed. And we do the same to them. What it does mean is that they almost certainly hacked Hillary's non-secure server. It's how business is done in spy-land. No news there.
Note that "attempted to hack" is not synonymous with "hacked." And note that hacking the DNC and Podesta is not "hacking our election" or "hacking our democracy."

Isn't the term "hacking" in this context normally referring to illegally breaking into ones computer system?

That's what it means to me. And your point is?

You seem to be glossing over the word "attempted." Let me give you a hint--murder means somebody is dead, attempted murder means he/she is alive.

(08-21-2019 09:39 AM)solohawks Wrote:  This guy better hire a private bodyguard

They would pay him off. If Epstein couldn't be safe INSIDE a jail cell what makes you think this Epstein would be safe outside?

(08-21-2019 12:40 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(08-21-2019 09:39 AM)solohawks Wrote:  This guy better hire a private bodyguard

They would pay him off. If Epstein couldn't be safe INSIDE a jail cell what makes you think this Epstein would be safe outside?

Only an alien abduction could protect someone from the Clintons.

Geez.. Did AFT derail another thread with silliness?

(08-21-2019 08:28 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 05:06 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  2) The claim was that they HACKED our election, implying that votes were changed. That people who voted for one candidate, their votes were somehow changed. That did NOT happen.

Has anyone specifically claimed that votes were actually changed?

And they most certainly hacked us. Whether they did anything with votes, etc. is irrelevant.

I don't understand your point here, other than to be obtuse. Your article is not any different from what I said.

Did I say anyone claimed that votes were actually changed? NO! I said it was implied by 'hacking our election'. Something your own article does.

What they DID do is hack a number of state databases with voter information on it. They did not hack the ELECTION. They did not get into voting machines or databases with voting results on it or the like. SOME of the breaches were months in advance of the election. I believe the DNC was warned about this a year before the election.

There is a very clear difference between accessing voter rolls and accessing election data. 'Hacking the election' clearly implies being specifically tied to the event.

(08-21-2019 10:31 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'm going to take this a different direction.

Is Russia really "a hostile foreign power"? Should they be?


In 1992, Ross Perot said what I had been thinking for several years, "In the post-Cold-War era, economic power will be more important than military power." And Perot was a military guy, as am I. What I see is China expanding it's sphere of influence economically, without firing a shot. And we are enabling them by defending the one thing that is essential to them.

Addressing only these points. just 4 years before these events, Obama was telling Putin that he'd have much more flexibility after the election and Romney that 'the 1980's want their foreign policy back'. In addition, the 'multi-agency report' on Russian interference says these acts date back to the 1950's or 60's.

I'm clearly not disagreeing with you Owl... I'm just laughing at how the left is disagreeing with itself.

(08-20-2019 06:57 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 01:08 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 01:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 12:49 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  Help me out here. How does Google or other Big Tech manipulate a vote? Are they saying that search results might have influenced swing voters?

The same way Russia...oh wait...that was TOTALLY impossible, AMIRITE?

Right. Russia, a hostile foreign power, had absolutely no influence on the outcome of our election...

But Google gave Hillary 16 million more votes.

Who's said that? Name names.

bump

(08-21-2019 02:15 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 06:57 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 01:08 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 01:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 12:49 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  Help me out here. How does Google or other Big Tech manipulate a vote? Are they saying that search results might have influenced swing voters?

The same way Russia...oh wait...that was TOTALLY impossible, AMIRITE?

Right. Russia, a hostile foreign power, had absolutely no influence on the outcome of our election...

But Google gave Hillary 16 million more votes.

Who's said that? Name names.

bump

Plenty of folks claimed that Russia didn't have an influence on the outcome of the election. I don't believe Russia literally changed anyone's vote, but I'm positive their targeted disinformation campaign in the US certainly swayed voters in Trump's favor.

My original post was trying to tie the two topics together. Trump supporters got all bent out of shape when the left accused Russia of influencing the election to put Trump in the White House. They claimed "Russia didn't actually change any votes"....

Well, nor did Google.

(08-20-2019 05:06 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  This is an incredibly disingenuous statement of facts

1) Russia DID try and influence our election. There may well be studies claiming specific numbers... I haven't seen them but I wouldn't dispute them. THE RIGHT has been arguing all along that this has been going on for decades, and we do the same thing. NEVER has the right argued that they didn't.

2) The claim was that they HACKED our election, implying that votes were changed. That people who voted for one candidate, their votes were somehow changed. That did NOT happen.

3) Hillary did the same thing. Trump through Breitbart I suspect also did the same thing

How do they do it? The same way Democrats have been doing it ever since. They post a multitude of false or misleading articles as facts... and when people search for facts/proof, they are instead diverted to opinions. They do EXACTLY what you have done here... claiming that the right said 'no voters were influenced' when what they said was 'no votes were changed'.

Same with 'Trump said all immigrants are criminals'... and 'Trump called white nationalists 'fine people''...

1) I agree that a country trying to exert influence in another county's elections isn't a new thing. However, I believe it's more prevalent now due to the ubiquity of social media. The information age has allowed propaganda and misinformation to spread at light speed, and that's a reality we will have to live with going forward. It reminds me of that quote: "A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes". The quote predates the internet, but it's more true than ever.

That said, wouldn't the responsible thing to do is strengthen our election security at home while at the same time punishing countries who do meddle? I admit that the Trump administration has placed sanctions on Russia for doing just that, but I don't think they will force Russia to rethink their actions in future elections. Trump putting on a stern face and telling Putin to "cut it out" won't do the trick.

2) I agree that Russia literally didn't change anyone's vote. They did plenty of hacking though.

(08-21-2019 02:39 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  Plenty of folks claimed that Russia didn't have an influence on the outcome of the election. I don't believe Russia literally changed anyone's vote, but I'm positive their targeted disinformation campaign in the US certainly swayed voters in Trump's favor.
My original post was trying to tie the two topics together. Trump supporters got all bent out of shape when the left accused Russia of influencing the election to put Trump in the White House. They claimed "Russia didn't actually change any votes"....
Well, nor did Google.

Given the size and sophistication of the two efforts, however many votes Russia turned toward Trump, if any, it is almost a lead pipe cinch that Google turned far more toward Hillary.

(08-21-2019 11:26 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(08-21-2019 10:36 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  And note that hacking the DNC and Podesta is not "hacking our election" or "hacking our democracy."

Ameoricans owe whomever hacked the DNC and Podesta a tremendous gratitude.

I get what you're saying, excepting the terminology- No one "hacked" anything, least not that we've seen any real evidence of. Did dummie Podesta fall for the oldest and most juvenile trick out there?

Apparently so, basically akin to sending that Nigerian Prince 20 grand to stake your claim to the millions he's promising.

"Click here to make sure your computer is secure!" Pedo- "Yea, duh, okay".

That was the extent of most of the "hacking". Commonly called phishing.

(08-21-2019 02:55 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 05:06 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  This is an incredibly disingenuous statement of facts
1) Russia DID try and influence our election. There may well be studies claiming specific numbers... I haven't seen them but I wouldn't dispute them. THE RIGHT has been arguing all along that this has been going on for decades, and we do the same thing. NEVER has the right argued that they didn't.
2) The claim was that they HACKED our election, implying that votes were changed. That people who voted for one candidate, their votes were somehow changed. That did NOT happen.
3) Hillary did the same thing. Trump through Breitbart I suspect also did the same thing
How do they do it? The same way Democrats have been doing it ever since. They post a multitude of false or misleading articles as facts... and when people search for facts/proof, they are instead diverted to opinions. They do EXACTLY what you have done here... claiming that the right said 'no voters were influenced' when what they said was 'no votes were changed'.
Same with 'Trump said all immigrants are criminals'... and 'Trump called white nationalists 'fine people''...

1) I agree that a country trying to exert influence in another county's elections isn't a new thing. However, I believe it's more prevalent now due to the ubiquity of social media. The information age has allowed propaganda and misinformation to spread at light speed, and that's a reality we will have to live with going forward. It reminds me of that quote: "A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes". The quote predates the internet, but it's more true than ever.
That said, wouldn't the responsible thing to do is strengthen our election security at home while at the same time punishing countries who do meddle? I admit that the Trump administration has placed sanctions on Russia for doing just that, but I don't think they will force Russia to rethink their actions in future elections. Trump putting on a stern face and telling Putin to "cut it out" won't do the trick.
2) I agree that Russia literally didn't change anyone's vote. They did plenty of hacking though.

Strengthening our election security at home is a good idea, but there's no indication that our election security was breached last time. Hacking the DNC and Podesta, whoever did it, is not hacking our election security.

Did the DNC and Podesta need to strengthen their information security? Absolutely. Did Hillary in 2013-2018? Absolutely. I find is fittingly ironic that Hillary beat the information security rap for her home server, but got undone at least partially by poor information security in her campaign.

Again, hacking the DNC and Podesta is not the same as "hacking our election" or "hacking our democracy." Unless you assume that the DNC and Podesta are "our election" or "our democracy." Of course, I think that is exactly the mistake that many on the left make.

(08-21-2019 02:55 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  1) I agree that a country trying to exert influence in another county's elections isn't a new thing. However, I believe it's more prevalent now due to the ubiquity of social media. The information age has allowed propaganda and misinformation to spread at light speed, and that's a reality we will have to live with going forward. It reminds me of that quote: "A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes". The quote predates the internet, but it's more true than ever.

Sure... and it's also far easier for extremists to get their message out there and for politicians and pundits to influence people, and a lot of it IS misinformation. Obama had a very sophisticated plan for using social media, as has Bernie and Hillary and Trump.

Quote:That said, wouldn't the responsible thing to do is strengthen our election security at home while at the same time punishing countries who do meddle? I admit that the Trump administration has placed sanctions on Russia for doing just that, but I don't think they will force Russia to rethink their actions in future elections. Trump putting on a stern face and telling Putin to "cut it out" won't do the trick.

What election security? What election data was hacked? Election data doesn't use the internet. I find it ironic that after defending her internet security, she was hacked.

The DNC was warned to strengthen their security. Hillary was specifically warned about it with regard to the loss of those emails.

My point would be that while 'what Trump did' may not be enough, it's more than Obama did... and unless you're willing to go to war over it, it seems the burden is on us to protect our data, and not on them to, for some reason, 'not value our data'.

I have yet to hear anyone say we shouldn't continue to improve our internet security, but it's up to THE STATES to secure their voter rolls.

Quote:2) I agree that Russia literally didn't change anyone's vote. They did plenty of hacking though.

SUre... happens every day... it's big business.... but they didn't hack the election

lol... I didn't read owls post before responding lol

(08-21-2019 12:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-21-2019 12:26 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-21-2019 10:36 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-21-2019 08:28 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 05:06 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  2) The claim was that they HACKED our election, implying that votes were changed. That people who voted for one candidate, their votes were somehow changed. That did NOT happen.

Has anyone specifically claimed that votes were actually changed?
And they most certainly hacked us. Whether they did anything with votes, etc. is irrelevant.

Quote:“[However,] a small number of the networks were successfully exploited. They made it through the door.” For the states that Moscow was successfully able to infiltrate, though, the report found that there isn't any evidence that any votes or voter data were actually changed. In Illinois, which “experienced the first known breach by Russian actors of state election infrastructure during the 2016 election,” the Kremlin gained the ability to manipulate voter data, and DHS staff said that with “the level of access that they gained, they almost certainly could have done more.” “Why they didn't... is sort of an open-ended question,” DHS staff told the committee. “I think it fits under the larger umbrella of undermining confidence in the election by tipping their hand that they had this level of access or showing that they were capable of getting it.”

SENATE REPORT FINDS RUSSIANS ATTEMPTED TO HACK THE 2016 ELECTION IN ALL 50 STATES

And they attempted to hack 2012 and 2008 and as far back as hacking has existed. And we do the same to them. What it does mean is that they almost certainly hacked Hillary's non-secure server. It's how business is done in spy-land. No news there.
Note that "attempted to hack" is not synonymous with "hacked." And note that hacking the DNC and Podesta is not "hacking our election" or "hacking our democracy."

Isn't the term "hacking" in this context normally referring to illegally breaking into ones computer system?

That's what it means to me. And your point is?

You seem to be glossing over the word "attempted." Let me give you a hint--murder means somebody is dead, attempted murder means he/she is alive.

No, that's just in the headline. The story describes, and the evidence seems to bear out, that they did actually penetrate, or hack, the systems. What they didn't do reportedly is actually change any votes or voter information.

(08-21-2019 01:33 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(08-21-2019 08:28 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-20-2019 05:06 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  2) The claim was that they HACKED our election, implying that votes were changed. That people who voted for one candidate, their votes were somehow changed. That did NOT happen.

Has anyone specifically claimed that votes were actually changed?

And they most certainly hacked us. Whether they did anything with votes, etc. is irrelevant.

I don't understand your point here, other than to be obtuse. Your article is not any different from what I said.

Did I say anyone claimed that votes were actually changed? NO! I said it was implied by 'hacking our election'. Something your own article does.

What they DID do is hack a number of state databases with voter information on it. They did not hack the ELECTION. They did not get into voting machines or databases with voting results on it or the like. SOME of the breaches were months in advance of the election. I believe the DNC was warned about this a year before the election.

There is a very clear difference between accessing voter rolls and accessing election data. 'Hacking the election' clearly implies being specifically tied to the event.

Merely asking if you've seen anyone claim votes were changed or implied that they were changed. I don't think I have. That's all.