Page 44 of 44 FirstFirst ... 34424344
Results 431 to 434 of 434

Thread: Russian interference with the 2016 election

  1. #431
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    37,511
    Amen (Given)
    874
    Amen (Received)
    15098
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    It was paid for in crypto currency and likely we will never know the amount spent.

    Jim
    Actually they have a pretty darn good idea. In battleground states, according to Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr, they spent a whopping $1979 on ads targeting Wisconsin. In Michigan the total spent was $823. And in Pennsylvania, it was $300.

    And for just a bit more context, when Colin Stretch, Facebook's general counsel, testified before the Senate about Russian interference in the election he said that they constituted "about four-thousands of one percent (0.004%) of content in News Feed, or approximately 1 out of 23,000 pieces of content."

    Further, as I noted in another thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    And according to the indictment the Russians spent "thousands" of dollars every month for advertising on social media. According to Facebook they were spending around $100,000 on Facebook and Instagram combined -- a drop in the bucket in a presidential campaign. Further, again according to Facebook, most of the time they showed up in a person's news feed was after the election (with only 44% before the election and 56% after it) and 25% of them were seen by nobody at all.

    What's more, concerning these ads Facebook reported that, "the vast majority [of them] didn't specifically reference the U.S. presidential election, voting or a particular candidate."

    So
    • a minuscule amount was spent.
    • the ads equaled about 0.004% of the contents in News Feed
    • a decided majority of those who actually saw the ads only saw them after the election.
    • 25% of the ads were never seen by anyone before or after the election.
    • and Facebook said "the vast majority [of them] didn't specifically reference the U.S. presidential election, voting or a particular candidate."


    Yet you want us to believe they tipped an election. Seriously?

    I'm always still in trouble again

    You're by far the worst poster on TWeb -- starlight

  2. #432
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,043
    Amen (Given)
    103
    Amen (Received)
    939
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    Actually they have a pretty darn good idea. In battleground states, according to Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr, they spent a whopping $1979 on ads targeting Wisconsin. In Michigan the total spent was $823. And in Pennsylvania, it was $300.

    And for just a bit more context, when Colin Stretch, Facebook's general counsel, testified before the Senate about Russian interference in the election he said that they constituted "about four-thousands of one percent (0.004%) of content in News Feed, or approximately 1 out of 23,000 pieces of content."

    Further, as I noted in another thread


    So
    • a minuscule amount was spent.
    • the ads equaled about 0.004% of the contents in News Feed
    • a decided majority of those who actually saw the ads only saw them after the election.
    • 25% of the ads were never seen by anyone before or after the election.
    • and Facebook said "the vast majority [of them] didn't specifically reference the U.S. presidential election, voting or a particular candidate."


    Yet you want us to believe they tipped an election. Seriously?
    You want me to believe that given putins track record in Tilting European elections that any efforts made in the US would be half hearted or insignificant?

    You're talking about things you don't know anything about.
    When it comes to cyber warfare, $ can't necessarily be tied directly to effect.

    Jim
    Last edited by oxmixmudd; Today at 04:19 AM.
    Jorge's trueorigins paper: "...it is known that other volcanic features match what is usually associated with impact craters including ... shatter cones and crystal deformations"

    Planetary Science Institute: "Shatter cones … are found in only two places on Earth, 1) in nuclear test sites and 2) meteorite impact structures. They are formed as a result of the high pressure, high velocity shock wave ...

    maximum pressures from 45 to 200 times greater than found in volcanic events (2->20 Gpa)

  3. Amen Tassman amen'd this post.
  4. #433
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,043
    Amen (Given)
    103
    Amen (Received)
    939
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    You want me to believe that given putins track record in Tilting European elections that any efforts made in the US would be half hearted or insignificant?

    You're talking about things you don't know anything about.
    When it comes to cyber warfare, $ can't necessarily be tied directly to effect.

    Jim
    I would apologize for the "you don't know anything about" line. Rogue you are a good fellow, and I don't know what you necessarily know about those sorts of things, and it is not my intent to go hostile on you. So please accept this apology.

    Jim
    Jorge's trueorigins paper: "...it is known that other volcanic features match what is usually associated with impact craters including ... shatter cones and crystal deformations"

    Planetary Science Institute: "Shatter cones … are found in only two places on Earth, 1) in nuclear test sites and 2) meteorite impact structures. They are formed as a result of the high pressure, high velocity shock wave ...

    maximum pressures from 45 to 200 times greater than found in volcanic events (2->20 Gpa)

  5. #434
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    37,511
    Amen (Given)
    874
    Amen (Received)
    15098
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    You want me to believe that given putins track record in Tilting European elections that any efforts made in the US would be half hearted or insignificant?

    You're talking about things you don't know anything about.
    When it comes to cyber warfare, $ can't necessarily be tied directly to effect.

    Jim
    I don't want you to "believe" anything. I'm just providing the facts.

    The fact is that they can look at what sort of stuff was put out, when it was put out and when and if anyone clicked on it.

    Here's something more for you to chew on.

    On the day after Mueller released the 13 Russians back in February (the indictment that blew up in his face when they showed up and he started giving a list of excuses why he didn't want to prosecute them) Facebook ads vice-president Rob Goldman issued several tweets that was studiously ignored by most of the MSM since it contradicted the account they wanted to push.


    Did you get that?

    Most of the coverage of Russian meddling involves their attempt to effect the outcome of the 2016 US election. I have seen all of the Russian ads and I can say very definitively that swaying the election was *NOT* the main goal.



    The majority of the Russian ad spend happened AFTER the election. We shared that fact, but very few outlets have covered it because it doesn’t align with the main media narrative of Tump [sic] and the election.


    The main goal of the Russian propaganda and misinformation effort is to divide America by using our institutions, like free speech and social media, against us. It has stoked fear and hatred amongst Americans. It is working incredibly well. We are quite divided as a nation.

    He later got in trouble with his bosses for, as the New York Times (which covered that part), his "unusually candid statement that flouted Facebook’s well-sculpted messaging strategy, which has generally been to stay as far away from partisan debates as possible"[1] -- but not before a couple other Facebook executives, including Andrew Bosworth ("VP AR/VR at Facebook. VP of Ads before that. Co-Invented News Feed, Messenger, Groups, and more" and who has been called one of CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s most trusted lieutenants), praised Goldman for what he did, tweeting it was an "Important thread here."








    1. Facebook has a pretty well documented history of leaning left including targeting conservatives for scrutiny and censorship (Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News) -- even going so far as to censor the Declaration of Independence. And who can forget how Facebook representatives told Obama’s 2012 campaign that they had been allowed to use the platform in ways that would have otherwise been prohibited, because Facebook was "on our side" and then grumbled about Cambridge Analytica doing the same thing because it helped Trump.
    Last edited by rogue06; Today at 02:25 PM.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    You're by far the worst poster on TWeb -- starlight

  6. Amen Cow Poke amen'd this post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •