8,979 karma · joined February 22, 2014
His explanations from first principles covering ground you already know are just excellent. Worthwhile reading for anyone who has to explain detailed, complex & technical subject matter.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-06-27/purdue...
WikiLeaks declined to publish a wide-ranging trove of documents — at least 68 gigabytes of data — that came from inside the Russian Interior Ministry, according to partial chat logs reviewed by Foreign Policy.
The logs, which were provided to FP, only included WikiLeaks’s side of the conversation.
“As far as we recall these are already public,” WikiLeaks wrote at the time.
“WikiLeaks rejects all submissions that it cannot verify. WikiLeaks rejects submissions that have already been published elsewhere or which are likely to be considered insignificant. WikiLeaks has never rejected a submission due to its country of origin,” the organization wrote in a Twitter direct message when contacted by FP about the Russian cache.
>are you claiming that not once has anyone sent Wikileaks negative information on him or his campaign, and that's the only reason we haven't seen any?
There is nothing that wikileaks is even credibly accused of suppressing. Trump leaks are found on the front page of the new york times. Lead story of CNN, NBC, CBS, wapo, wsj and fox. Eg his tax return. There is no need for whistleblowers to send things to wikileaks. If wkileaks didn't publish, you'd see it and also likely claims from the source that it happened.
"There must be massive trump dirt so if we haven't seen it that's wikileaks supressing it." Difficult to believe.
Again if there is /any/ credible accusation that wikileaks suppressed /anything/ at all in support of republican presidents, like we know the ny times did, let's see it. Let them answer for it specifically. These constant smear accusations that are totally evidence free look really bad.
So no.
I think you wanted Wikileaks to suppress the information there and they didn’t. They published. But hell maybe Assange really did decide he preferred syphilis to gonorrhoea. Just like the times do, and the post, wsj, and Fox, cnn and mother jones. It’s a very establishment media thing to do. Clapper disagrees, sure.
The content of the emails was the problem not Wikileaks for publishing truth.
Wikileaks gave access to third parties for documents they were publishing many times. So dues everyone when the story is big and impact is desired. So what?
Source?
Have you got a link for what it is?
My prior is that any evidence of substance that contributed to a belief in wikileaks being untrustworthy would be /very/ easy to find in many locations. Maybe it's not but I can't think why. Perhaps you know?
I think you've confused wikileaks with the new york times there. The times definitely pick and choose. I have seen no evidence that wikileaks suppressed anything ever. Link if you have it as that would make them more like the times.
As far as I know there is zero evidence that wikileaks did not publish everything newsworthy that they were given regardless of who it helped or hindered.
Anyone have anything credible showing they suppressed anything ever?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled."
Social media & their ilk UI is likely not a mistake (eg youtube, X, netflix) given it nakedly optimizes engagement.
I'm actually a little gobsmacked anyone on this forum can type those words without physically convulsing.
The even more terrible part is I'm sure it's common. And so via network externalities the rest of us who do NOT trust any of these companies on the basis that all of them, time and again, have shown themselves to be totally untrustworthy in all possible ways, will get locked into this lunacy. I now can't deal with the government without a smartphone controlled by either google or apple. No other choice. Because this utter insanity isn't being loudly called out, spat upon, and generally treated with the withering contempt that these companies have so richly and roundly earned this decision is being made for all society by the most naive among us.
The new weight loss drugs. Are they good? How serious are the side effects? How often are there problems? Is the risk low and benefits high? Are they good for cancer? Are they good to help alcoholism? Are they scary? Should I take them?
Much legit debate there and I'd rather know who is being paid for their opinion faced with the choice when trying to weigh probability in the face of imperfect information.
A company itself does nothing. People make decisions and carry them out and should be accountable.
It seems difficult to believe all the medical treatment advances and insane amounts of money spent are having zero effect on postponing date of death (Or even the date of loss of ability to live independently including death).
Of 100,000 people born in a nation 80 years prior, how many still alive and living independently in that nation. Compare with the same metric in 2004. This is to net out immigration, which can be considered separately.
https://gist.github.com/seanjensengrey/f971c20d05d4d0efc0781...
I once used excel & vba as an intranet webserver to collect weekly business analytics using user input into web forms from various departments.
A very little knowledge, no proper resourcing, no support, internal politics determined the effort should fail came together to produce such a "success"
Got a seedy story like that? Seedier than that? Let's hear it!
Legal, regulated opiate availability implies a known quality, purity and therefore dosage. Any drug user who prefers heroin takes uncut heroin in the precise amount they choose. They would not choose to take cut fentanyl where they can be precise about nothing, including the knowledge that it is fentanyl not something else they might prefer.
The secondary argument is the reduction in crime committed to finance addiction. Burglary, mugging, prostitution all are said to expect to decline.
The tertiary argument is the reduction in corruption of law enforcement enabled by the sugar bags of cash in the illegal drug trade, a trade that just got undercut by the government to the point where it is out of business. In addition the additional police resource made available by the collapse of the illegal drug trade and reduction in "drug use financing" crime is very useful in reducing other crime and corruption.
Whether you believe it or not is up to you. If you have strong views either way it would pay to research results from countries where it has been tried while noting it's a hugely emotive issue so your bullshit detector has to be well tuned. Also keeping in mind any good idea can be ruined in implementation through incompetence, inexperience or malice. Also people do get very excited about ideas they think are fantastic but turn out not to be.
Good luck.
Measured how? Being good enough or not for which of a million uses? Without that these statements may well be true for the author but meaningless for the reader & potential user.
(Avoiding allocations is frequently a reasonable idea when minimizing latency, for example - maybe not for you).
Dependent customers does work, even when they're miserable and they hate you. Consider some examples, from worse is better through addiction.
Say the loan amount on the building is 100m
you know you ain't getting for less than that because the lender will bid up to there at least if anyone is bidding. You think it's worth 20m? Go home, that bid will not win and everyone knows it. You bid 20, lender outbids you. you bid 30, again outbid as far as the loan amount at least. This 12.3M is the equivalent of the auction being passed in with a reserve price of the loan amount, whatever that amount is, possibly much higher than 12.3M. In this circumstance the auction is a farce and you could not buy it for 12.3M+ or anything like it.
I can't vouch for the truth or accuracy of _any_ of that, but I believe that is the point being made.
The point being pushing things (good, bad or ugly) in schools often doesn't work out as hoped. Schooling is not a solved problem but it is a very crude tool used badly and often brutally by people of all kinds who wish to improve society by giving kids the tools to... You've heard it all before.
Sometimes being nice really pays off.
Immigration.