|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Ice9]
#28033484 - 11/04/22 10:03 PM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ice9 said: You all need to read up on cyber attribution and analytical confidence.
It must be awfully hard to make a judgement on assessments that have been made when you don't even understand how the language is being used in them.

Why don't you point to your article that says "this is the kind of thing we think the Russians might do" is actual evidence of anything. If there was more to it than that, feel free to share what else there was.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,045
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 20 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Kryptos]
#28033485 - 11/04/22 10:03 PM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
He’s blowing it worse than even I expected
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Ice9]
#28033486 - 11/04/22 10:03 PM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ice9 said: LOL dude, you are so fucking dumb.
You think ad hominem logical fallacies are smart?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: mycosis]
#28033490 - 11/04/22 10:06 PM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
mycosis said:
Quote:
McGovern's post-retirement work includes commenting for Consortium News, RT, and Sputnik News, among other outlets, on intelligence and foreign policy issues.
You mean the sources that prefer facts to make believe?
If you disagree, pick your favorite mainstream news source and let's see how much more fake news I find from them than you find from the above.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Ice9]
#28033497 - 11/04/22 10:11 PM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Ice9 said:
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Quote:
Ice9 said: LOL dude, you are so fucking dumb. Appeal to authority fallacy has nothing to do with invoking ACTUAL AUTHORITIES 
... No
Quote:
Definition Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam) logical fallacy and Argument from Authority (argumentum ab auctoritate) are the same form of of discussion argument in which person producing a claim referencing the opinion of an authority as evidence to support an argument. As a fallacy it’s included onto Red Herring Fallacies group.
.
LOLOLOLOL
From the website you quoted Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam) logical fallacy and Argument from Authority (argumentum ab auctoritate) are the same form of of discussion argument in which person producing a claim referencing the opinion of an authority as evidence to support an argument. As a fallacy it’s included onto Red Herring Fallacies group.
This can be a fallacy if the referenced person does not have proper authority.
Emphasis mine. So I see you lie by omission just like your budy Falcon. Fucking loser
But you said "Appeal to authority fallacy has nothing to do with invoking ACTUAL AUTHORITIES". And you've just proven it does. I think you meant to say "it doesn't always have to invoke an actual authority."
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,472
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#28033504 - 11/04/22 10:15 PM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Citing to a legitimate authority is not a logical fallacy, though.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,045
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 20 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#28033514 - 11/04/22 10:21 PM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
The mueller report contains a detailed information about the hacks. It describes how Russian GRU hacking teams hacked the DNC and other systems, and it describes how investigators know it was the Russians
Quote:
Beginning in March 2016, units of the Russian Federation’s Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff (GRU) hacked the computers and email accounts of organizations, employees, and volunteers supporting the Clinton Campaign, including the email account of campaign chairman John Podesta. Starting in April 2016, the GRU hacked into the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). The GRU targeted hundreds of email accounts used by Clinton Campaign employees, advisors, and volunteers. In total, the GRU stole hundreds of thousands of documents from the compromised email accounts and networks.109 The GRU later released stolen Clinton Campaign and DNC documents through online personas, “DCLeaks” and “Guccifer 2.0,” and later through the organization WikiLeaks. The release of the documents was designed and timed to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election and undermine the Clinton Campaign.
Quote:
Two military units of the GRU carried out the computer intrusions into the Clinton Campaign, DNC, and DCCC: Military Units 26165 and 74455.110 Military Unit 26165 is a GRU cyber unit dedicated to targeting military, political, governmental, and non-governmental organizations outside of Russia, including in the United States.111 The unit was sub-divided into departments with different specialties. One department, for example, developed specialized malicious software (“malware”), while another department conducted large-scale spearphishing campaigns.112 Investigative Technique a bitcoin mining operation to secure bitcoins used to purchase computer infrastructure used in hacking operations.
Military Unit 74455 is a related GRU unit with multiple departments that engaged in cyber operations. Unit 74455 assisted in the release of documents stolen by Unit 26165, the promotion of those releases, and the publication of anti-Clinton content on social media accounts operated by the GRU. Officers from Unit 74455 separately hacked computers belonging to state boards of elections, secretaries of state, and U.S. companies that supplied software and other technology related to the administration of U.S. elections.114
12 Russians have been indicted for hacking the DNC and other systems
Can we please stop pretending Falcon has legitimate questions about the Russian’a culpability. He says he has no evidence that Seth Rich has anything to do with the hacks, yet he brings up that garbage conspiracy theory every time this topic comes up. It’s pathetic
Anyways all the good stuff starts on page 36
https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/download
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,045
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 20 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#28033522 - 11/04/22 10:27 PM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Ice9 said:
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Quote:
Ice9 said: LOL dude, you are so fucking dumb. Appeal to authority fallacy has nothing to do with invoking ACTUAL AUTHORITIES 
... No
Quote:
Definition Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam) logical fallacy and Argument from Authority (argumentum ab auctoritate) are the same form of of discussion argument in which person producing a claim referencing the opinion of an authority as evidence to support an argument. As a fallacy it’s included onto Red Herring Fallacies group.
.
LOLOLOLOL
From the website you quoted Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam) logical fallacy and Argument from Authority (argumentum ab auctoritate) are the same form of of discussion argument in which person producing a claim referencing the opinion of an authority as evidence to support an argument. As a fallacy it’s included onto Red Herring Fallacies group.
This can be a fallacy if the referenced person does not have proper authority.
Emphasis mine. So I see you lie by omission just like your budy Falcon. Fucking loser
But you said "Appeal to authority fallacy has nothing to do with invoking ACTUAL AUTHORITIES". And you've just proven it does. I think you meant to say "it doesn't always have to invoke an actual authority."
In an appeal to authority fallacy, the fallacy is the authority. The authority isn’t an actual authority. It’s not a fallacy if the authority one appeals to is actually an authority. Saying “Stephen Hawking says black holes emit radiation” isn’t an appeal to authority fallacy, it’s supporting evidence.
Maybe the confusion is that appeal to authority is not always a fallacy. Appeal to authority “can be a fallacy if the referenced person does not have proper authority.” Hope that clears things up.
Edited by koods (11/04/22 10:35 PM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,045
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 20 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Kryptos]
#28033633 - 11/05/22 12:15 AM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said: https://i.redd.it/a41q5e8ka0y91.jpg
I guess Elon Musk thinks free speech is when he says whatever the fuck he wants and other people have to just accept it and not change their behavior based on the stupid shit he spews.
(guess shroomery image button doesn't like this particular image)
Holy shit it gets better. Elon blocked the advertising representative who called him out. Elon is completely unsuited to run a media company like this. It’s a train wreck.
Edited by koods (11/05/22 12:17 AM)
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,292
Last seen: 2 minutes, 22 seconds
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Enlil]
#28033666 - 11/05/22 01:21 AM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Citing to a legitimate authority is not a logical fallacy, though.
Yes it is, if you're using their authority to make your argument, and not their claim. I'm not going to argue with idiot anymore, because it's no use, but I will argue with you...
Quote:
Appeal to authority is understood as a form of argumentation where the soundness of a statement is proven by reference to an external authority, such as an expert or a ruling of a higher court.
Appeal to authority simply means that one quotes known and respected scholars who hold that view. This in itself is not a proof. It is not sufficient for the argument to be considered conclusive. An acceptable argument by the scholars must be given in order for the view to be considered acceptable.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
Edited by Bigbadwooof (11/05/22 01:26 AM)
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,292
Last seen: 2 minutes, 22 seconds
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#28033675 - 11/05/22 01:31 AM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Here's an interesting video about Elon Musk's ties to the government... It's not likely that he will manage twitter so terribly different than it was before, for the same reasons it was the way that it was.
https://rumble.com/v1rcwn2-elon-musk-in-bed-with-war-machine-and-cia.html
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: koods]
#28033691 - 11/05/22 01:59 AM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: In an appeal to authority fallacy, the fallacy is the authority. The authority isn’t an actual authority. It’s not a fallacy if the authority one appeals to is actually an authority. Saying “Stephen Hawking says black holes emit radiation” isn’t an appeal to authority fallacy, it’s supporting evidence.
Maybe the confusion is that appeal to authority is not always a fallacy. Appeal to authority “can be a fallacy if the referenced person does not have proper authority.” Hope that clears things up.
Reply fail? I thought I clarified that already.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: koods]
#28033695 - 11/05/22 02:02 AM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
Kryptos said: https://i.redd.it/a41q5e8ka0y91.jpg
I guess Elon Musk thinks free speech is when he says whatever the fuck he wants and other people have to just accept it and not change their behavior based on the stupid shit he spews.
(guess shroomery image button doesn't like this particular image)
Holy shit it gets better. Elon blocked the advertising representative who called him out. Elon is completely unsuited to run a media company like this. It’s a train wreck.

So Elon blocked him from talking to Elon, not anything else? If I'm on Facebook or Twitter, I'd want the ability to limit who can chat with me.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,292
Last seen: 2 minutes, 22 seconds
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#28033713 - 11/05/22 02:25 AM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
koods said: In an appeal to authority fallacy, the fallacy is the authority. The authority isn’t an actual authority. It’s not a fallacy if the authority one appeals to is actually an authority. Saying “Stephen Hawking says black holes emit radiation” isn’t an appeal to authority fallacy, it’s supporting evidence.
Maybe the confusion is that appeal to authority is not always a fallacy. Appeal to authority “can be a fallacy if the referenced person does not have proper authority.” Hope that clears things up.
Reply fail? I thought I clarified that already.
Koods is incorrect, as I have demonstrated repeatedly. The fallacy is using their "authority" (Even if they are a supposed authority) to make your argument, rather than their argument.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 20 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#28033719 - 11/05/22 02:34 AM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Absolutely. 
Just because a "proper" authority says something doesn't necessarily mean it's true, unless they can back it up with evidence.
Edit: In other words, I agree that just because Crowdstrike and the Government said Russia did it, without any evidence it's just an appeal to authority.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (11/05/22 03:03 AM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,045
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 20 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#28033777 - 11/05/22 03:51 AM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
Kryptos said: https://i.redd.it/a41q5e8ka0y91.jpg
I guess Elon Musk thinks free speech is when he says whatever the fuck he wants and other people have to just accept it and not change their behavior based on the stupid shit he spews.
(guess shroomery image button doesn't like this particular image)
Holy shit it gets better. Elon blocked the advertising representative who called him out. Elon is completely unsuited to run a media company like this. It’s a train wreck.

So Elon blocked him from talking to Elon, not anything else? If I'm on Facebook or Twitter, I'd want the ability to limit who can chat with me. 
Yes he is blocked from interacting with Elon or seeing his tweets. The person who is blocked cannot engage in a conversation with the person blocking them. Everyone has the ability to block someone, the question is why is Elon blocking someone who is representing Twitter advertisers?
Elon made a claim that advertisers were being influenced by activists, and a guy who was on the phone call between advertisers and Elon replied to that tweet, saying it was not true and the reason advertisers were pulling out was because they are unsure about advertising in a platform that may contain content that is not aligned with sponsors values. In particular, they were concerned about the behavior of musk himself. He said these were all things they told musk a day earlier on their call.
Elon cut him off. Removed his ability to reply to musk. It’s fucking petty and childish and ridiculous behavior for someone who claims to be a free speech absolutist.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,045
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 20 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#28033778 - 11/05/22 03:54 AM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Quote:
Enlil said: Citing to a legitimate authority is not a logical fallacy, though.
Yes it is, if you're using their authority to make your argument, and not their claim. I'm not going to argue with idiot anymore, because it's no use, but I will argue with you...
Quote:
Appeal to authority is understood as a form of argumentation where the soundness of a statement is proven by reference to an external authority, such as an expert or a ruling of a higher court.
Appeal to authority simply means that one quotes known and respected scholars who hold that view. This in itself is not a proof. It is not sufficient for the argument to be considered conclusive. An acceptable argument by the scholars must be given in order for the view to be considered acceptable.
I disagree and enlil went to law school, I think he knows what valid arguments are
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
Edited by koods (11/05/22 04:04 AM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,045
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 20 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: koods]
#28033801 - 11/05/22 04:58 AM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
What a shitshow
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,292
Last seen: 2 minutes, 22 seconds
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: koods] 1
#28033835 - 11/05/22 06:02 AM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Quote:
Enlil said: Citing to a legitimate authority is not a logical fallacy, though.
Yes it is, if you're using their authority to make your argument, and not their claim. I'm not going to argue with idiot anymore, because it's no use, but I will argue with you...
Quote:
Appeal to authority is understood as a form of argumentation where the soundness of a statement is proven by reference to an external authority, such as an expert or a ruling of a higher court.
Appeal to authority simply means that one quotes known and respected scholars who hold that view. This in itself is not a proof. It is not sufficient for the argument to be considered conclusive. An acceptable argument by the scholars must be given in order for the view to be considered acceptable.
I disagree and enlil went to law school, I think he knows what valid arguments are
Disagree all you like, this isn't a matter of opinion. Enlil went to law school, which is why I'm surprised he is disagreeing with me on this, but he is wrong.
That's another appeal to authority lmao!
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
Edited by Bigbadwooof (11/05/22 06:03 AM)
|
christopera
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,201
Last seen: 4 hours, 12 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#28033896 - 11/05/22 07:05 AM (1 year, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Providing a story from Ray McGovern and then listing his past jobs is an appeal to authority.
Crowdstrike is actually an authority, they do this work all over the world, as professionals. Ray never spent a day of his life in cyber security, he was just an CIA officer. I.E. not an authority on anything related this discussion. Crowdstrike however is absolutely an authority and they released a lot of information with the conclusion that Russia hacked the DNC server. They investigated, they wrote reports, and the reports were confirmed by government agencies. There is just nothing anybody can do about those facts.
Here's the thing, the right has waged a war against Crowdstrike since at least 2016, starting with Donald Trumps false claims (that Fal posted here as well) that Crowdstrike basically hid Hillary's email servers. Trump went on to add (a bit convenient for Fal) that Ukraine was the hacker, not Russia. Later, the Republican controlled Senate Intelligence Committee reported that Paul Manafort worked with a Russian intelligence officer to create that story. Then down the road the conspiracy was also linked to numerous right wing medias such as Breitbart News. It is factually incorrect, and a lot of that story lies in how Trump doesn't understand the internet either. Trump even asked Zelensky to help find out what happened with Hilary's server and Crowdstrike.
In summary, of course Fal and others don't want to trust Crowdstrike. The company has been getting slammed by right wingers for at least 6 years for saying things they don't like. Additionally, you have people like Ray McGovern, who aren't qualified to talk on the topic, continuing to beat away.
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
|
|