Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mki

Facebook is at it again

Recommended Posts


SEOPress WordPress SEO plugin

17 hours ago, Mike Friedman said:

I'm just curious, but what kind of information are people storing on their Facebook accounts that matters?

I have an email address. I think maybe my cell phone number is linked up to it. 

What's the big deal?

I'm not positive Mike, but FB now has a feature that you can pay people with, much like PayPal.  So your credit card/bank info would be in there.  The information people freely post like birth dates, schools, where they work.. it's easy to gather enough info about a person.  

My favorite is the 'what relation' feature.  So finding out one's mother's maiden name is schmeezy.  

I don't know if FB fixed it the last time, but the 'share' feature, depending on what is being shared, secretly allowed the creator of thing being shared, gave them permission to gather your contacts list.  Not just your FB contacts, but your email contacts as well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Mike Friedman said:

I'm just curious, but what kind of information are people storing on their Facebook accounts that matters?

I have an email address. I think maybe my cell phone number is linked up to it. 

What's the big deal?

None, really. Privacy was handed over long ago, but we live in a 'hair on fire' world where everything, regardless of how meaningless is of major significance.

Personal privacy is the biggest bullshit complaint and worry of the modern world. People should have given a shit 20 years ago, when it still existed. It's gone, forever. To think otherwise is ridiculous and intellectually dishonest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Mike Friedman said:

I'm just curious, but what kind of information are people storing on their Facebook accounts that matters?

I have an email address. I think maybe my cell phone number is linked up to it. 

What's the big deal?

The main issue is that any little piece of information you put out there can be combined with other information to obtain even more information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mki said:

The main issue is that any little piece of information you put out there can be combined with other information to obtain even more information.

I get that. But what are they getting on Facebook that isn't public record anyhow? Name. Date of Birth. Address. 

This is the kind of thing that spirals out of control and gets people calling for more government intervention. 

Unless my credit card number is stolen, I just find it hard to give a shit.

Even if that was stolen, financial institutions are so on top of that shit these days, I would have no trouble getting my money back. I cannot count how many times I have had a credit or debit card blocked because I was traveling in another state and stopped to buy something. They monitor that stuff so closely these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Mike Friedman said:

I get that. But what are they getting on Facebook that isn't public record anyhow? Name. Date of Birth. Address. 

It's not just Facebook, but all of the apps and sites one links to via Facebook. Many apps and sites utilize Facebook's login credentials, so it just spider-webs from there. Then you have to question what information do the apps have? Credit card information? Employment history? Addresses? Your contacts? Etc. 

And trust me, if you ever get full blown hacked, you'll give a shit. Some hacker absolutely hammered me last year right as I was buying a house. I spent a month (seriously, a month of my free time) on the phone calling various department stores, websites, banks, you name it, closing accounts and trying to get credit pulls off my credit report and spent countless more hours trying to get my lender to understand I wasn't running around racking up debt whilst trying to buy a house. And I'm pretty staunch about privacy issues; not some one who falls for phishing attempts or other bullshit. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Dan Riffle said:

Some guy named Whitacre absolutely hammered me last year right as I was bending over. I spent a month bruised and sore (seriously, a month of my free time) as well as on the phone calling  The Sweeper Store to try to get his latest STD report

 

 

Fixed that for you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Mike Friedman said:

I feel like if you lie in a confirmation hearing for a Supreme Court nomination, no matter how small the lie, that should be an automatic disqualification.

A Devil's Triangle is not a drinking game.

I thought A Devil's Triangle was a  was an illegal move in the game of Twister.

 

And his version of his yearbook mentions of "alumni" was a lie...and shows a complete lack of character.(at the time)

Most teenage boys have done similar things. Had he just admitted it, it probably would have been forgiven. Being an aggressive drunk isn't a sin. And had she reported it at the time, probably nothing would have come of it. Times change. What's acceptable changes.

I was OK with Bratski until he testified.  I thought the minor lies and the behavior (mostly the behavior) was disqualifying. And it was going south for him until Uncle Lindsey (who I actually like) jumped in and saved his bacon with his call to war. A complete game saving play by Graham.

The SNL opener was funny. But it was even better because the histrionics were only exaggerated slightly. Like when Tina Fey imitated  Palin. She would say an actual speech that Palin gave...word for word..and it was incredibly funny, because it was satire without the need for exaggeration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2018 at 10:16 AM, Claude Whitacre said:

As opposed to the hard evidence of crying and yelling for two hours by Brattski. 

 

Well, it's a lot more difficult to prove something didn't happen than it is even to lie that something did happen. It's akin to proving Superman doesn't exist, a point you like to refer to. 

I'm not saying it didn't or did happen or that it isn't somewhere in between. We'll never really know for certain, which is why I land moderately on the side of "this shouldn't be relevant." I'm slightly concerned about his response. However, if he is being falsely accused, I can imagine it would be difficult to maintain composure after being questioned in such a fashion. 

I wonder how SNL would treat this if the parties were swapped? 

As far as him lying, yes, that's a different story. If he lied about something and it's proven definitively, he should be sent packing. If we're going to argue about semantics or the phrasing choices of a teen boy, we've dug too far. And if you can't become a Supreme Court Justice because you drank too much beer in college, well, the court is going to wind up with no justices in about 20 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Dan Riffle said:

Well, it's a lot more difficult to prove something didn't happen than it is even to lie that something did happen. It's akin to proving Superman doesn't exist, a point you like to refer to. 

Agreed. He couldn't prove innocence. Nobody can. But he could sound credible. Which he did not. 

Quote

I'm not saying it didn't or did happen or that it isn't somewhere in between. We'll never really know for certain, which is why I land moderately on the side of "this shouldn't be irrelevant." I'm slightly concerned about his response. However, if he is being false accused, I can imagine it would be difficult to maintain composure after being questioned in such a fashion. 

I disagree. Think of the worst thing that ever happened in your life. did you cry solidly for two hours?  I never did. And this was just a job interview. He wasn't going to be arrested, or even lose his job. The worst thing that could happen to him is...he wouldn't get the job. It was a performance. He tried for "Indignant', but it came off as whiny and privileged. It's his lack of emotional control that makes him a bad judge. Frankly, I thought he was a decent pick, until I saw his unhinged performance.

Ford got the same kind of hard questions, and she held up well. Would these questions have made you whimper like a baby for two hours? The answer is No.

Quote

I wonder how SNL would treat this is the parties were swapped? 

You know the answer to that. In today's climate, women are always telling the truth, the man is always guilty...and he should be destroyed. Al Franken did nothing...and he's gone. Chris Hardwick did nothing...and he was gone (Coming back a shell of his former self). It would have been impossible for SNL to portray Ford's testimony as anything other than absolutely true and sincere.

Bratski's third accuser's story is falling apart. But Ford's story was strong and convincing. Far more convincing than I expected.

 

Quote

As far as him lying, yes, that's a different story. If he lied about something and it's proven definitively, he should be sent packing. If we're going to argue about semantics or the phrasing choices of a teen boy, we've dug too far. And if you can't become a Supreme Court Justice because you drank too much beer in college, well, the court is going to wind up with no justices in about 20 years. 

Nope. Not the phrasing of a teenage boy (He was in college then). It's that he lied about what the words in his yearbook meant...while he was in the hearing, just a few days ago.

I have no problem with the drinking. In fact, the "attack" was almost nothing, as far as I am concerned. It's that he lied (a few minor lies) to the senators. And his composure (assuming for a second that it was genuine) showed a lack of emotional control I've never seen in an adult male before. If you watched it, you know exactly what I mean.

 

Tell me, my friend, if you were falsely accused of a minor "sexual attack" that happened when you were in high school, how would you answer questions about it? Even on national television. You would be firm, composed, as accurate as possible, and not look scared shitless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Bratski is in. 

And except for two, everyone voted along party lines.

What does this mean? Forget for a minute about the accusations, the testimony, the performances, and all the yelling.

It means that any reasons anyone gave...any justifications for a Yes or No vote...are meaningless. They just voted along with their party. No thinking (other than about self preservation), no actual contemplating the testimony...none of that. Blindly following their tribe. Both sides.  And nearly all of us are exactly the same.  

Humans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottom line. Regardless of anything else, "Bart" will never be regarded as legitimate for his entire tenure on the Court. Also, I'm sure that Chief Justice Roberts could become the swing vote on the Court, if he feels that Kavanaugh is ruling strictly along party lines.

Personally, I believe he's a Right Wing hack and wouldn't recognize the truth if it bit him on the ass. Emotionally immature, entitled and devious.

My friends actually think the crying was phony, it wasn't. He was that upset that someone was taking something away from him that he believes had a right to, that he couldn't handle it.

And about coaching girl's basketball being the "most important thing in his life." What's up with THAT??? I'm almost afraid to know the answer. Still lovin' those teenage girls? I'm wondering if the Judge has a peephole into their showers?

This thing is far from over. You'll see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The AMOL said:

My friends actually think the crying was phony, it wasn't. He was that upset that someone was taking something away from him that he believes had a right to, that he couldn't handle it.

One advantage of being a psychopath, is that I can tell when someone is faking an emotional outburst. Bart was. Sure, he may have been mad, but he had to work himself up into that display....customers sometimes do that if they are going to ask for a refund. He was really going for "I'm mad as hell and indignant that I have to answer these questions....just like a completely innocent man", But it came off as whiny and he looked like a man begging for his life.  Believe me, an hour before that display...and an hour afterward, he wasn't whimpering. He was preparing...and afterward, evaluating. My main thought was "I wonder what his father is thinking, watching his son make this display?"

What he was accused of was pretty minor, in my opinion. My guess is that most teenage boys have done just as badly or worse.....when you are 17 and really drunk, you do incredibly stupid shit. Maybe harsh, but I'm incapable of feeling empathy for either of these people. 

About 25% of the population is crazy and maybe 1% is certifiably so. So I believe he was getting death threats. Just as Ford probably was. But...a Supreme Court Judge will get death threats....so showing a nervous breakdown during the interview isn't the best way to go...in my opinion.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Claude Whitacre said:

One advantage of being a psychopath, is that I can tell when someone is faking an emotional outburst. Bart was.

It was 75% fake and 25% pure emotional upset at the prospect of losing his entitlement.

You may be crazy, but you're not a psychopath, regardless of what any test has told you.

I, on the other hand . . . . . . . . . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kavanar.. Knava drink, then another and another till his breath doth stink

kavanar, now runs the bar,  lights up a big Cuban cigar

And slides his hand down a young girls bra.

But he took advice from President Woosey

What he really should have done was grab em by the P....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.