Facebook Admits It Blocked Links to Wikileaks DNC Emails

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Have you ever noticed that every single time Facebook does something like this, they always blame it on an algorithm or something beyond their control? I would have more respect for them if they just came out and said "whoops, you caught me, my bad" and left it at that.

Facebook admitted it briefly blocked links to Wikileaks files containing internal Democratic National Committee (DNC) emails. The block seems to be the result of another algorithm accident that may have incorrectly determined the links to be malicious or spam. Facebook Chief Security Officer says the company has fixed the error, after receiving heavy criticism from WikiLeaks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
You've got to be a bit amused by the world in general these days.

 
Google SafeBrowsing also briefly marked the Wikileaks website as hazardous after the DNC leaks happened. The explanation was that the SafeBrowsing spiders crawling the site saw an e-mail with a malicious attachment and marked the website for "Dangerous downloads."

Safe Browsing Site Status – Transparency Report – Google

The timing is all too convenient, though. Google has been a staunch advocate for Hillary Clinton for President, and earlier leaks show Google has manipulated search results to be favorable to Clinton.

google clinton at DuckDuckGo
 
HockeyJon said:
Facebook should just admit that they're a shill for the Democrats and move on.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure they already have, when they admitted that they manipulate what is trending, which you would otherwise think is an organic thing.
 
This is just your friendly monthly reminder from Facebook that they are a private company, and you should have no illusions that they foster free speech on their site.
 
Shmee said:
This is just your friendly monthly reminder from Facebook that they are a private company, and you should have no illusions that they foster free speech on their site.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Same reason I stopped using Reddit. These sites are so far entrenched in politics it makes their original purpose moot. I just want to read news without having to latch onto a certain party and accidently give them money through ad revenue.
 
goodcooper said:
what about all the people who have to live with the legislation those who use "fakebook" for news vote in?
Click to expand...

Exactly, the rest of us are the ones who pay for the ignorance of these useful idiots. It's disgusting how biased Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, et al really are, and how much of the naïve, brain-dead populace laps up their bullcrap to reinforce their confirmation bias. These are the same people who will denigrate anyone who watches fox news and in the same breath, regurgitates whatever garbage they read on HuffPo that morning. That's how we got Kang and Kodos...err, I mean Trump and Clinton as our "choices" for president.
 
B2BigAl said:
Exactly, the rest of us are the ones who pay for the ignorance of these useful idiots. It's disgusting how biased Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, et al really are, and how much of the naïve, brain-dead populace laps up their bullcrap to reinforce their confirmation bias. These are the same people who will denigrate anyone who watches fox news and in the same breath, regurgitates whatever garbage they read on HuffPo that morning. That's how we got Kang and Kodos...err, I mean Trump and Clinton as our "choices" for president.
Click to expand...
don't forget Google... it's DESIGNED to show you what you want to see

some if it is nefarious, like i think facebook is being here... but a lot of these technologies are just doing it by design, i can't really blame them... the entire system is broken, including the media, so now there really is absolutely no way to get it straight...

the truth is incredibly muddled now... why do you think people are becoming so polarized all around the world?
 
Ducman69 said:
Pretty sure they already have, when they admitted that they manipulate what is trending, which you would otherwise think is an organic thing.
Click to expand...

Yep, a few times actually.

Why people think they would be neutral to start with, I have no idea.
 
If the algorithm is working as designed can you really blame it for doing what it was suppose to do?
 
I have never seen corruption like this in the US before, it is seriously out of control. Which is why I am voting for Trump, and making no qualms about it, I just hope he is being honest (sigh) when he says his team will root it out.

To have the DNC chair step down, as the convention starts! And immediately get picked up by team hillary, is almost as flabergasting as seeing Comey let her off the hook. It is just outright, down and out corruption. And blatent! Haha, in your face public! We can do what we wahnt! DEAL WITH IT.
 
Shmee said:
This is just your friendly monthly reminder from Facebook that they are a private company, and you should have no illusions that they foster free speech on their site.
Click to expand...
Still doesn't make it scumy and not eligible for criticism. Also they compound it by hiding what they are doing. I'm sure large numbers of people that use facebook don't frequent a wide variety of internet sources and use only other news services that are not rushing to disclose facebooks practices. They are conceivible trapped in a disinformation bubble. And facebook gets to manipulate their decision making including how they vote scott free.
 
Mugato said:
I have never seen corruption like this in the US before, it is seriously out of control. Which is why I am voting for Trump, and making no qualms about it, I just hope he is being honest (sigh) when he says his team will root it out.
Click to expand...

Sometimes just having someone who is an ass that questions everything is a merit, and I mean that is a positive way. Even if he has zero plans, just having someone who is critical of the government (and has authority) at a time like this is worth it. And that's a worst case scenario. The other shit about Hitler and stuff just aren't feasible. Our system doesn't allow it. Look at how much push back Obama has gotten just for his Executive Orders alone, let alone anything else he planned on pushing through.
 
Jim Kim said:
Anyone who uses fakebook for news gets what they deserve.
Click to expand...

It's not that they are using it for news, it is being used an aggregate of thoughts and opinions. Kind of like DrudgeReport, love him or hate him, you have to accept that Matt is a person and he has opinions. Yet so many people rely on him to aggregate the pulse of the nation/world. He is not providing the news himself, but he can influence was is news. Facebook and Twitter have the same power, it's just not as obvious.

Twitter also blocked #DNCHacks before someone brought it up. They also banned Milo, which may not seem like a big deal by itself, but when you take into account banning Milo (the gay Republican) and blocking #DNCHacks, there appears to be a pattern there. Appears of course, I'm not making any accusations.
 
MongGrel said:
You've got to be a bit amused by the world in general these days.

Click to expand...


No, once again John Oliver misrepresents the truth and the young people believe it. Would this issue not have been resolved by now if it was really as simple as an artist saying you can't use our copyrighted material?

These artists sold their souls to the music industry and the side effect is that it's not their decision to make anymore.

http://www.ascap.com/~/media/files/pdf/advocacy-legislation/political_campaign.pdf

ASCAP collects licensing fees from users of music created by ASCAP members, then distributes them back to its members as royalties. In effect, the arrangement is the product of a compromise: when a song is played, the user does not have to pay the copyright holder directly, nor does the music creator have to bill a radio station for use of a song.

In 2012, ASCAP collected over US$941 million in licensing fees and distributed $828.7 million in royalties to its members, with an 11.6 percent operating expense ratio.[1] As of July 2013, ASCAP membership included over 460,000 songwriters, composers, and music publishers.
Click to expand...

You purchase a public performance license from ASCAP, who doesn't give a shit about the integrity of the music because they get paid either way. And the artist doesn't get to have any say because they joined a record label or publisher, which in turn is a member of ASCAP.
 
westrock2000 said:
No, once again John Oliver misrepresents the truth and the young people believe it. Would this issue not have been resolved by now if it was really as simple as an artist saying you can't use our copyrighted material?

These artists sold their souls to the music industry and the side effect is that it's not their decision to make anymore.

http://www.ascap.com/~/media/files/pdf/advocacy-legislation/political_campaign.pdf



You purchase a public performance license from ASCAP, who doesn't give a shit about the integrity of the music because they get paid either way. And the artist doesn't get to have any say because they joined a record label or publisher, which in turn is a member of ASCAP.
Click to expand...

Of course they do, or they wouldn't conventions wouldn't have gotten away with that for decades.

He didn't misrepresent anything.

Big Business at it's finest, recording companies have been doing that type of thing since inception, unless an artist has the money to own their own studio and market it.

 
Mugato said:
I have never seen corruption like this in the US before, it is seriously out of control. Which is why I am voting for Trump, and making no qualms about it, I just hope he is being honest (sigh) when he says his team will root it out.

To have the DNC chair step down, as the convention starts! And immediately get picked up by team hillary, is almost as flabergasting as seeing Comey let her off the hook. It is just outright, down and out corruption. And blatent! Haha, in your face public! We can do what we wahnt! DEAL WITH IT.
Click to expand...


You think Trump is honest about anything ?

As2D7NP.gif
 
The DNC fucked over Bernie Sanders, and if that causes Hillary to lose, it means Bernie will win in four years, and Hillary will never have won. That said, I can't blame the DNC entirely for acting as they did, Bernie is an Independent / outsider who conveniently joined the DNC to run for President. Its natural that bias was against him. If Bernie had joined the DNC four or eight years ago, this would never have happened. But Bernie is too Bernie to sacrifice his principles for political gain.
 
MongGrel said:
You think Trump is honest about anything ?
Click to expand...

Nope, and it's why I have voted 3rd party since moving out of my parent's a couple decades ago. As long as people keep voting for the lesser of two evils, evil always wins. And a principled vote for someone you can support still has value, no matter what those in power try to convince you of since all they are trying to do is keep the republocrats in charge.
 
Voting third party is pretty much pissing in the wind, to be honest.

You are not influencing anything, than other taking away your vote where it might matter.

Go look up Ralph Nader.

But it's your right.
 
MongGrel said:
Voting third party is pretty much pissing in the wind, to be honest.

You are not influencing anything, than other taking away your vote where it might matter.

Go look up Ralph Nader.

But it's your right.
Click to expand...

Where it might matter? Only if I vote for your guy. If I vote for Hillary instead of a left leaning third party, I'm voting against my own principles. And, I won't vote Trump....

So, I'll just throw it away. :D
 
EODetroit said:
The DNC fucked over Bernie Sanders, and if that causes Hillary to lose, it means Bernie will win in four years, and Hillary will never have won. That said, I can't blame the DNC entirely for acting as they did, Bernie is an Independent / outsider who conveniently joined the DNC to run for President. Its natural that bias was against him. If Bernie had joined the DNC four or eight years ago, this would never have happened. But Bernie is too Bernie to sacrifice his principles for political gain.
Click to expand...

I hate to sound overly cynical, but Bernie does not look like he will be sucking air 4 years from now to me personally.

Al Franken has really went over the hill a lot lately from what I have seen watching the DNC, I imagine he is getting torn up in the news feeds a lot atm.

I expected better by now myself.
 
EODetroit said:
The DNC fucked over Bernie Sanders, and if that causes Hillary to lose, it means Bernie will win in four years, and Hillary will never have won. That said, I can't blame the DNC entirely for acting as they did, Bernie is an Independent / outsider who conveniently joined the DNC to run for President. Its natural that bias was against him. If Bernie had joined the DNC four or eight years ago, this would never have happened. But Bernie is too Bernie to sacrifice his principles for political gain.
Click to expand...

He stopped being an "independent" the moment he kneeled to Zod.
 
EODetroit said:
The DNC fucked over Bernie Sanders, and if that causes Hillary to lose, it means Bernie will win in four years, and Hillary will never have won.
Click to expand...
Bernie's staff were implicated in the leak as well, trying to negotiate private use of jets and the like in exchange for Bernie's endorsement to Hillary, which his endorsement also means that she is entitled to all the cash left over in his coffers from his campaign which is considerable. Money that naive young people gave to "fight the establishment" which was handed right over to the establishment candidate. End effect is that Bernie Sanders was essentially campaigning for Hillary all along, so that she would get votes and money from demographics that know her to be corrupt and would otherwise not have supported her bid. They also demonstrated clear image manipulation when it was revealed that his staff had orchestrated the press coverage of his "running through the airports trying to catch a flight in coach" so that he'd seem really busy and frugal, fighting for the people, when in reality he had private chartered luxury jets that were serving outlandishly elaborate gourmet dishes to him and his entourage.

Bernie is going to be 78 years old, ending his term at the age of 82 or if vying for a two term would be 86 years old. The party is not going to get behind someone that gets lost in the white house and forgets what he was talking about mid speech. Most presidents start their first term at 55, and the candidates are all quite old this time around, so its make it or break it for them.
 
Armenius said:
The timing is all too convenient, though. Google has been a staunch advocate for Hillary Clinton for President, and earlier leaks show Google has manipulated search results to be favorable to Clinton.

google clinton at DuckDuckGo
Click to expand...

Just for curiosity I just googled "google clinton" and the results are pretty much the same. I'm not saying Google isn't manuipulating search results, but there isn't much evidence of it. At least not right now. Although I suppose it could be geographically constrained, I don't live in the USA.

On a related topic, it's nice we have a serious search engine that's not owned by Microsoft or Google, but Duck Duck Go needs to work on their interface. I find their site nearly unusable.
 
MongGrel said:
Voting third party is pretty much pissing in the wind, to be honest.

You are not influencing anything, than other taking away your vote where it might matter.

Go look up Ralph Nader.

But it's your right.
Click to expand...

Dude... Gore couldn't even carry his home state. Nader had nothing to do with Gore losing
 
Quix said:
Just for curiosity I just googled "google clinton" and the results are pretty much the same.
Click to expand...
Autocomplete manual manipulation was what they got busted for recently: Alleged Google Insider: Management Doesn’t Deny ‘Censoring Autocomplete To Favor Hillary’

Eric Schmidt, Google CEO, even founded a startup specifically for Hillary's campaign.
Eric Schmidt’s ‘The Groundwork’ Failing Hillary Clinton - Breitbart

I don't think its ideological though, as much as it is simply buying politicians in exchange for future favors. When you see these guys donating millions, they don't do this out of charity, but simply because they expect a return on investment.

That's why I think its funny when we talk about promoting small businesses, when all we need to accomplish that is leveling the playing field by now allowing the big businesses to purchase anti-competitive legislation in their favor.
 
EODetroit said:
The DNC fucked over Bernie Sanders, and if that causes Hillary to lose, it means Bernie will win in four years, and Hillary will never have won. That said, I can't blame the DNC entirely for acting as they did, Bernie is an Independent / outsider who conveniently joined the DNC to run for President. Its natural that bias was against him. If Bernie had joined the DNC four or eight years ago, this would never have happened.
Click to expand...
Give me a break. They would have sandbagged Bernie just as much. His big platforms are getting money out of politics and reigning in Wall Street. This is the lifeblood of both parties, the LAST thing they're going to do is let that message gain traction if they can stop it. On the contrary, the DNC didn't think he was going to be as big a threat as he was, if they had more experience of him operating, they would have cut him off even sooner than they did.
 
You sorta get the idea Hilary had her own email server because of this nonsense. The state dept. and DNC gets hacked. Hillary's email only dumped by feds.

I was more suspicious of the Hillary email server scandal at first, but now it sounds like a simple case of someone trying to get something done in a stupid bureaucracy.

EDIT: I'm not voting for Hillary OR Trump.
 
ruffbytes said:
You sorta get the idea Hilary had her own email server because of this nonsense. The state dept. and DNC gets hacked. Hillary's email only dumped by feds.

I was more suspicious of the Hillary email server scandal at first, but now it sounds like a simple case of someone trying to get something done in a stupid bureaucracy.

EDIT: I'm not voting for Hillary OR Trump.
Click to expand...

The history of the Clinton's would suggest she did not want any of her communications to be susceptible to FOIA's. Also did not want tracking of who was getting what. And the fringe theory would be that she may have been having relationships that might not be socially viable just yet, but that's fringe. Bill and Hillary are a duo (as any married couple should be). Do not think for a minute that they operate independently of each other.
 
ruffbytes said:
I was more suspicious of the Hillary email server scandal at first, but now it sounds like a simple case of someone trying to get something done in a stupid bureaucracy.
Click to expand...

Circumventing the IT rules at most businesses can get you fired. You can't bend the rules to fit what you want to do. Regardless of how much the process holds you back, you have to follow the rules. Don't like it, find ways to change them. However, I don't think it was that simple. That's for a different thread, though.

Although - does it really matter? The email server, DNC BS, etc... The people that will care about any of that come election time (even next week) is probably under 1%. It just doesn't matter. People are dumb. The lesser of two evils, the party of their choice instead of the candidate, etc...
 
EODetroit said:
That said, I can't blame the DNC entirely for acting as they did, Bernie is an Independent / outsider who conveniently joined the DNC to run for President. Its natural that bias was against him. If Bernie had joined the DNC four or eight years ago, this would never have happened. But Bernie is too Bernie to sacrifice his principles for political gain.
Click to expand...

You are correct. That is why this election cycle will be one for the history books. Both parties are experiencing the same "problem". Bernie is not typical of Democrat and Trump is not typical of Republican. That's why the parties both hate them. -BUT- Who is the "party"? Is the party the political members or is it the plebians who cast millions of votes?

Both of the parties had to make a decision. We, as Americans, believe that the citizens of this country should be able to choose their destiny. Isn't that the fundamental "risk" of freedom? So they had to choose who would lead the direction of the party. The plebians whom they both claim to represent or their own self motivations.

Trump won the Republicans nomination outright, despite everything that was done to stop him. The Republicans had no choice but support him, because his votes came from the people. Had they chosen anyone else, even Cruz, it would not have been representative of the people, and there would have been a collapse of the party.

The Democrats have a more convoluted system and chose not to <fully> represent the will of the people. Excluding the super delegates, Bernie Sanders won 45% of the vote. That means 45% of the people who call themselves democrats voted for this guy and support his message. The superdelgates however were a staggering 13:1 ratio. That's the tell, that they couldn't even be bothered to at least try to follow the will of the people. So Bernie did lose, but he also received far less coverage then Hillary and was cast in a negative light much like Trump. Had he received favorable media coverage, he might have been able to close that gap (and I say that with high optimism based on how many people feel right now).

You have to understand that if you think your vote and opinion is important, then so is everyone else's. If we choose to allow the citizens to choose the fate of our nation then we have to accept that we will, from time to time, get people like Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump. Whether they are good or bad is mostly irrelevant, because they represent the mind set of the nation. Don't blame the guy pushing socialism, question why society wants socialism. Don't blame the guy pushing nationalism, question why society wants nationalism. Both of these candidates are symptoms.

What we have witnessed in this election is something that has always been there, but with this election both of the "parties" had to confront it head on and very publicly.
 
Mugato said:
I have never seen corruption like this in the US before, it is seriously out of control. Which is why I am voting for Trump, and making no qualms about it, I just hope he is being honest (sigh) when he says his team will root it out.

To have the DNC chair step down, as the convention starts! And immediately get picked up by team hillary, is almost as flabergasting as seeing Comey let her off the hook. It is just outright, down and out corruption. And blatent! Haha, in your face public! We can do what we wahnt! DEAL WITH IT.
Click to expand...

Corruption like this has existed in the US since day one. The difference is, we're finding out about it now rather than it being buried.

As for voting third party? If everyone who complained about Trump & Hillary actually voted for their principles rather than voting for the lesser of two evils, maybe a viable third party wouldn't be a pipe dream. So yes, maybe Trump or Hillary would be president this time, but unlike a lot of people, I'm pretty confident the world won't be destroyed by their actions, and we'll be around in another 4 years, at which point, hopefully things could change.

I'm sorry, but not voting, or voting third party isn't a vote for the other guy/gal, and it's certainly not my fault, nor people like me. I didn't vote for them in the primaries, nor did people like me have a say. The people at fault here are the people who voted for them to be our choices. To me, it's those people who just don't want to take responsibility for their own terrible judgment and choices, and pass the blame onto innocent people.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top