Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 132

Thread: Cambridge Analytica + Psyops + The Beast

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    7,074

    Default

    The Obama comparisons are well off from what I understand of the technicals.

    The follow up interviews have really fleshed out how dirty CA are, as for their effectiveness - in the right circumstances they seem to have pushed marginals over the edge at least once or twice.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    15,590

    Default

    I'm sure I read somewhere that several of the subpoenas issued by Mueller were headed for the UK, but no-one knows who for yet - anyone heard anything further on this?

    Quote Originally Posted by droid View Post
    Brilliant work by the Guardian/Channel 4 against some serious opposition too. Proper one/two punch over the last few days.
    Carole Cadwalladr's been doing some great work (in addition to having a superb name) - were you thinking of this specifically? https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...raps-elections

    The great piece she did last autumn about the Farage-Trump-Assange connection made me wonder if one or two of Mueller's UK-bound subpoenas could be for people with a rather high public profile. Maybe that's too much to hope though.
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  3. #18
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    CHI
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droid View Post
    its much less controlled
    alrite, different from Bernays, who wouldn't have freelanced for the USSR. but is CA really the first play dirty/psyops private sector election contractor?

    Beyond CIA etc coups I don't really know the broader history of election influencing, but I suspect not

    continue to think the only real significant innovation is big data/data science.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    CHI
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    otoh today is another strong data point for the sky is falling at FB, tho still early days

  5. #20
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    CHI
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    do agree w/leo about the joy of seeing these assholes get caught with their hands in the cookie jar

  6. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sufi View Post
    There's surely some truth to this. Obama was widely lauded for his use of "big data" and campaign analytics. I remember a Washington Post headline: "Big Data President" (not meant as criticism).

  7. #22
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    CHI
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    also I like all of us I'd bet have no actual idea about the truth of CA's claims in re its own efficacy but I wouldn't be surprised if they're bullshit

    the whole thing has always come across a bit like snake oil

  8. #23
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    CHI
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vimothy View Post
    Obama was widely lauded for his use of big data and campaign analytics
    that is 100% true I remember it quite well. also universally favorable contrasting it w/the Romney's campaign lack of same.

    obv no one was accusing his campaign of stealing data etc, but it also speaks to how much more innocent the world was about these issues just 6ish years ago

  9. #24

    Default

    also theres something fundamental about the modern web here. it's based around targeted, data-heavy, quasi-surveillance-state advertising. with the CA scandal you can pretend thats an abuse of the platform rather than its essence.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    7,074

    Default

    One of the Obama bods arguing the difference in this thread.


  11. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    7,074

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by padraig (u.s.) View Post
    alrite, different from Bernays, who wouldn't have freelanced for the USSR. but is CA really the first play dirty/psyops private sector election contractor?

    Beyond CIA etc coups I don't really know the broader history of election influencing, but I suspect not

    continue to think the only real significant innovation is big data/data science.
    I honestly cant think of another instance of non-state directed electoral interference, allowing of course for the fact that this may not be non-state at all.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    7,074

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by padraig (u.s.) View Post
    otoh today is another strong data point for the sky is falling at FB, tho still early days
    About 11% total drop now, on top of the loss of new US users for the first time ever in January.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    7,074

    Default

    This is the argument for effectiveness.

    The company’s head of data, Alex Tayler, added: “When you think about the fact that Donald Trump lost the popular vote by 3m votes but won the electoral college vote that’s down to the data and the research.

    “You did your rallies in the right locations, you moved more people out in those key swing states on election day. That’s how he won the election.”

    Another executive, Mark Turnbull, managing director of Cambridge Analytica’s political division, was recorded saying: “He won by 40,000 votes in three states. The margins were tiny.”

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    7,074

    Default

    Nix suspended. He's finished.

  15. #30

    Default

    this article in the new statesman is good, seems to have a handle on the technical side of what happened but puts it in its wider context: https://www.newstatesman.com/science...ere-no-scandal

Posting Permissions

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