General Chat (Non-Music-Related)

"Move along folks, nothing to see here, these aren't the ones".
Since Google, Facebook, Microsuck, and the EU united to form the Internet Speech Police will they join forces in getting hillary elected ? Having full control of all posted Internet information will they remove or hide opposing viewpoints? ................... YOU BETCHA!

Some highlights from the article:

Google ‘Directly Engaged’ In Clinton Campaign, Says Julian Assange

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/06/0 ... -campaign/

by Lucas Nolan8 Jun 20160
8 Jun, 2016 8 Jun, 2016

"[Google] is directly engaged in Hillary Clinton’s campaign claimed Julian Assange at a Moscow journalism forum on Tuesday."

"Google controls 80 percent of the smartphone market through its control of Android and if you control the device itself that people use to read then anything that they connect to through that device you have control over as well."
"It’s not hard to imagine how any form of manipulation of certain search returns and political polls may greatly benefit a presidential candidate or push a political agenda. If Assange is correct in his assertion that links Google to the Clinton campaign, then the search engine could have a major impact on the Presidential race. Assange also pointed out that Google has had no trouble working with the Obama administration."

"Moscow journalism forum" - BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Doesn't surprise me at all. All of the alphabet soup "news" channels are owned and operated by Democrats with close ties to government officials, usually family ties, more and more people every day are finding out just how much they are not being told. ABC and CBS are owned by Democrats with siblings in the government, I found a list a while back but a search recently didn't urn it up again. Why not search engines? Facebook is already in the hot seat for pulling conservative posts or burying them so they do not land in their "trending" list, this is no surprise at all.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s ... -house-tie

I've started using another search engine, it says it doesn't track you, and so far I've gotten good results. I haven't tried a comparison with Google, but it might be a good idea.

https://duckduckgo.com/

Look up Sharyl Attkisson, reporter who resigned from CBS a while back, she's one of the most outspoken about this. She did a story on air one night that was not nice to Obama, her publisher called her into his office and told he no more stories that make Obama look bad. Later she found that her laptop at home had been hacked, most likely by a government agency, everything she had just typed up for her notes on another story was being deleted, (she took a video of it), a 2nd fiber optic line had been installed at her house the phone company knew nothing about, and classified information had been put on her laptop in a location she would never think to look.

Here's just one of her interviews about this same topic, from back in 2014.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/matthe ... all-line-a

This has been going on for a long time. I knew the news stories being aired about Viet Nam in the 60's and early 70's, then a couple of years later had a good friend who had actually been there. What he told me was not what we heard on the news. This is not new, it's just getting some public attention these days. It's also why I never even bother to look at ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, PBS or MSNBC. And I dig around and double check anything I see on Fox or Newsmax...but at least they try to tell something that resembles the truth...even if it's not always the whole story.

Right now for example, they're covering the Trump U issue, but they're not concentrating on the fact that the judge involved is a member of the LaRaza lawyers assoc, and was on the board that approved scholarships for illegal immigrants, and has referred to himself as a Mexican. Trump didn't say anything racist, he just repeated what the judge himself has said. Not only that, the law firm behind the suit has donated large money to the Clintons, in the range of $650,000, and paid both Clintons big bucks for speeches.

From here http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/exclusi ... -clintons/

Our analysis, using data first compiled by The Washington Post, found that Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd paid the Clintons a total of $675,000 in fees for speeches since 2009. Hillary Clinton gave a $225,000 speech at the law firm as recently as September 4, 2014. Bill Clinton also gave a speech for the same fee back in 2013, and another one in 2009 before the firm had been renamed

You're not hearing anything about any of that on the alphabet soup channels, and not much on the others. I had to scroll through a long list of mainstream smear jobs to find that one...

That's the other problem, there's just so much mainstream slanted stuff out there, it's not easy to find the ones who tell the rest of the story.

By the way the Apple vs Google smartphone share is about 50-50. here's an article from last year:
http://bgr.com/2015/09/03/apple-vs-andr ... july-2015/
SO... more lying drivel form the brietbart site. You can be a parrot, and just repeat the crap, or you can be a sheep and just let them lead you on - or you can do a little thinking for yourself, a little research and realize they're trying to lead you around with a ring in your nose.

How long did it take you to find someone who said what you wanted them to say? I just did a bt of looking and only found one that said 51% vs 42%, the rest are saying about the same thing, around 80% of all smartphones are Google powered.

http://www.businessinsider.com/iphone-v ... 014-5?op=1

In Q4 2013, according to research firm IDC, Google's Android mobile operating system had a 78% share of all users globally. Apple's iOS had just 18%. Now, IDC predicts that in 2014 Android will claim 80.2% of users and only 14.8%

http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougolenick ... 008c742d4e

IDC most recent data shows Apple increasing the number of iOS units shipped between 2015 and 2019 from 237 million to 274.5 million , but it’s market share will dip 2.2 percent to 14.2 percent. During the same period the number of smartphones using Android will hit 1.53 billion, up from 1.2 billion in 2015, but its marketshare will remain static at about 79 percent.

http://www.idc.com/prodserv/smartphone-market-share.jsp

Android dominated the market with an 82.8% share in 2015 Q2. Samsung reasserted its global leadership with a renewed focus on lower-cost smartphones.

http://dazeinfo.com/2014/03/24/apple-aa ... droid-won/

So who's putting out drivel? Forbes? IDC? Businessinsider?

Very interesting Billy. As usual you are pretty good at looking beyond the obvious.
I think I am just going to stay away from apple shares... Even mattel is returning 6 or 7 %, and they are just a toymaker.

How long did it take you to find someone who said what you wanted them to say? I just did a bt of looking and only found one that said 51% vs 42%, the rest are saying about the same thing, around 80% of all smartphones are Google powered.

So who's putting out drivel? Forbes? IDC? Businessinsider?

The difference is probably USA numbers vs a worldwide measure.


In America, Apple has about half the market, but worldwide Samsung rules and it's not even close.



.

Very interesting Billy. As usual you are pretty good at looking beyond the obvious.
I think I am just going to stay away from apple shares... Even mattel is returning 6 or 7 %, and they are just a toymaker.

I've never played the stock market...but if I did....NVIDIA is the stock to get. With the advent of VR about to disrupt everything, there will be more and more need for high-end video cards, which will necessarily continue being upgraded frequently.

Just saw an interesting test on Google's auto-correct function.

https://usuncut.com/politics/google-may ... -searches/


Of course the top story on google about this is snopes doing their best diversion to say your eyes can't be trusted.

"US Government computer systems use Bing as the standard (default) search engine. Take that for what it is."

Since they are all corrupted i doubt that it will make any difference. I'm sure they will all join in with what Google is already beginning to do. It is what it is.

"The European Commission has today announced a partnership with Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Microsoft in order to crack down on what it classes as illegal hate speech while criminalizing perpetrators and promoting independent counter-narratives that the European Union favors".

You are right , Ted. You can not play the "stock market".
So what do you do when you have some extra money after all expenses?
What if you need to pull some cash together fast?

I checked out the link Ted posted and decided to check out the search engine I posted above, Duck Duck Go.

Here's what "hillary clinton cri" brought up in their suggestion box below where you type:

hillary clinton -

criminal charges
crimes
criminal
cri
criminal investigation
crimes list
criminal record
criminal history

That's in order of appearance. Plus a couple of others, "criticism" is the only one that didn't include the words "crimes" or "criminal".

Google got this:

crime reform
crisis
crime bill 1994

I've never used Bing, didn't bother to look.

You are right , Ted. You can not play the "stock market".
So what do you do when you have some extra money after all expenses?

There is no such thing as extra money.

What if you need to pull some cash together fast?

I pray harder