The NSA’s machine learning algorithm may be killing thousands of innocent people

Re:The NSA’s machine learning algorithm may be killing thous... by arca_vorago on Tuesday February 16, 2016 @12:09PM (#11111317)

I understand this response but I think it is the wrong one. Yes, there are many crazy and outlandish conspiracy theories out there that make it easy for the intellectually lazy to dismiss all theories out of hand, but the globalist conspiracy is one that is less and less hidden to the point that you aren't really paying attention if you don't see it. Now, thats not to say there is a single, grand, overarching conspiracy (a common fallacy in the realm), but rather there are many different parties all with their own self interests, sometimes aligned, sometimes not.

The conspiratorial view of the world is the correct one. Your attitude is one of sticking ones head in the sand and pretending these things don't exist.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The NSA’s machine learning algorithm may be killing thous... by Karunamon on Tuesday February 16, 2016 @04:54PM (#11113416)

The conspiratorial view of the world is the correct one.

Not when said conspiracies are dumped, explanation-free, into the middle of a post without any backing what so ever.

Buzzwords like "new world order" are both loaded and uninteresting, and that goes double when most people who've have examined the "evidence" have found it wanting. If globalization is meant, say "globalization".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The NSA’s machine learning algorithm may be killing thous... by arca_vorago on Tuesday February 16, 2016 @06:17PM (#11113907)

Deapite the most strong public sentiment connotations, the phrase correctly distinguishes a sect of the globalist group, and is just used as such by me. Hence the phrase was "new world order globalists". Its a loaded term, granted and I could probably find a more descriptive way to articulate it, but focusing on that as criticism is nothing more than grammatical group think as a strawman for the much more importance issues being put forward. Its the lazy way out, eg, "that dude said "nwo", all his point are moot and hes a crazy conspiracy theorist." That essentially the position you took.

Also, are you even in the same thread as me? Theres plenty of context, within my comment and out, thats gives an indicator about why such a comment is relevant to the discussion.

What you have done is perform a knee jerk reaction and now you are backpedalling.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The NSA’s machine learning algorithm may be killing thous... by Karunamon on Tuesday February 16, 2016 @11:47PM (#11115386)

Use of buzz phrases is generally the mark of "crazy conspiracy theorists" (your words, not mine) or: people who generally have a tenuous grip on concepts like burden of proof and recognition of confirmation bias.

I have yet to see a single thing in this thread that suggests my initial read was incorrect, or indeed anything to indicate your rant contributed anything to the conversation. (Hence: uninteresting)

Like a single link to support your assertions, for instance.

[ Parent | on HN ]