General > General Technical Chat
BREXIT - what it means for small manufacturers
DrG:
--- Quote from: coppice on January 03, 2021, 05:05:32 pm ---
--- Quote from: DrG on January 03, 2021, 04:54:01 pm ---Most of the court cases were thrown out due to a lack of standing, not because the evidence was successfully refuted.
That is simply a false statement and is easily proven to be false. Simply count the number of court cases and determine whether the number of court cases dismissed because of a lack of standing exceeds the total number of cases / 2. I do not believe that you have done that. I believe that it is more likely that you are simply expressing a biased perception because (in large part) of lies being repeated so often. Therein lies the bigger problem.
Maybe its all fake, but not investigating its veracity in a democracy is bizarre.
There is much that is simply wrong with that statement. First, it assumes that no investigations have taken place, which is, again, demonstrably false, Second, it suggests that the biased view that certain allegations, no matter how lacking of supportive evidence, should be investigated at whatever cost and for however long, if doing so is viewed as politically advantageous. Third is describing the practice of requiring evidence to support allegations as being bizarre. What is bizarre is that so many people, who know better, are acting like they really don't know better and have no problem wading into the unfounded conspiracy pool because they perceive some kind of personal gain in doing so.
The latter description distinguishes the "weasel" from the "loon". To be clear, I am not calling you either, I am referring to the talking heads and publicity hounds and wannabe "influencers", and, of course, the elected officials which condone and support such behaviors if not directly engaging in such behaviors, which some also do.
--- End quote ---
As an observer from another country, I find a deep lack of skepticism in America about its elections. There are only two parties of any significant weight, and both are regularly seen to be using every possible means to skew results in their favour, like Gerrymandering. Its considered the preferred approach, over having policies the public can get behind, and ensuring they are carried out. Yet, when it comes to the actual election day there is a general assumption they won't play games. I would assume they are both getting up to every possible trick, and demand the most detailed monitoring by numerous representatives from all stakeholders. The US has used voting machines considered proprietary and not subject to independent audit. That's bizarre.
--- End quote ---
I appreciate your opinion and respect your right to voice it. What you are saying above essentially ignores my responses and those responses were the most important points that I wanted to make and I am ok making them as I did.
I'm not going to go into your comments above in as much detail, except to say that we all find a lot of things bizarre. :)
SilverSolder:
--- Quote from: coppice on January 03, 2021, 05:05:32 pm ---As an observer from another country, I find a deep lack of skepticism in America about its elections.
--- End quote ---
Can accusing the elections of being outright rigged without evidence be considered "skepticism"? Or is it just sedition?
--- Quote from: coppice on January 03, 2021, 05:05:32 pm ---[...] I would assume they are both getting up to every possible trick, and demand the most detailed monitoring by numerous representatives from all stakeholders. [...]
--- End quote ---
It is almost as if you are saying nobody is monitoring the elections in the USA. Is that really the case?
--- Quote from: coppice on January 03, 2021, 05:05:32 pm ---[...] The US has used voting machines considered proprietary and not subject to independent audit. [...]
--- End quote ---
Did that happen with the 2020 election? I don't recall seeing any verified cases of that.
SiliconWizard:
--- Quote from: coppice on January 03, 2021, 05:05:32 pm ---
--- Quote from: DrG on January 03, 2021, 04:54:01 pm ---Most of the court cases were thrown out due to a lack of standing, not because the evidence was successfully refuted.
That is simply a false statement and is easily proven to be false. Simply count the number of court cases and determine whether the number of court cases dismissed because of a lack of standing exceeds the total number of cases / 2. I do not believe that you have done that. I believe that it is more likely that you are simply expressing a biased perception because (in large part) of lies being repeated so often. Therein lies the bigger problem.
Maybe its all fake, but not investigating its veracity in a democracy is bizarre.
There is much that is simply wrong with that statement. First, it assumes that no investigations have taken place, which is, again, demonstrably false, Second, it suggests that the biased view that certain allegations, no matter how lacking of supportive evidence, should be investigated at whatever cost and for however long, if doing so is viewed as politically advantageous. Third is describing the practice of requiring evidence to support allegations as being bizarre. What is bizarre is that so many people, who know better, are acting like they really don't know better and have no problem wading into the unfounded conspiracy pool because they perceive some kind of personal gain in doing so.
The latter description distinguishes the "weasel" from the "loon". To be clear, I am not calling you either, I am referring to the talking heads and publicity hounds and wannabe "influencers", and, of course, the elected officials which condone and support such behaviors if not directly engaging in such behaviors, which some also do.
--- End quote ---
As an observer from another country, I find a deep lack of skepticism in America about its elections. There are only two parties of any significant weight, and both are regularly seen to be using every possible means to skew results in their favour, like Gerrymandering. Its considered the preferred approach, over having policies the public can get behind, and ensuring they are carried out. Yet, when it comes to the actual election day there is a general assumption they won't play games. I would assume they are both getting up to every possible trick, and demand the most detailed monitoring by numerous representatives from all stakeholders. The US has used voting machines considered proprietary and not subject to independent audit. That's bizarre.
--- End quote ---
I agree with this, although I think you're downplaying the skepticism in the USA. There seems to be millions of americans being currently skeptic. Maybe you mean a lack of skeptisicm from the institutions themselves?
And regarding the voting machines, the concerns seem real and nothing new either:
https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/11/13/top-democrats-raised-concerns-about-dominion-voting-technology-in-2019/
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/26/politics/hackers-voting-machines/index.html
(a lot of other concerns were expressed in the past years, from independent sources, as well as both from democrats and republicans.)
Is there a valid reason not to be concerned anymore?
coppice:
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on January 03, 2021, 05:38:35 pm ---And regarding the voting machines, the concerns seem real and nothing new either:
https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/11/13/top-democrats-raised-concerns-about-dominion-voting-technology-in-2019/
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/26/politics/hackers-voting-machines/index.html
(a lot of other concerns were expressed in the past years, from independent sources, as well as both from democrats and republicans.)
Is there a valid reason not to be concerned anymore?
--- End quote ---
There were a lot of articles about the lack of accountability in Dominion machines in early 2019. If you go back a decade there have been lots of articles in publications across the political spectrum about the lack of accountability in a number of makes of voting machines. Dominion seem to have supplied 28 US states. I'm not clear if they are the only supplier in those states, but they appear to have served 70M voters in the 2016 elections. Clearly they are an important player in this market.
tszaboo:
--- Quote from: SilverSolder on January 03, 2021, 05:23:01 pm ---
--- Quote from: coppice on January 03, 2021, 05:05:32 pm ---As an observer from another country, I find a deep lack of skepticism in America about its elections.
--- End quote ---
Can accusing the elections of being outright rigged without evidence be considered "skepticism"? Or is it just sedition?
--- End quote ---
No, it's not the elections that are rigged. It's the whole system.
It's very unreasonable to only have two choices for a given political view, and it polarizes your entire country. It's unhealthy. You should be able to choose between multiple political parties, have coalitions, and make healthy compromises that make sense.
There must be so many people that are forced to vote for one party or another, otherwise they will have worse taxation or they would (supposedly) loose a right that they cherish.
It is similarly wrong, like the elections were in the Soviet union. People are not free to choose what they actuallywant, due to the lack of reasonable candidates.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version