[evan_au]

This week the Australian government is debating some draft legislation: "No free News on the internet"

An update:
Yesterday, Facebook Australia  agreed to terminate their field trial of the draft Australian media legislation.
- This means that traffic to Australian Media and Government websites can start to increase back towards usual levels.
- Advertising revenue to Media websites can start to increase back towards usual levels.
- I would love to know how much media traffic (and revenues) declined while Facebook tested out the new media legislation.
- I would not be surprised it dropped by more than 20%.
- Traffic won't get back to normal quickly, as some people have deserted Facebook for Parler or other platforms that aren't covered by the draft legislation.
- And some people don't need news from reputable sources - they just make up their own conspiracy theories.
- The fact is that the Australian Government and Media needs Facebook more than Facebook needs them.

I am interested in how the Australian government will now rejig their proposed media legislation to fill the enormous holes in their current draft.
- And whether we will need another field trial of the draft legislation before it is enacted into law.

As part of the face-off with Facebook, the government declared it would never advertise with Facebook again.
- Lets see how long that lasts - Facebook is provably the most cost-effective advertising platform to reach a wide demographic
- Especially important with a vaccine rollout underway; now, under the revised legislation, will "vaccine rollout" be News, or not News?

[Jolly2 (OP)]

This week the Australian government is debating some draft legislation: "No free News on the internet"

An update:
Yesterday, Facebook Australia  agreed to terminate their field trial of the draft Australian media legislation.
- This means that traffic to Australian Media and Government websites can start to increase back towards usual levels.
- Advertising revenue to Media websites can start to increase back towards usual levels.
- I would love to know how much media traffic (and revenues) declined while Facebook tested out the new media legislation.
- I would not be surprised it dropped by more than 20%.
- Traffic won't get back to normal quickly, as some people have deserted Facebook for Parler or other platforms that aren't covered by the draft legislation.
- And some people don't need news from reputable sources -

How are they reputable? Is lying about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that helped lead to the war in Iraq reputable? Is promoting day after day lies and propaganda about Russia gate, reputable? Is refusing to publish negative information about a corporation or government reputable? Is taking your talking points from a CIA or MI6 memorandum reputable? Is saying nothing about Julian Assange a fellow journalist locked up and tortured without any criminal conviction reputable?

 There is NOTHING reputable about the main stream media every day they show themselves as little more then mouth pieces of corrupt corporate oligarchic power. They are a disgrace.

Top to bottom they are a joke, nothing reputable about them at all, Which is why anyone with sense doesnt listen to them anymore, the day they all go bankrupt will be a good day.

There are plenty of new media outlets with real journalists like Glenn Greenwald or Chirs Hedges amounst others like Julian Assange that actual care about the truth journalistic integrity and not corporate propaganda.

they just make up their own conspiracy theories.
- The fact is that the Australian Government and Media needs Facebook more than Facebook needs them.

No one needs Facebook,  there are far better alternatives that do not steal your data to sell it, that are not interested in trying to manipulate their users with different algorithms for ads.

Try minds or Gab.

I am interested in how the Australian government will now rejig their proposed media legislation to fill the enormous holes in their current draft.

Well the people pushing this is the oligarchy that controls the media,  they can do what they like hardly anyone wants to listen to their propaganda..

- And whether we will need another field trial of the draft legislation before it is enacted into law.

As part of the face-off with Facebook, the government declared it would never advertise with Facebook again.
- Lets see how long that lasts - Facebook is provably the most cost-effective advertising platform to reach a wide demographic

Maybe for now, but millions are leaving that trend will continue anyone who cares about their privacy shouldnt use any Facebook service.  I recomend no one downloads Facebook to their phone, you cant uninstall it afterwards.

- Especially important with a vaccine rollout underway; now, under the revised legislation, will "vaccine rollout" be News, or not News?

Doesnt have anything to do with the news, doctors give the vaccine not newspapers.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

TUCKER CARLSON has become a Democrat

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Votes are not counted by hand they are verified by hand and counted by machine.

And the hand count verified that the machine count gave the right answer.

Apart from the reality that in some precincts the ballot machine numbers didnt always match. And on recounts uncounted ballots were found on occasion.

You're point is meaningless.  All they tally at the end of the process, is number of votes, against number of ballots. They dont match votes for candidate against ballots for candidate.

One of the biggest issues is that it is the envelope the ballot arrives in that is used for verification, there is nothing on the ballot to link it to the person that sent it. As soon as a ballot becomes separated from its envelope it is impossible to find out whose ballot it is. Leaving the opportunity to add fake ballots wide open.

Some Poll workers on election day claimed they saw ballots that looked like they had been printed by computer printer, and were not filled in by hand using a pen.

If an algorithm was used to change the voting numbers in the machines, all they would need to do is add fake ballots to the counted ballots after the machines finished their counting. Once fake ballots are added there would be no way to find them.

Algorithms change the numbers fake ballots make up the difference between the votes and ballots.

The best solution to this would be to have the people voting add their ballots to the machines themselves. Poll workers should not be feeding then in People voting should. There should also be a mark on the ballot that links it to the person who voted. Demanding a secret vote allows more potential for fraud. Most voters are registerd Democrat or Republican hardly a secret who they will vote for, I would suggest removing the secret ballot system and allowing those that want to vote in secret to request a secret ballot to do so,  with other checks in place to prevent fraud.

Which is exactly what the algorithm is meant to do.

So, what, exactly, is your problem?

The data analysts that looked over the data from the election suggested there was clear evidence of an algorithm that was repeatedly giving a 2% lead to Biden in every precinct it was actively being employed. They suggested when you track the data, the algorithm was not employed universally but in selective areas, and turned on in one precinct then would move to another, they suggested the number match so closely once you know what to look for you can track the activation of the algorithm across the precincts involved.

There were no grounds to convict,

Even the Republicans said there was.
The evidence also said so.
So did Trump's lawyers in the trial. (Though they then said that nobody should have taken him seriously)

More nonsense.

Steven crowder took a list of registered voter addresses, then crossed referenced them with the post office to find if any were listed as 'not available to receive packages'. He found 100s on checking them out by going to the actual locations,  he found car parks, storage areas and all manner of other places no voter lives in.
On sharing this news on Twitter,  Twitter banned him.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Traditional media is illegitimate as a news source.

Uncharacteristically, Jolly is right about that.
For example, The Sun "newspaper" makes a loss.
But the owners still pay to have it  printed as a propaganda sheet  to get the naïve to support the billionaires.

However, it does raise an interesting question; where the heck should we get actual information from?

"Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me"

You can read all past reporting if a journalist has been shown to have written a hit piece or published a fake news story or outright lied and not given a retraction.  Then you should avoid them.

[Bored chemist]

They dont match votes for candidate against ballots for candidate.

Yes they do.
But even if all they did was- as you say- to count that the numbers are right then that's enough to stop this

As soon as a ballot becomes separated from its envelope it is impossible to find out whose ballot it is. Leaving the opportunity to add fake ballots wide open.

Please try to remember what you say  from one sentence to the next.

Steven crowder took a list of registered voter addresses, then crossed referenced them with the post office to find if any were listed as 'not available to receive packages'. He found 100s on checking them out by going to the actual locations,  he found car parks, storage areas and all manner of other places no voter lives in.

Did any of  the car parks vote?

[Bored chemist]

Traditional media is illegitimate as a news source.

Uncharacteristically, Jolly is right about that.
For example, The Sun "newspaper" makes a loss.
But the owners still pay to have it  printed as a propaganda sheet  to get the naïve to support the billionaires.

However, it does raise an interesting question; where the heck should we get actual information from?

"Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me"

You can read all past reporting if a journalist has been shown to have written a hit piece or published a fake news story or outright lied and not given a retraction.  Then you should avoid them.

From the ardent Trump supporter, that is comedy gold.

[charles1948]

Traditional media is illegitimate as a news source.

For example, The Sun "newspaper" makes a loss.
But the owners still pay to have it  printed as a propaganda sheet  to get the naïve to support the billionaires.

However, it does raise an interesting question; where the heck should we get actual information from?

I didn't know that the "Sun" runs at a financial loss.  But when I consider the huge amount of paper and coloured ink that goes into producing each issue, and the wages that have to be paid to all the reporters and photographers, plus the cost of distributing millions of copies of it every day, what you say makes sense.

There must be easier ways to make money.  Like buying properties in London, then waiting for their values to go up. 

As for your question about getting information, at the present time the best information comes from the Internet. 
But will this last much longer.  Can't you see the Internet soon being censored. 

[alancalverd]

Steven crowder took a list of registered voter addresses, then crossed referenced them with the post office to find if any were listed as 'not available to receive packages'. He found 100s on checking them out by going to the actual locations,  he found car parks, storage areas and all manner of other places no voter lives in.

So none of those will have voted by post. So no evidence of postal vote fraud.

But the Republicans wanted their people to vote in person, so any fraud would have been caused by people registering at a false address, say  in another district or state, then turning up to vote. As I said several times, Trump certainly rigged the election and still lost, which is why he was so pissed off about it.

Or maybe Stephen Crowder didn't actually visit so many voter addresses that he found "hundreds" of false ones. That seems far more likely.

Or maybe he hopes you don't understand what a registered address is. It might be an apartment block, a post office box number,  or a lawyer's office. These are places where a legal document can be sent but there may be no facility for holding "packages", which is why we have parcel drops as well as postal addresses.


Beware of false prophets and Republican sympathisers.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Steven crowder took a list of registered voter addresses, then crossed referenced them with the post office to find if any were listed as 'not available to receive packages'. He found 100s on checking them out by going to the actual locations,  he found car parks, storage areas and all manner of other places no voter lives in.

So none of those will have voted by post. So no evidence of postal vote fraud.

But the Republicans wanted their people to vote in person, so any fraud would have been caused by people registering at a false address, say  in another district or state, then turning up to vote. As I said several times, Trump certainly rigged the election and still lost, which is why he was so pissed off about it.

Or maybe Stephen Crowder didn't actually visit so many voter addresses that he found "hundreds" of false ones. That seems far more likely.

Or maybe he hopes you don't understand what a registered address is. It might be an apartment block, a post office box number,  or a lawyer's office. These are places where a legal document can be sent but there may be no facility for holding "packages", which is why we have parcel drops as well as postal addresses.


Beware of false prophets and Republican sympathisers.

All the fake addresses would have had postal ballots created for them, what the post office did with them on realising there was no place to put them is a question.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

- Traffic won't get back to normal quickly, as some people have deserted Facebook for Parler

You can forget about Parler they sold out to get back online, no one that used to use parler is gonna be interested in continuing, with the changes to free speech.

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/betrayed-how-parler-sold-out-to-the-globalist-establishment-to-get-back-online/

[alancalverd]

All the fake addresses would have had postal ballots created for them, what the post office did with them on realising there was no place to put them is a question.

You have made an unsubstantiated statement and asked a question. Please substantiate your statement and answer the question. If you are unable to do so, then my claim that the disgraced 45th president had his brain sucked out by an alien arse probe has equal validity. Particularly as he has never denied it.

[Kryptid]

Are we seriously still arguing that there was widespread voter fraud? Despite the fact that claims of such were found to be unsubstantiated when investigated by various government departments? Do you really think you are more skilled at finding such evidence than they are?

[charles1948]

Are we seriously still arguing that there was widespread voter fraud? Despite the fact that claims of such were found to be unsubstantiated when investigated by various government departments? Do you really think you are more skilled at finding such evidence than they are?

Were the people who conducted the "investigations" nearly all Left-wingers?

[Bored chemist]

at the present time the best information comes from the Internet. 

So does the worst.
That's part of the problem.

[charles1948]

at the present time the best information comes from the Internet.

So does the worst.
That's part of the problem.

Perhaps you should be put in charge of the Internet.  I can't think of a better person for the job.  So acerbic and masterful.  And with a powerful, penetrating intellect.

You could handle my problems any time I'm sure.

[Bored chemist]

at the present time the best information comes from the Internet.

So does the worst.
That's part of the problem.

Perhaps you should be put in charge of the Internet.  I can't think of a better person for the job.  So acerbic and masterful.  And with a powerful, penetrating intellect.

You could handle my problems any time I'm sure.

I don't think that stating what should be the obvious is much of a qualification.

[Kryptid]

Were the people who conducted the "investigations" nearly all Left-wingers?

It sounds like you're accusing those government entities of being in on the conspiracy. You can't be serious...

[Jolly2 (OP)]

All the fake addresses would have had postal ballots created for them, what the post office did with them on realising there was no place to put them is a question.

You have made an unsubstantiated statement and asked a question. Please substantiate your statement and answer the question. If you are unable to do so, then my claim that the disgraced 45th president had his brain sucked out by an alien arse probe has equal validity. Particularly as he has never denied it.

Rather than ramble, why not directly ask the actual question you want answered?

[Jolly2 (OP)]

They dont match votes for candidate against ballots for candidate.

Yes they do.
But even if all they did was- as you say- to count that the numbers are right then that's enough to stop this

No it wouldn't,  fake votes added by an algorithm matched with fake ballots,  wont be noticed in a tally at the end.

As soon as a ballot becomes separated from its envelope it is impossible to find out whose ballot it is. Leaving the opportunity to add fake ballots wide open.

Please try to remember what you say  from one sentence to the next.

I know exactly what I'm saying primarily that the American election voting system is a total joke. Which isn't surprising when the elites that run America hate democracy.
Chomsky on neoliberalism destroying democracy

Steven crowder took a list of registered voter addresses, then crossed referenced them with the post office to find if any were listed as 'not available to receive packages'. He found 100s on checking them out by going to the actual locations,  he found car parks, storage areas and all manner of other places no voter lives in.

Did any of  the car parks vote?

Not sure,  I saw one women complaining that her dog had voted, her dog had been chipped and as part of the chipping process the dog has a registration number, someone used the registration to make a fake registered voter.  She checked the roles and found that her dog had actually voted in the last election.  That was her claim anyway.

Traditional media is illegitimate as a news source.

Uncharacteristically, Jolly is right about that.
For example, The Sun "newspaper" makes a loss.
But the owners still pay to have it  printed as a propaganda sheet  to get the naïve to support the billionaires.

However, it does raise an interesting question; where the heck should we get actual information from?

"Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me"

You can read all past reporting if a journalist has been shown to have written a hit piece or published a fake news story or outright lied and not given a retraction.  Then you should avoid them.

From the ardent Trump supporter, that is comedy gold.

I'm not an Ardent Trump supporter,  I would have voted Bernie Sanders in 2016. I wouldn't vote him today ofcourse, it's clear now that Bernie is a sheep herder there to defend and protect the corporate system.

I like Trump because they all hate him. Watching TDS idiots scream at the sky is rather hilarious. Trump failed to achieve America first, he failed to stop America interfering in other countries affairs but he didn't launch any new wars he stopped the CIA funding ISIS, something atleast.