Welp, we got totally outplayed. And the chance to fight back was just thrown out the window.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT16| Unpresidented
- Thread starter ItWasMeantToBe19
- Start date
- Status
Welp, we got totally outplayed. And the chance to fight back was just thrown out the window.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
But that just makes it even worse because it means that state-sponsored cyber-warfare is now a partisan issue. The fact that the sitting president can't talk about it because it might look bad/biased is more damaging than the hack itself. Our national security interests being outweighed by electoral politics is not a good thing; Obama should have done this even if the positions were reversed and the Russians were hacking Trump.
Obama's legacy is going to be about the pursuit of political ideals at the expense of everything else.
I think he means long before the late fall. Hacking really is 21st century warfare, and our leadership is not yet treating it that way. They keep talking about "the cyber" and order tanks and ships, but the reality is you also need to be strong in all aspects and protect your national interests online and denounce violators loudly.
balladofwindfishes
Member
I bet you the GOP dreams in secret of running America for 4+ decades.
That one's possibly worse, because that's the one that could squeeze past the court.
Any potential baby that could grow up into poverty and told they are worthless by the government and don't deserve a federal support system is a-okay with the GOP.
balladofwindfishes
Member
A typo doomed us all!
Dominican Power
Member
The DNC is so fucking incompetent. Jesus!
Oil profits most likely.
Something to do with our nukes at worst.
Anyone's guess here.
StopMakingSense
Member
I don't think he knows what the DoE really does.
Or he really really really wants to go all in on nuclear power, or something
Would explain why he picked Perry than, he doesn't even know the name of it.
Cesare Borgia
Banned
I mean nuclear power wouldn't be a bad thing, it's the best form of energy we can have
Brawndo Addict
Banned
I don't know what to believe on the typo issue. Although a typo is plausible it's not like a person in that situation is ever going to go "oh boy, I really fucked that up". Obviously they're going to say it was a typo or auto-correct or whatever, everyone would say that if they were put in that situation.
What makes it harder to believe:
1) Double mistake. Typos usually involve a single missing or transposed letter (or mispelling, eg: illigitimate) but here we are missing both the "I" and the "L". Missing one key in a long word is believable, missing the first two keys in a word not so much.
2) Grammar. The proper grammar for a word starting with a vowel sound is "an" not "a". So it should be "this is an illegitimate email" not "this is a illegitimate email". Person is obviously well-educated based on vocabulary and would know the difference.
3) Double meaning. In the context of the email chain, legitimate could have been intended as a reference to the phishing email itself. As in, this is a legitimate phishing attempt and we need to take this threat seriously.
4) Context. The original phishing email said that Gmail had prevented a user from using your password in Ukraine. If you thought that warning was fake and it was a phishing email then there would be no reason to change your password. The response only makes sense if the person believed the original password was compromised as the phishing email claimed.
5) Continued Presence. If someone forwards you an email asking if it's phishing email you don't reply to them with the phishing email still in the chain. You delete it so that nobody runs the risk of accidentally clicking on it again.
What makes it easier to believe:
1) Provided a link to the actual webpage. If they really did think the email was legitimate, they could have said to go ahead and click on that button. But instead they provided a link to the actual webpage and provided instructions to change your password and enable two-factor authentication.
2) Auto-correct. A well-known risk factor that can turn transform simple typos into bigger problems. However, the fact that this person took the time to insert a colon and hyperlink into their email suggests they were not using a phone. Most email applications do not automatically change words.
3) Routine. If they were being repeatedly pestered with phishing emails then it would be expected for them to be able to recognize them. Otherwise they would have gotten tricked way earlier.
What makes it harder to believe:
1) Double mistake. Typos usually involve a single missing or transposed letter (or mispelling, eg: illigitimate) but here we are missing both the "I" and the "L". Missing one key in a long word is believable, missing the first two keys in a word not so much.
2) Grammar. The proper grammar for a word starting with a vowel sound is "an" not "a". So it should be "this is an illegitimate email" not "this is a illegitimate email". Person is obviously well-educated based on vocabulary and would know the difference.
3) Double meaning. In the context of the email chain, legitimate could have been intended as a reference to the phishing email itself. As in, this is a legitimate phishing attempt and we need to take this threat seriously.
4) Context. The original phishing email said that Gmail had prevented a user from using your password in Ukraine. If you thought that warning was fake and it was a phishing email then there would be no reason to change your password. The response only makes sense if the person believed the original password was compromised as the phishing email claimed.
5) Continued Presence. If someone forwards you an email asking if it's phishing email you don't reply to them with the phishing email still in the chain. You delete it so that nobody runs the risk of accidentally clicking on it again.
What makes it easier to believe:
1) Provided a link to the actual webpage. If they really did think the email was legitimate, they could have said to go ahead and click on that button. But instead they provided a link to the actual webpage and provided instructions to change your password and enable two-factor authentication.
2) Auto-correct. A well-known risk factor that can turn transform simple typos into bigger problems. However, the fact that this person took the time to insert a colon and hyperlink into their email suggests they were not using a phone. Most email applications do not automatically change words.
3) Routine. If they were being repeatedly pestered with phishing emails then it would be expected for them to be able to recognize them. Otherwise they would have gotten tricked way earlier.
Just to reiterate how fucked we are: if you want to see how much damage complete control by the GOP can do to progress and liberalism, look at North Carolina. A shining beacon in the south reduced to shambles in 6 years. There is your reference on what kind of damage Trump can do.
Fucking shade.
VendettaRed07
Member
I actually assumed he'd run as a republican back when he announced
Coriolanus
Banned
What the fuck is "meat?" Also how do you get a D in it? This brings up so many questions.
EDIT: OK, it's something to do with animal husbandry. That said I'm still confused, is it about making the meat taste good?
shinra-bansho
Member
NYTimes: Trump Is Said to Offer Interior Job to Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana (Trump Is Said to Offer Interior Job to Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana http://nyti.ms/2hKQ4ro)
How many more Cabinet positions to fill.
How many more Cabinet positions to fill.
Have you read stories about vets trying to get care? It will be like that for everything.
If the witch hunt for EPA staffers who worked on climate change research/projects is any indication, the answers are yes and so much.
This guy's relevant experience appears to be studying geology in college and being a member of the Committee on Natural Resources for his whopping one term in the House.
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
As long as people think those experts are just "politicizing" the issue by pushing their "liberal" agenda.
Never.
But they aren't categorizing those people as "experts," in the sense that they see them as sincere avatars of extrahuman knowledge.
I guess, really, the issue isn't that people have become anti-expert, it's that there's been a mass movement to place the "expert" label on the likes of television evangelists and vapid celebrities.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
It's a little early to worry about that. Just need to get Jason Kander into some sort of position that he can use to launch a 2020 campaign (can we have him run for McCaskills seat in 2018? Is she ready to retire?).
After listening to his interview on Keeping it 1600, I'm more convinced than ever that Kander could be president and really win. He's the future of the party, I'm just not sure he has a viable path to run for 2020 office, despite the fact that he's exactly the type of person we need to run (he's inspiring and fights for progressive ideals and he knows how to talk like a normal person).
jack_package_200
Banned
whyamihere
Banned
This NY Times Magazine article on Franken is fantastic
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/m...ext-four-years.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/m...ext-four-years.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur
Aaron Strife
Banned
Interesting, this might actually be a lifeline to Jon Tester if anything. Also Montana's at-large would be a reasonable place to start for Democrats looking to inch up their seat count (Democrats have won every statewide state government race since 2000).
Let me preface this by saying I love Kander and would love even more to see him run for president someday.
Kander running in 2020 after being in an office for two years would look really dumb. Yes, the GOP just elected Trump, so it's not to say he couldn't win. On the other hand one of the biggest critiques against Palin was her inexperience, and same for Trump. I don't think we need to forfeit our standards for candidates just because Trump won - this makes us a better party.
Kander should go for Gov in 2020 or Senate in 2022. If McCaskill did retire (she's said she's running, but minds can change) he would be a great backup candidate. Probably even better than McCaskill, but the ball's in her court. He goes for gov, he can serve four years and run in 2024 if Trump/GOP got reelected, or wait until 2028 if the incumbent was a Democrat. Elected to Senate in 2022, he can run in 2028.
Cesare Borgia
Banned
I don't see this happening given that no one candidate is going to have too much influence over the DNC. Much of the anger this year centered on Clinton allies in the DNC giving her preferential treatment. I can't stand Clintons obviously but let's be real: I understand why the Democrat National Committee favored a democrat in the democrat primary.
I'm not worried about progressives, I'm moreso worried about finding a good candidate who can win. Unless Trump is a complete disaster he's going to raise a billion dollars and be very formidable.
Yeah... I know, 2 years isn't enough when his highest elected office is Secretary of State for Missouri.
It's more a pipe dream because he's straight up an inspiring dude that has a definite future as a leader of the party, but 2020 is too soon.
Good Job Bob
Member
Is he still ruling out running in 2020 in this?
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
I'm probably super late on this, teacher life; but the interview with Coates with Hayes on MSNBC was superb. I just started reading Coates' article on Atlantic and it is really good, only through the first section.
My President Was Black
Coates/Hayes
Gonna try and grab 1/2 dozen issues of Atlantic for some friends/family, I know at the minimum my parents will read it.
My President Was Black
Coates/Hayes
Gonna try and grab 1/2 dozen issues of Atlantic for some friends/family, I know at the minimum my parents will read it.
ErasureAcer
Banned
You guys gave up on Castro pretty quick. I'm sure you'll give Kander up too after the next election.
Castro and Kander are nothing alike.
Actually a pick up opportunity during a Trump presidency.
whyamihere
Banned
lol the transition team even mentioned Zinke could run for Senate in 2018.
I really hope Denise Juneau snatches that seat.
I really hope Denise Juneau snatches that seat.
- Status