War Room Lounge v94: I'd need to ice up when I wasn't pounding cakes in that kitchen

[Gregolian]

Dammit.

I hate Hulu. I have no idea how it's interface can be so un-intuitive and user-unfriendly.

When was the last time you used it? It's pretty easy now.

They have a tab for "Hulu top picks", "recommended for you" and then right next to that is your "Continue Watching" section.

I don't really go past that unless it's to their search function.

An easy way to think of it is like this. Barring Disney stuff (so a lot of the Marvel stuff once it all transfers to Disney+) is if Hulu DOESN'T have it, chances are Amazon Video will have it and you get an Amazon Video subscription if you are a Prime member.

 

[Trotsky]

When was the last time you used it? It's pretty easy now.

They have a tab for "Hulu top picks", "recommended for you" and then right next to that is your "Continue Watching" section.

I don't really go past that unless it's to their search function.

An easy way to think of it is like this. Barring Disney stuff (so a lot of the Marvel stuff once it all transfers to Disney+) is if Hulu DOESN'T have it, chances are Amazon Video will have it and you get an Amazon Video subscription if you are a Prime member.

I had it in early 2019. Like January to June, I think. Watched the whole series of Scrubs. And used Amazon Prime Video (also since unsubscribed) to watch the whole series of Corner Gas (@HereticBD).

 

[Gregolian]

I had it in early 2019. Like January to June, I think. Watched the whole series of Scrubs. And used Amazon Prime Video (also since unsubscribed) to watch the whole series of Corner Gas (@HereticBD).

Ah.

Sadly I don't know anywhere else you could stream KOTH barring those off the cuff technically illegal web based things that have their servers in like, Poland.

 

[kpt018]

From the article, she seems like a very sweet, humble woman. Doesn't have a phone or internet, so might not realize that being compared to Donald Trump isn't a compliment.

Just goes to show that looks aren't everything.

Oh man, I feel bad. But I am still mostly laughing at Trump.

 

[Higus]

I don't know how much that sort of thing actually sways elections though.
At least online it seems that the people consuming and mindlessly cut and pasting false information don't actually care at all that it's bullshit.

Most people already know who they are voting for and aren't going to change no matter what. Smear tactics work best to either discourage unenthusiastic voters from participating or poisoning the well in the future.

 

[Trotsky]

Most people already know who they are voting for and aren't going to change no matter what. Smear tactics work best to either discourage unenthusiastic voters from participating or poisoning the well in the future.

Yeah, it depends on the medium, too. A political message board? Fat chance at changing anyone's mind across the partisan divide. I do think, maybe naively, that you can persuade someone in terms of primary choices. So I might convince KPT to vote Sanders instead of Buttigieg, but I'm sure as shit not convincing Starman to vote Biden over Trump.

On social media, though? Particularly at the level of local news outlets which are followed largely by persons who aren't technologically or politically sophisticated? I don't know. Maybe that makes a big difference.

 

[Gregolian]

Fuck God.


Although 100% if push came to shove and it looked like the world was ending I'd pull what Butters pulls here:

 

[Higus]

On social media, though? Particularly at the level of local news outlets which are followed largely by persons who aren't technologically or politically sophisticated? I don't know. Maybe that makes a big difference.

tbh, I don't know if technological/political sophistication is a good predictor of someone's ability to be dramatically influenced, at least at the short term. People generally have their minds made up about something and either consciously or unconsciously seek sources that confirm their biases. Smart people are often the hardest to convince that they've made a mistake.
In the long term, though, I think social media bias saturation can make a big effects, although that might be harder to measure.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Most people already know who they are voting for and aren't going to change no matter what. Smear tactics work best to either discourage unenthusiastic voters from participating or poisoning the well in the future.

They also move the center. So people think, "well, (candidate) is probably not everything that some people are saying, but where there's smoke, there's fire." Kind of relies on the anchoring effect to sway people who are less informed or just less interested in the subject. So those people might not show up as having been persuaded one way or the other, but their thinking is still influenced.

 

[Higus]

@Ruprecht
watching Australians insult Scott Morrison to his face has warmed my heart and given me some hope for the future.

 

[HockeyBjj]

Most people already know who they are voting for and aren't going to change no matter what. Smear tactics work best to either discourage unenthusiastic voters from participating or poisoning the well in the future.

Yeah. Primaries are where there is convincing of a person to vote for either candidate A, B, or C

In the general, it's about getting the people who would vote for you to actually go to the polls and vote. And convincing those who would vote for the other to not bother.

 

[Higus]

They also move the center. So people think, "well, (candidate) is probably not everything that some people are saying, but where there's smoke, there's fire." Kind of relies on the anchoring effect to sway people who are less informed or just less interested in the subject. So those people might not show up as having been persuaded one way or the other, but their thinking is still influenced.

Agreed, although I'm assuming that you mean "center" as in the center between moderate left and extreme far right, which is somewhere on the right.

 

[Jack V Savage]

tbh, I don't know if technological/political sophistication is a good predictor of someone's ability to be dramatically influenced, at least at the short term. People generally have their minds made up about something and either consciously or unconsciously seek sources that confirm their biases. Smart people are often the hardest to convince that they've made a mistake.
In the long term, though, I think social media bias saturation can make a big effects, although that might be harder to measure.

I think we shouldn't think of it as being a matter of innate ability. Forming correct beliefs is a learned skill that requires discipline to apply. Very few people have either learned it or have the discipline to put what they've learned about it into practice.

I've pointed this out before, but a lot of people kind of think that being "unbiased" means having some views that go against the grain of the tribe you most visibly belong to, which is really completely irrelevant to the question of bias. Notice how often you see people deny charges of bias not by attempting to demonstrate that their beliefs are objectively true but by insisting that they "criticize both sides" or something stupid like that.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Agreed, although I'm assuming that you mean "center" as in the center between moderate left and extreme far right, which is somewhere on the right.

In that sense, I just mean the center of any two beliefs that are visible in the medium. So if someone is smeared on a television program, it's about the center between the person and the person being smeared on that program. The smearing doesn't necessarily convince viewers that the claims are true and that the person really is as described, but it can still color viewers' perceptions.

 

[JDragon]

Notice how often you see people deny charges of bias not by attempting to demonstrate that their beliefs are objectively true but by insisting that they "criticize both sides" or something stupid like that.

Well, that is quite obviously true. Just try applying it to the question of the Holocaust.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Well, that is quite obviously true. Just try applying it to the question of the Holocaust.

Yeah, it applies to anything but more obviously to some issues ("I criticize Andy Wang's skills just as much as GSP's so I'm not biased, unlike you who says that GSP was really good but Wang was not"). Saying, "I'm not biased," should be seen as almost equivalent to "my views are objectively correct" rather than "I'm a fence-sitter on this issue." Likewise, saying, "X is less biased than Y," means "X's views are more objectively correct than Y's" rather than "X is less predictable."

 

[Ruprecht]

@Ruprecht
watching Australians insult Scott Morrison to his face has warmed my heart and given me some hope for the future.

You have to understand that in Australia politicians aren't generally held in high regard.



Of course I didn't think ScoMo taking a holiday was really anything to belabour, because the fact that he's not really affected by or personally addressing the fires shouldn't surprise anyone. Just bad optics.
Nowhere near as bad as the Emergency Services minister pissing off, when his policy portfolio really was relevant.
The delays in recognising a need for and organising a national response on the other hand, can certainly be laid at ScoMo's feet.

 

[luckyshot]

This is my Senator:

 

[Gregolian]

This is my Senator:

Mattis I feel like being around prevented this until Trump decided to be a cunt to him and Mattis said "fuck off" and left.


Also, my haphazard chicken salad I made wasn't half bad.

 

[Clippy]

This is my Senator:

OMG isn't this how Game of Thrones ended?