Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mainiac]

Has the definition of secret changed on me at some point?

It was changed secretly.  By which I mean it was changed in an official white house press announcement with 6 months of PSAs.  Nobody paid attention.  But in a few years boy will they be mad.  I think the english language needs a word to describe anger caused by outrage felt at something that isn't a secret but you didn't pay attention to in the past.  I imagine it would be a very common word if we had it.

Also, it seems this recent bout of whatever-it's-called was caused by Trump not knowing what B-reel is: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/08/donald-trump-roundup-thursday-evening

[Starver]

Apparently Obama is going to go ahead and give Trump the same intel briefing stuff that would normally be given both candidates, so, if he he really DOES blab secret stuff, it'll be Trumps fault.

I'm not sure it'd reflect well on Obama to do so, if the one instigating it, but I could definitely imagine a Canary Trap being set up.

[Lord Shonus]

Apparently Obama is going to go ahead and give Trump the same intel briefing stuff that would normally be given both candidates, so, if he he really DOES blab secret stuff, it'll be Trumps fault.

I'm not sure it'd reflect well on Obama to do so, if the one instigating it, but I could definitely imagine a Canary Trap being set up.

I fail to see a situation in which this makes sense. The purpose of a canary trap/barium meal is to identify who is leaking information, and any Trump-induced information dispersal will happen on national television.

[Starver]

... also wow, what the hell. The money was actually Iran's. Like, literally theirs, that had been sitting in a trust fund for years due to sanctions. How the hell do you call giving someone their own bloody money back paying a ransom? How does this friggin' work?

"You give us what rightfully belongs to us, and we give you what rightfully belongs to you... "...is probably the imagined version of the blackmail.  Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitemail#Social_culture

Personally, I think that the timing was too close. Things of unrelated genesis happen by coincidence all the time, and if there was a known "we will do this if you do that, but on the QT" situation it would have been deliberately buffered, a staged handover via a mutually acceptible third-party country and not basically a Glienicke Bridge situation.

Apparently Obama is going to go ahead and give Trump the same intel briefing stuff that would normally be given both candidates, so, if he he really DOES blab secret stuff, it'll be Trumps fault.

I'm not sure it'd reflect well on Obama to do so, if the one instigating it, but I could definitely imagine a Canary Trap being set up.

I fail to see a situation in which this makes sense. The purpose of a canary trap/barium meal is to identify who is leaking information, and any Trump-induced information dispersal will happen on national television.

Information that was only from a specific security briefing would identify Trump's source as being the "now, you shouldn't tell anyone, but our underground base in Greenland has discovered an original Illuminati spacecraft" one.  More properly a Canary Seed Trap.

[smirk]

Nah, the source is the White House via a routine briefing. It's not a trap; it's just Enough Rope for Trump to Hang Himself With. The president's team would need to make sure that stuff in the next few briefings wouldn't be too damaging if leaked, just in case.

[Starver]

It was more the "now, you shouldn't tell anyone, but..." bit I was concentrating on.

As opposed to just making his own facts up, that's a fact that he is told he is obligated to not disclose. Anyway, it was a mere conceptual musing, hence not much worry about the vague wording not coming out as intended.

[mainiac]

Personally, I think that the timing was too close.

And too public.  Bribes generally aren't done in front of news cameras...

[Frumple]

Hey man, refuge in audacity. Or hiding in plain sight? Something along those lines. It's entirely too early to brain well on less'en four hours of sleep.

Still, you could make the argument it's basic sun tzu-y stuff. When attacking, appear to defend. When bribing, appear to be paying long agreed on reparations. That would assume a lot more competence than I'm particularly willing to give to the folks involved, though, personally...

[mainiac]

Sun Tzu the psychotic dictator?

[Strife26]

Sun Tzu's aphorisms are generally either obvious or only apply to a small segment of ancient Chinese history.


Now, Goebbel has some useful quotes on the topic

Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.

Even better, you can apply it to whichever party you particularly want.

[mainiac]

The ironic thing about Goebbels is that people think many of his quotes are "how to lie" when he was actually saying "this is how the jews/soviets/english/whoever lie to the german people".  Which is actually very fucking useful information to keep in mind when it comes to accusations of dishonesty...

In more recent news: https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/761222286003281921

To add to that, Clinton has better odds of winning Utah/Texas/Mississippi/Montana then Trump does of winning the electoral college.  Kinda shows the limits of the whole backwards and ignorant red states meme.

[BorkBorkGoesTheCode]

Still, you could make the argument it's basic sun tzu-y stuff. When attacking, appear to defend. When bribing, appear to be paying long agreed on reparations. That would assume a lot more competence than I'm particularly willing to give to the folks involved, though, personally...

""When capable, feign incompetence.""

[sluissa]

Still, you could make the argument it's basic sun tzu-y stuff. When attacking, appear to defend. When bribing, appear to be paying long agreed on reparations. That would assume a lot more competence than I'm particularly willing to give to the folks involved, though, personally...

""When capable, feign incompetence.""

When racist and hateful, feign inclusive comradery.

When you desire peace, offer nukes.

When you want an honest, capable leader, choose a foolish illusion.

[mainiac]

Guys, do you want to do another needlessly complicated predictions game?  Each player lists:

Battleground) The state where the margin between Clinton and Trump is the smallest (in percent)
Trumped!) The state besides the Battleground where Trump wins by the narrowest margin (in percent)
Record Corrected) The state besides the Battleground where Clinton wins by the narrowest margin (in percent)
Feel the Johnson) The state where Johnson gets the highest percentage
Dilute the vote) The state where Stein gets the highest percentage

If you want to be no fun at all, you are allowed to hedge your bets and predict the same state for multiple categories.  This means you will be wrong but you might minimize your wrongness.

Scoring:
Lowest score wins
-Score for Battleground is how big the margin of victory is is between the correct answer and the player's prediction
-Score for Trumped! is how big the margin is between the correct answer and the player's prediction.  Score is doubled if Clinton wins the state the player predicted.
-Score for Record Corrected is how big the margin is between the correct answer and the player's prediction.  Score is doubled if Trump wins the state the player predicted.
-If Johnson wins the state the player predicted, their score in this category is -10%.  Otherwise their score is the margin between Johnson's percentage in his best state and the state the player predicted.
-If Stein wins the state the player predicted, their score in this category is -10,000%.  Otherwise their score is the margin between Stein's percentage in her best state and the state the player predicted.

Sound good?

[Rolepgeek]

Still, you could make the argument it's basic sun tzu-y stuff. When attacking, appear to defend. When bribing, appear to be paying long agreed on reparations. That would assume a lot more competence than I'm particularly willing to give to the folks involved, though, personally...

""When capable, feign incompetence.""

When racist and hateful, feign inclusive comradery.

When you desire peace, offer nukes.

When you want an honest, capable leader, choose a foolish illusion.

Hey man, if you make mistakes often enough it just might work to set out to achieve the opposite of your goal.

Also, does anyone know when 'creed' dropped from the list of things one is supposed to disregard when looking at one's fellow humans?

And Mainiac: at least for the Iraq sanctions, suffice to say that in my history and current issues classes, I was told that Bill basically ignored Saddam's bullshit, and I still mostly maintain (or maintained when I said it) trust in the information the educational system offers.

On other subjects I still disagree with you.