Wednesday, August 24, 2016

98 Facts and Secrets Facebook Knows about YOU

WHO knows the most about you?

You might say it’s your partner or perhaps your mom, assuming you’ve had the sort of tame life a parent would find acceptable.

But you’d be wrong, because tech companies now have more information about you than almost anyone else.

The firm with the largest information stash is likely to be Google, which could theoretically tell an awful lot about your life based on your search history.

Facebook has a staggering amount of info about its users

But coming in at second place has to be Facebook, the social network which holds gazillions of our photos, conversations and innermost thoughts.

Now Mark Zuckerberg’s firm has revealed the 98 “data points” it holds on all users, which can be found in a new website revealing how it targets users with advertising.

“We want the ads people see on Facebook to be interesting, useful and relevant,” a Facebook spokesman said.

“Like many companies, we use widely available information to help show people better ads. However, unlike many of those companies, we provide information that helps explain this practice, and we give people ways to opt out and help control their experience.”

So here are the facts and secrets Facebook has found out about you or is trying to discover, according to the Washington Post.

1.  Your location

2. Age

3. Generation

4. Gender

5. Language

6. Education level

7. Field of study

8. School

9. Ethnic background

10. Income and net worth

11. Home ownership and type of home

12. Value of home

13. Size of your property

14. Square footage of home

15. The year your home was built

16. Who lives in your house

17. Whether you have an anniversary approaching in the next month

18. If you’re living away from family or hometown

19. Whether you’re friends with someone who has an anniversary, is newly married or engaged, recently moved, or has an upcoming birthday

20. If you’re in a long-distance relationship

21. If you’re in a new relationship

22. If you have have a new job

23. If you’re recently engaged

24. If you’ve just got  married

25. If you’ve moved house recently

26. When your birthday is coming up

27. Parents

28. Expectant parents

29. Mothers, divided by ‘type’ (which includes ‘soccer mums’ or other maternal tribes)

30. If you are likely to engage in politics

31. Whether you are conservative or liberal

32. Relationship status

33. Employer

34. Industry

35. Job title

36. Office type

37. Interests

38. Whether you own a motorcycle

39. If you’re planning to buy a car

40. If you have purchased auto parts or accessories recently

41. If you are likely to buy auto parts or services

42. The style and brand of your car

43. The year your car was bought

44. Age of car

45. How much money you’re  likely to spend on next car

46. Where you are  likely to buy next car from

47. How many employees your company has

48. If you own small businesses

49. If you work in management or are executives

50. If you have donated to charity (divided by type)

51. Operating system

52. If you play browser games

53. If you own a gaming console

54. If you have created a Facebook event

55. If you have used Facebook Payments

56. If you have spent more than average on Facebook Payments

57. If you administer a Facebook page

58. If you have recently uploaded photos to Facebook

59. Internet browser

60. Email service

61. Early/late adopters of technology

62. If you are an expat and what country you left

63. If you belong to a credit union, national bank or regional bank

64. If you are an investor

65. Number of credit lines

66. If you are an active credit card users

67. Credit card type

68. If you own a debit card

69. If you carry a balance on your credit card

70. If you listen to the radio

71. What TV shows you like

72. If you use a mobile device and what brand it is

73. Internet connection type

74. If you have  recently bought a smartphone or tablet

75. Whether you access the Internet through a smartphone or tablet

76. If you use coupons

77. The type of clothing your household buys

78. Which time of year you do the most shopping

79. Whether you are a ‘heavy’ buyer of beer, wine or spirits

80. What groceries you buy

81. Whether you buy beauty products

82. Whether you buy medications

83. Whether you buy/spend money on household products

84. Whether you buy/spend money on products for kids or pets, and what kinds of pets

85. If your household makes more purchases than is average

86. If you tend to shop online or offline

87. The types of restaurants user you eat at

88. The kinds of stores you shop at

89. If you’re interest in adverts offering auto insurance, mortgages or satellite tv

90. Length of time user you have lived your house

91. If you are likely to move soon

92. If you are are interested in the Olympics, football or cricket

93. If you travel frequently

94. Whether you commute to work

95. The type of holiday you enjoy

96. If you have recently returned from a holiday

97. If you have used a travel app

98. Whether you are involved in a timeshare

Please share this.

Tuesday, August 23, 2016

The Triumph of the Ad-Blockers

About two months ago, I could not access Forbes. I got a message: turn off your ad-blocking software. I didn't. I notice that Forbes has reverted to its three-second delay strategy.

The Telegraph, a British site, tried the same strategy. That lasted about a month.

I know why. Almost no one turned off the ad-blocking feature. It's not clear how to do this. I don't recall. I decided to ignore the problem. There is always some site that offers the same story.

The financial sites, Wall Street Journal and Financial Times still close access. So do the New York Times and the London Times. But revenues keep falling for the two Times's. No one needs either of these two Establishment outlets. Their information is available elsewhere.

This is bad news for journalists. We are told that we are dependent on these people. We are told that the Web is destroying journalism. So far, I have not been aware of this. The attrition is continual, yet I notice no decline in the quantity or quality of information. I notice an improvement. Open access is working.

Maybe the doom-sayers are correct. Maybe, someday, there will be a tipping point. The flow of high quality information will decline exponentially. But if it does, there will be profit-seeking sellers of such information.

We are seeing how the mainstream media are dealing with Trump and Clinton. It's kid gloves for the stumbling lady.

The pro-Trump people are seeing just how biased the industry is. For millions of Americans, the reality of media bias is now hitting home. They will not forget or forgive. Mainstream journalism is losing legitimacy. This is good. The less legitimacy these vultures have, the better.

I like the phrase "presstitutes." This well describes the industry as a whole. It is a self-policing, self-screening cartel of liberals and fellow travelers. All cartels break down in the face of price competition. This is what is happening to the cartel of journalism.

The inability of a handful of online publishers to deal with ad-blockers is a reminder: they have no functioning business model. They try one thing after another, but nothing works.

The "business model" of Progressivism is no longer working. The failure of the global warming campaign is obvious. The warmers are unable to get meaningful international controls. This has been their biggest campaign for 25 years. It has failed.

Progressivism is a cartel. It is breaking down. It wins only by default. Its political leaders no longer inspire confidence. Yet the whole movement has been a massive confidence game for over a century: faith in bureaucracy. That faith is waning. So are new revenue sources to support the existing programs, which are all running deficits.

They promised a new world order. It's the same old order: power grabbing and tax grabbing.

Hillary Clinton does not inspire confidence. Yet politics is a confidence game.

When confidence in the Federal Reserve fails, the Progressives' game will be over.

Please share this.

Friday, July 15, 2016

Guns and Homicides: NOT A WHITE PROBLEM

The statistics in the chart below are representative of every Democrat controlled urban shithole city in America. Obama and his anti-gun activist minions are peddling a false narrative about guns because they understand most Americans are dumber than a sack of hammers and easily manipulated by propaganda. Obama uses every high profile shooting to blame guns, in order to deflect people from seeing the truth. And the truth is guns are not a problem in white America.

It’s only a problem in the urban ghettos with the toughest gun laws run by Democrat mayors and city councils. Chicago is a perfect example of Obama ignoring the real problem. Fifty years of welfare programs and treating black people like victims has created a dysfunctional system leading to hopelessness, crime, and perpetual poverty. Chicago is 32% white, but they commit only 3.5% of the murders. Over 96% of the murders are committed by non-whites. Essentially, it is young black men murdering other black men. White people are not in the equation and are not part of the problem. It’s a black problem framed as a gun problem by Obama and his lying apparatchiks.

There are approximately 8,000 gun related homicides annually in the U.S. The vast majority occur in the urban ghettos and are committed by blacks and hispanics against other blacks and hispanics. They use illegally acquired guns, so more gun laws will do nothing. Their lawless culture, requiring no personal responsibility by those who father children, creates the dysfunction and crime. The urban ghetto kill zones all have the same thing in common – run by liberal Democrats for decades, with poverty created by their welfare policies, dreadful public schools, and a black population who don’t work and take no personal responsibility for their lives or their children.
Here are the murders by city for a sampling of these shitholes:
  • Los Angeles – 587
  • Chicago – 508
  • NYC – 333
  • Detroit – 316
  • Phila – 248
  • Baltimore – 233
  • New Orleans – 150
  • Indianapolis – 129
  • Memphis – 124
  • St. Louis – 120
  • Newark -112
  • Milwaukee – 104
  • Washington DC – 103
There are dozens of other shitholes like Camden, Kansas City, Atlanta, Oakland, Pittsburgh, and Miami with extremely high murder rates, and in every case more than 90% are committed by non-whites. Why don’t you hear Obama giving speeches about black communities policing themselves and taking responsibility for the crime, drugs and murder in their neighborhoods? He has no problem with proclamations about white people clinging to their guns in middle America where there are virtually no murders.

The entire gun narrative peddled by liberals is false. The crime rate has been falling for 25 years. There were 24,703 murders in 1991 when the population was 253 million. Murders in 2014 totaled 14,249 with a population of 317 million. The willfully ignorant American public completely buys the falsehoods presented by Obama and believes murders and crime are skyrocketing.

Today, the national crime rate is about half of what it was at its height in 1991. Violent crime has fallen by 51 percent since 1991, and property crime by 43 percent. In 2013 the violent crime rate was the lowest since 1970. And this holds true for unreported crimes as well. According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, since 1993 the rate of violent crime has declined from 79.8 to 23.2 victimizations per 1,000 people.

So, with homicides at a 25 year low and completely confined to the urban ghettos where young black men kill other young black men, we need new gun laws to restrict what white people can own? It makes you wonder. Why has the government militarized local police forces across the country in white communities when crime and murder is virtually non-existent in those communities? Why is Obama and his liberal nazi hordes trying to ban any gun capable of providing defense against a tyrannical government? Why has this become a war on whites when it is solely a black problem? It’s almost as if the government is treating working class whites with guns as the enemy. I wonder.

Please share this.

Friday, June 24, 2016

The USA, World Wars, and Refugees

In early summer of 2016 the world stands on a precipice looking down at a conflict that could easily lead to World War III. The UN has proved itself to be nothing but an aged hooker long past her prime and incapable of any reasonable action. The EU is little more than an adolescent female child still wondering what her role should be in life. The EU might have the tools but is clueless as to what to do with them. With her long tradition of non-alignment and experience with direct democracy, Switzerland alone seems capable of adult mature actions.

The First World War, created mainly by miscommunication and poor leadership led to the deaths of somewhere around 18 million people. No one really started World War I, it just happened because of a minor political assassination in Serbia and a lot of overlapping treaties that may as well have guaranteed there would be war. Largely because of the stupidity of Britain and France, the intolerable requirements of the Treaty of Versailles created the stage for World War II.

World War II dragged nearly every country on earth into the conflict and by the end some 60 million or more had died.

We are one stupid 2nd Lieutenant away from the start of World War III. The war will be short and violent. It may last less than a week. At the conclusion, billions will have died or soon will as a result of the war. It easily could be the end of mankind.

We have the same blind and stupid leadership, overlapping treaties committing countries to conflicts not in their best interests and an economy in the United States that feeds on continuous warfare.

We could fall into the abyss of war almost anywhere. In early 2014 the US sponsored a coup d’├ętat in Ukraine replacing the legally elected government with their own specially selected thugs. US Assistant Secretary of State and Jewish Neocon Victoria Nuland express her admiration for the leadership and wisdom of the EU in a phone conversation over a non-encrypted device when she was quoted as saying, "Fuck the EU.”

Nuland went on later that year to brag about how the US had spent $5 billion to destabilize Ukraine since 1991 using such incredible words in her speech such as justice, modern democratic government, human dignity, and economic health. She talked about how the paid for mob prayed for peace before rioting. How thoughtful of them.

When the eastern Ukraine and Crimea later voted for reunion with Russia Nuland and the rest of the Neocons somehow forgot the words democracy and peace. So today the US and Nato blame Russia and Putin for the conflict in Ukraine when clearly it was a coup organized and financed by the US. I would ask any reasonable person to look at the actions of the US and the Neocons in Ukraine and try to convince anyone that the people of Ukraine are somehow better off with peace or prosperity. Nuland turned Ukraine into a Nazi run cesspool of corruption, blaming Putin the entire time.

The US invaded Afghanistan in 2001 based on the thin premise that Taliban gave shelter to Osama bin Laden after the attacks on 911. Of course papers later showed that the invasion was planned nearly a year before September of 2001. The success of the operation can be gauged by the fact that for 32 years, Afghanistan has produced more refugees than any other country. The United States continues to essentially run the country through their hand-selected warlords. If the US actually won a victory with their destruction of Afghanistan, it’s news to the rest of the world. Likewise the continuing drone strikes against Pakistan where 90% of those killed were innocent victims the US has made no friends and many enemies.

I suppose it would be time to point out that while I was at war we used a phrase saying, “Never create enemies faster than you can build bullets.” If 90% of the people you murder are innocent, you are creating a lot of enemies. And while I hear the subject of refugees discussed on a constant basis with little or no insight, people talk about refugees as if where you send them is the issue. Actually it is not. The real problem is creating refugees and until and unless that is addressed, the problem can only grow. If you don’t want a refugee issue, don’t create refugees.

While the US choose to pretend that they are the sponsors of freedom and democracy so there would be no valid reason to want to attack the US, it just is not so. Clearly anyone attacking the US must be a terrorist in the minds of the US government. But think about it for a minute. If you create 65 million refugees some of them are bound to become terrorists.

Since 1945 the US has started 81% of the conflicts in the world. That’s a scary and illuminating statistic. The conflicts seem to exist just to keep the Congressional/Military/Industrial complex fed and fat. The US has not only lost the vast majority of the wars it fought, the costs are soaring.

Recently the Navy began to operate its first $4.4 billion dollar ship. And lest you think it’s some whiz-bang new and giant Aircraft Carrier, it’s actually a destroyer. You know, like the ones rich people give their kids to play with.

The numbers are interesting. According to the Navy, the guns on the vessel can hit targets from seventy miles away. Alas the Chinese have anti-ship missiles that have 290 NM miles range and probably cost under $100,000. Throwing a $4.4 billion dollar ship against a $100,000 missile doesn’t make a world of sense.

But $4.4 billion row boats can’t compare with $1 trillion dollar airplanes that have faulty software, can’t fight, and require helmets that cost $400,000 apiece. The US F-35 program is referred to as the plane that ate the Pentagon. For those who don’t yet understand the degree of insanity of those running the US, perhaps you should consider the war against Assad in Syria where Pentagon supplied and financed terrorists are fighting CIA supplied and financed terrorists, all in the name of peace, democracy and freedom.

Lest the reader come to the conclusion the US pentagon is the only military leadership capable of grotesque stupidity, there is the example of the $2 billion dollar UK destroyers that lose all power when having to operate in the Persian Gulf because the ships weren’t designed to operate in high temperature environments. Who could have imaged conflict in the Middle East?

In hearings before the UK Defense Committee, a representative from Rolls Royce was quoted as saying, "The equipment is having to operate in far more arduous conditions that were initially required." Not to be outdone in memorable quotes, BAE Systems Maritime said, "The operating profile at the time was that there would not be repeated or continuous operations in the Gulf." 

In the South China Sea a number of countries including the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of China, Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, Brunei and Malaysia have conflicting claims over a vast area of open water dotted here and there with tiny islands and shoals. The area is believed to be rich in oil and natural gas. As far back as 1988 the area provided fishing, enough to supply 8% of the world’s consumption. No doubt that number has increased today.

Half the oil transported by sea passes through the area. Sea traffic is three times greater than through the Suez Canal and five times greater than through the Panama Canal.

There is no easy solution to the conflict. But notice I did not include the United States in the list of countries with conflicting claims in the South China Sea. That’s because the US is 6,500 nautical miles away. Unless you believe the US has some inherent right to global dominance, it’s not our problem.

The solution is fairly easy. The directly affected countries need to send their senior diplomats to a conference where they have agreed to make an honest effort at a reasonable determination. The solution is not for the US to try to bully China as it has been doing for the past several years. In simple terms, the US can make the problem worse but not better. It would be better for the countries directly involved to make a good faith attempt at a solution. Making a treaty is a lot like buying a car. What the seller demands is never what the seller will really take.

A number of good and thoughtful writers have recently written convincing arguments that the US and Nato need to think about playing with fire lest they get burned. Those writers would include Dmitry Orlov who wrote here. In a recent podcast John Batchelor and Stephen F Cohen discuss the dangers of Nato encircling Russia. Less than a week ago, Chris Martenson of PeakProsperity wrote a somber piece he called "Tensions between US/NATO & Russia are Flaring Dangerously."

Philip Giraldi entered into the fray a month ago with a thoughtful piece titled, "How the World Ends." Patrick J Buchanan wrote just a few days ago in a piece he called, "Trolling for War With Russia." Former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under Reagan, Paul Craig Roberts wrote just a couple of days ago something he named, "If You Value Life, Wake Up!” All of these people are warning of a potential devastating conflict with Russia and they all agree the US/Nato will lose the most.

None of these guys actually have the courage to call a spade a spade. We all know intuitively that if you can’t identify the source of a problem, you can’t solve that problem. So we mumble about Nato and Ukraine and Iraq and Syria but never ask just who is behind all the chaos. Who actually initiated the events that led to the greatest number of refugees in world history?

The answer will surprise you but the evidence has been in writing right in front of your eyes. You have to read it and think about it and ask yourself if the events of the past thirty-four years resemble what the writer suggested?

In the Oden Yinon Plan written in 1982 the author quotes,
“Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel's targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel. An Iraqi-Iranian war will tear Iraq apart and cause its downfall at home even before it is able to organize a struggle on a wide front against us. Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon. In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi'ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. It is possible that the present Iranian-Iraqi confrontation will deepen this polarization.

The entire Arabian Peninsula is a natural candidate for dissolution due to internal and external pressures, and the matter is inevitable especially in Saudi Arabia. Regardless of whether its economic might based on oil remains intact or whether it is diminished in the long run, the internal rifts and breakdowns are a clear and natural development in light of the present political structure
This was followed up with a derivative of the Yinon Plan written for Benjamin Netanyahu in 1996 called, "A Clean Break..." In this paper written by a number of Jewish citizens, they clearly made their allegiance to Israel known. The writers included Richard Perle, David Wurmser, Meyrav Wurmser and Douglas Feith.
Two of the three new policies outlined in the position paper suggested,
1. Rather than pursuing a "comprehensive peace" with the entire Arab world, Israel should work jointly with Jordan and Turkey to "contain, destabilize, and roll-back" those entities that are threats to all three.
2. Changing the nature of relations with the Palestinians, specifically reserving the right of "hot pursuit" anywhere within Palestinian territory as well as attempting to promote alternatives to Arafat's leadership.
In an interesting aside, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected the position paper as being too extreme. If what the writers suggested sounds familiar, it may be because it is a carbon copy of the events of the last thirteen years. The idea that somehow a civil war began in 2011 in Syria is utter rubbish and everyone claiming it knows that it is rubbish. Those same Jewish citizens also hold US passports and would later lie the Bush administration into war in Iraq that continues today.

The festering boil that is the Middle East all goes back to the Balfour Document issued by the British Government in 1917 to Baron Rothschild. In it UK Foreign Secretary Balfour said,
“His Majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object...”
Everyone is quite familiar with that part of the declaration but has forgotten what he wrote next.
… it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.
The UN made it clear in 1948 that the partition of Palestine was to create two individual countries, one for the Jews and one for the Arabs.
There are three and only three possible solutions to the intractable issue of rights for the Palestinians. There is the two-state solution that Israel firmly rejects. There is the one-state solution that Israel firmly rejects and there is genocide of the Arabs. That appears to be the direction Israel is headed.

There are six major news conglomerates that control what every American watches, hears and thinks. Ten hours a day on average for Americans. Those corporations are either Jewish owned or Jewish controlled. Americans are fed a constant diet of Zionist propaganda. No wonder Americans see Israel as the victim of the nasty Arabs. Israel is not the victim now and they have never been the victim. They have always been the aggressors even while they put their diabolical plans into writing for the world to ignore.

The media likes to paint Israel as reacting to events only when they are forced to but the lack of response from Western nations tells the tale of what politicians are deathly afraid to say. Israel has bought and paid for through AIPAC the entire American political process. The US doesn’t have two political parties. It’s one snake with two heads. The US is a vassal state controlled by Israel. How do we know? Because throughout all of history, you were never allowed to be critical of your master.
In America any person can be critical of Obama or Clinton, even the Pope or Buddha or Trump. You can say terrible things about Islam or Mormon or Catholics. You cannot be critical about Israel no matter how outrageous their behavior. A couple of days ago I was reading about how Israel killed 180 Arabs including young children they claimed were responsible for killing 15 Israelis. Guess who the victims were? Not the 180 Arabs, after all, they are just Arabs, but the 15 chosen people, the Jews.
With the admission from recently released Clinton emails Hillary Clinton actually confessed that she is a prostitute owned and operated by Israel. She was quoted as saying, in writing,
“The best way to help Israel deal with Iran’s growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad.”
She continues a couple of paragraphs later with a chilling suggestion realizing Assad will not accept a diplomatic solution from the outside. And he would have no reason to step aside; in a supervised and fair election he won 88% of the vote in 2014.
“With his life and his family at risk, only the threat or use of force will change the Syrian dictator Bashar Assad’s mind.”
That’s cold. But to hear her cackle chills the soul.
There are a couple of issues here that pretty much define the question of just who is a vassal state of whom. While the US pays the most tribute to Israel there are a number of other vassal clients of Israel, all terrified of being critical of their masters.

In 2007 in the most pro-Zionist administration in US history sixteen US intelligence agencies came out with a remarkable National Intelligence Estimate(NIE) that said Iran had no nuclear weapons program and showed no intentions of restarting a program they had dropped as far back as 2003.

Let me repeat that. All the US intelligence agencies agreed there was no Iranian nuclear weapons program and there hadn’t been for years. In 2012 they said the same thing. Clinton talks about an Iranian nuclear program as being a threat to Israel. That’s very funny, the world understands Israel alone has WMD in the Middle East and may have as many as 400 nuclear weapons.

Nobody in the Canadian government said anything on the NIE. That’s because they, too, are a client state of Israel. In Canada you can go to prison by merely suggesting that maybe the story of the six million Jews killed in World War II didn’t actually add up. The UK thought that sanctions against Iran for a fictional nuclear weapons program was just spiffy. They are a vassal state of Israel. France didn’t mind ignoring the truth. Everyone that should have known did know. And did nothing. And said nothing.

The US stood to gain nothing by attacking Iraq. Their master ordered. They obeyed. Israel thought the destruction of Iraq was just wonderful, they wanted the country destroyed 30 years before.

Israel told their paid agents in France and the US it was time to destroy Maummar Gaddafi and Libya. So using the same lies from the exact same dual national Neocons that wrote the Clean Break and dragged the US into the biggest military fiasco in US history in Iraq instigated yet another “Civil War” consisting of outside paid and organized terrorists destroying a country that Israel feared might one day be some sort of rival.

You know, with a few million refugees from Afghanistan, millions more from Iraq, and Syria and Lebanon and then Libya, sooner or later that UN number of 65 million refugees is going to sound quite reasonable. I wonder how many will become terrorists and how the US and the EU are going to feel about sowing the seeds of their own destruction.

We need to lance the boil in the Middle East that is Palestine. If we do not and if the US/Nato doesn’t stop pressurizing both China and Russia we will be at war. Peace is always a better alternative.
I wrote about it on Amazon. It’s called The Art of Peace.

The world is on the road to perdition. A peace conference right now would be a good idea.
Bob Moriarty

Please share this.

A View From Space with Gary Bell the Spaceman, June 18, 2016

Please share this.