Current Senior Google Engineer Goes Public: Tech Is “Dangerous,” “Taking Sides”

https://veritas.cmail19.com/t/j-l-mdtyujl-trihjlhlc-r/

by Fjolsvith • 7 years ago

26 15 7 years ago

veritas.cmail19.com

Majromax• 7 years ago

Note that as of this writing, the submitted link appears to be a tracking link from an e-mail campaign.

aphextim2• 7 years ago

Bets on how long until YouTube removes this video like the last few interviews?

I'm thinking by this time tomorrow it'll be gone.

onyva2• 7 years ago

No need to remove imho. Simply add a warning before and during about these people and a link to the Wikipedia article. It’s actually good to inform people of what their watching rather than ignore it. This is a great example of high production value in fake news.

fooey2• 7 years ago

Linking through a veritas tracking url isn't great

pashabitz• 7 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Veritas

The group's productions have been widely criticized and dismissed as misleading, fabricated or taken out of context; a failed attempt to sting The Washington Post led to widespread mockery.[4][5] O'Keefe and Project Veritas have been sued for defamation repeatedly, at least one of those suits leading to an apology and $100,000 payment.[6][7][8] O'Keefe has been barred from fundraising for Project Veritas in Florida and other states because of his federal criminal record for entering a federal building under fraudulent pretenses.[9]

aphextim2• 7 years ago

Although he has had a record of stuff in the past try this.

Google search, "project veritas defamation lawsuit"

See how many of the top results 9 of 10 are all libel lawsuits they have gotten thrown out or actually won.

Investigative journalism like this is pretty much dead and even through sometimes they may be wrong, it seems like 9 out of 10 is a pretty good record.

smacktoward2• 7 years ago

Public figures who sue for libel have to demonstrate that the person they claim libeled them did so with "actual malice" (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actual_malice), which is quite hard to prove as to a certain degree it involves reading their minds. If they're smart enough to avoid sending an email where they cackle about how they're going to twist the truth in order to destroy you, you're going to have a hard time meeting that standard.

fooey2• 7 years ago

They're not investigative journalism, they cut and edit video and stories to create lies in support of a predetermined narrative.

They're propagandist tabloid journalism with a video camera

CydeWeys• 7 years ago

From the Wikipedia article:

"Project Veritas is an American right-wing[1][2] non-profit organization. It was founded in 2010 by James O'Keefe. Its stated mission is "to investigate and expose corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions in order to achieve a more ethical and transparent society."[3] The group's productions have been widely criticized and dismissed as misleading, fabricated or taken out of context; a failed attempt to sting The Washington Post led to widespread mockery.[4][5] O'Keefe and Project Veritas have been sued for defamation repeatedly, at least one of those suits leading to an apology and $100,000 payment.[6][7][8] O'Keefe has been barred from fundraising for Project Veritas in Florida and other states because of his federal criminal record for entering a federal building under fraudulent pretenses."

Seems like this should be taken with a grain of salt.

Omatic810• 7 years ago

Be aware that this is from Project Veritas, an organization that is notorious for lying and misleading videos. Here's a quick list of their previous attempts:

https://www.businessinsider.com/james-okeefe-project-veritas...

smacktoward2• 7 years ago

This video is from Project Veritas (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Veritas).

As a friendly reminder, Project Veritas has been repeatedly caught out selectively editing and manipulating their footage, and setting up their subjects in "sting" operations where their words can be misrepresented and taken out of context, in order to score right-wing ideological points. (See https://www.npr.org/2011/03/14/134525412/Segments-Of-NPR-Got..., https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/30/james-okeefe-a..., https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/james-okeefe-helps-was... for just a few examples.)

Given their history, I would not trust anything in a Project Veritas video to be an accurate representation of its subject's actual opinions or intent.

Copenjin• 7 years ago

A lot of "maybe" and "i think" from this guy.

mistermann• 7 years ago

Stating uncertainty when you are uncertain should be considered proper behavior.

Contrast that with how respectful, trustworthy news sites often present stories such as the MAGA hat kids. Do articles from organizations that write mildly slanted stories like that, or such articles themselves, get memory-holed on HN as quickly and efficiently as this one did?

ap3• 7 years ago

What is cmail19.com ?

onyva2• 7 years ago

Tech is dangerous but also right wing spin machine.

Planned Parenthood recordings (2008) ACORN videos (2009) NPR video (2011) Americans United for Change videos ... Give us a break.

Wikipedia: A month before the launch of Donald Trump's presidential campaign, the Trump Foundation donated $10,000 to O'Keefe's Project Veritas.

Current Senior Google Engineer Goes Public: Tech Is “Dangerous,” “Taking Sides”

Related Stories