These products have been heavily marketed to minorities, and the only real difference between today’s crypto and OneCoin is that there’s a smokescreen of technology and VC money.
They didn't recruit in the slums of Manila or the Nepali countryside. I'm sure there were some poor people among the victims too but the majority wasn't. Just look at the amounts of money they gave them. What "marginalized" person from a developing country has thousands of dollars lying around to give to random people promising them high returns? Poor people get debt trapped with so-called microloans, happens to millions in Africa and South Asia.
The minority in this case were folks with more wealth than brains - in Europe, the Middle East and Asia. What poor person has the money to travel all the way to places like Dubai to attend a OneCoin conference?
No they absolutely did recruit in the developing world and in the type of “slum” you refer to. They took huge amounts of money in Africa.
Your comment shows you haven’t looked into one coin deeply. There were huge one coin conferences in Africa. For example Uganda was plastered with onecoin. https://youtu.be/NMt4KUSz_Fw
A youtube video by some random guy with 310 views is not a credible source. Surely you've seen some kind of evidence that isn't social media hearsay to make you so convinced. Pictures, videos? Can you tell us the name of the slum you're referring to?
>They took huge amounts of money in Africa.
"Huge" amounts. What sort of amounts are we talking about? Do you have a more concrete number and a source? Must be someone involved in the scam who told you because the perpetrators have not even been caught yet, let alone tried.
German authorities tried charging a single couple that collected over 320 million Euros for Ignatova on their own! Just to give an idea of what sort of sums we're talking about. The average each of the European victims invested is in the thousands, possibly over 10k Euros.
The media commonly cites 4 billion dollars that Ignatova and her accomplices collected in total. How much do you think they got out of that supposed Ugandan slum?
So if I write an article about say the North Korean government stealing money, or murdering, I’m using an emotional trigger word and an “out group”?
Have you ever watched Russian domestic tv, which is incidentally 100% controlled by the government? You’d find a new appreciation for emotional triggers and out groups!
> So if I write an article about say the North Korean government stealing money, or murdering, I’m using an emotional trigger word and an “out group”?
Yes. "We are psychologically predisposed to view group X as terrible" and "group X is actually terrible in real life" are in no way contradictory. It's almost as if humans are products of natural selection, and our psychological instincts serve a useful purpose
I think the point made by the original comment is that Google has been doing this basically forever, and the privacy concerns are unrelated to the fact that a Russian Ad company took advantage of them. While a Russian Ad company doing this is bad, people are only paying attention to it now, because Russia being bad[er than usual] is part of the current socio-political environment, so the activity has a higher S/N.
Yeah, I wasn't trying to make a statement on whether that claim is true or not. If you're asking, I think it's true but only to a small degree and only with certain cohorts (those likely to be emotionally inflamed or attached to the Russia issue). This website has seen lots of Google privacy articles pushed to the front page and No. 1 for a long time now, so it seems suspect this phenomenon is that common here. I have no idea how true that is outside of this self-selected group. It's possible it's true to a much larger degree in the general public, who are either unaware or don't care about the other privacy issues Google is (becoming?) famous for.
I'm sorry I'm not accusing you specifically, it's just very aggravating to hear people proclaim how ignorant "the public" is and how only they are wise enough to understand the real issues.
Interesting, I'm happy that more people are having concerns about this. I suppose it should be obvious that they are, since Apple started using that as a differentiation wedge between themselves and other tech companies.
Reporting negatively on the Iraq war or blackwater or Facebook isn’t “anti American propaganda”.
Just because you are anti establishment doesn’t mean you should instinctively support the Russian establishment which is incidentally many times more horrific and out of control than the people you claim are spreading “propaganda”. (I’m guessing NGOs, charities like amnesty international or anyone who reports on the war crimes and crimes against humanity of the Russian government).
I guess the point of the parent comment is that the real issue is not whether this is a anti American or pro Russia thing, but that Google's privacy practices are bad. Any government/institution doing the same would be bad, but the discussion tends to focus on whoever the public enemy currently is.
The implication in the parent comment is that “anti Russian” propaganda is warping the truth and the people have been brainwashed, the word propaganda isn’t being used to imply the issue is the opposite of “true”.
Contribution in taxes are not a measure of human worth, neither should people who own property get more votes than those who don’t (people who didn’t own property used to not be able to vote in the uk)
Speaking as an 'older person', many of the opinions I held as a 'younger person' turned out to be completely wrong. That's the problem with being 'older' you get the benefit of experience and seeing how certain ideals actually play out.
Many of these people you now hold in contempt were once just the same as you are now and changed as they became older and wiser - just like you will.
You’ll find people denying that nationalism or Brexit or anti EU politics has anything to do with xenophobia, usually coupled with “your attitude is exactly why we voted leave” as if by noticing the xenophobia, Brexit is your fault.
Anyway, many voters quite literally spoke into camera saying directly that they voted leave to “stop Muslims” and things like this. If you point this out, or point out that all racists and extremist nationalists supported Brexit they’ll further deny and claim it’s just an extreme minority that doesn’t matter. Or they’ll say “what about antifa!” Or some other strange comment.
Anyway here’s one example of a voter clearly saying why they voted
Also Tory party voting is a minority in the uk. The uk “democracy” gives a party with 40% vote share absolute power and absolute parliamentary majority.
The alt right poisoning of discourse by repeating these strange tropes like “another Sweden” or “London is full of murder” or “France is basically Islamic”, is really curious. Because after a while these strange untrue and often deeply weird theories / ideas become common and for some people accepted reality.
They do it by cherry picking horror stories and repeat them over and over, eg “a refugee murdered a woman in sweden” over and over and over. Or “knife crime” in London, usually implying the knife murdered is black or brown. Of course in reality sweden is very safe, advanced, high living standard country. London has a murder rate per 100,000 that would make it statistically the safest large city in America and significantly safer than supposedly “low crime” cities like San Diego which have a murder rate much higher than London. The entire uk police forces have only shot dead 50 people approx, since 1980! American police shoot dead several thousand per year, plus 10k pets and dogs. But many Americans for example now believe that “London is over run with 3rd world refugees and therefore crime and murder”. Build the wall!
Victim blaming is no good