Who is behind the "End quarantaine now" movement?

[cyrano]

Brian Krebs has been doin' some digging:

https://krebsonsecurity.com/2020/04/whos-behind-the-reopen-domain-surge/

It seems some groups that make the NRA look like schoolboys are behind the movement. And that includes these guys, the Dorr Brothers:

https://www.dorrbrotherscams.com/p/how-dorr-brothers-work.html

Mind you, these are not your average nut jobs. They just want to profit from any form of animosity.

 

[ruairioflaherty]

Spotted a Reddit thread that had some very quick but effective sleuthing on this, tracking back many of the domains registered for supposedly independent groups to a single company.  I haven't verified for myself so won't post here.

Much like the "grassroots" nature of the Tea Party there are some good questions to be asked here.  On the flip side, even as a left leaner my immediate suspicion was aroused when I saw pics of the nurse blocking the protest. Questions there too..

 

[scott2000]

Brian Krebs has been doin' some digging:

https://krebsonsecurity.com/2020/04/whos-behind-the-reopen-domain-surge/

It seems some groups that make the NRA look like schoolboys are behind the movement. And that includes these guys, the Dorr Brothers:

https://www.dorrbrotherscams.com/p/how-dorr-brothers-work.html

Mind you, these are not your average nut jobs. They just want to profit from any form of animosity.

...Do you have any thoughts of your own on this?

You just pretty much copied and pasted what was written in the article you linked...

I mean that's cool but I think you're supposed to put quotes around it if it's straight from a source....

"More importantly, the same code shows up on a number of other anti-gun control sites registered by the Dorr Brothers, real-life brothers who have created nonprofits (in name only) across dozens of states that are so extreme in their stance they make the National Rifle Association look like a liberal group by comparison"

"This 2019 article at cleveland.com quotes several 2nd Amendment advocates saying the Dorr brothers simply seek “to stir the pot and make as much animosity as they can, and then raise money off that animosity.”

 

[JohnRoberts]

Does there always have to be a conspiracy?

I expect some people want to get back to work and relative normalcy.

Of course there are health safety issues but not only do opinions vary about cost/benefit, but the variables are constantly shifting (lately for the better). 

JR

 

[scott2000]

over 22million unemployment claims....

I would be happy with $2400/month for a bit..... $4400 if my wife would pick it up too..... I could try to be more patient....

 

[boji]

Does there always have to be a conspiracy?

FWIW, my guess is that 'conspiracy' is now partially used as a threat mitigation tactic. Trust in leadership is low and our information ecology has become a bit of a sewer. 'Good journalism' just doesn't pay the bills anymore, and it has reconditioned the average person's mind. Also Epstein didn't kill himself.  ;D

 

[ruairioflaherty]

Does there always have to be a conspiracy?

Has there never been a conspiracy?

 

[JohnRoberts]

Also Epstein didn't kill himself.  ;D

He may have died from Covid19... 

JR

 

[cyrano]

...Do you have any thoughts of your own on this?

You just pretty much copied and pasted what was written in the article you linked...

I mean that's cool but I think you're supposed to put quotes around it if it's straight from a source....

"More importantly, the same code shows up on a number of other anti-gun control sites registered by the Dorr Brothers, real-life brothers who have created nonprofits (in name only) across dozens of states that are so extreme in their stance they make the National Rifle Association look like a liberal group by comparison"

"This 2019 article at cleveland.com quotes several 2nd Amendment advocates saying the Dorr brothers simply seek “to stir the pot and make as much animosity as they can, and then raise money off that animosity.”

What's your point?

It's clearly NOT copy and paste. I just tried to summarise and keep it brief. I also expect most people here to be smart enough to draw their own conclusions.

But, hey, if you want to know: Conspiracy? No don't think so. Even if they registered domains "en vrac". Simple greed. Just some right-wing sleaze-bag using the usual ignorant loud-mouths to make a buck.

As if that isn't disgusting enough...

 

[Seeker]

Cherchez la dollar....

 

[scott2000]

No point...

I'm always interested in seeing what people glean out of something .  It's more interesting to me sometimes than an actual source..

But I like remixes too...lol

Seems like some shady stuff going on I guess.... Sure it happens all over...  Not sure I even understand anything tbh....

 

[JohnRoberts]

on topic sort of, I find it interesting that facebook is blocking posts they consider inciting such protests.

I guess they don't completely believe in the 1st amendment.

"dont tread on me"

JR

 

[living sounds]

on topic sort of, I find it interesting that facebook is blocking posts they consider inciting such protests.

I guess they don't completely believe in the 1st amendment.

They're a private corporation, not the government. They're not subject to traditional media regulation.

I have long advocated for action WRT to virutally unregulated or at least underregulated digital media behemoths. I hope we can find a way to minimize the spread of bullshit in the future, while protecting freedom of opinion/expression.

 

[JohnRoberts]

They're a private corporation, not the government. They're not subject to traditional media regulation.

I have long advocated for action WRT to virutally unregulated or at least underregulated digital media behemoths. I hope we can find a way to minimize the spread of bullsh*t in the future, while protecting freedom of opinion/expression.

I don't think they are exempt from the constitution but this is not a simple issue. They appear to be imposing their elite values on the masses by restricting selected speech.

Big  data is big power... if you want something new to worry about the joint venture between apple and google to use smartphone apps for potential contact tracing....

Hmm how could that be abused?  : Let me count the ways.

JR

 

[hodad]

All those goofballs out protesting are the useful idiots of Trump & the right wing plutocrats, out there risking their lives to make sure the rich continue to get richer.  Hey, Kool-Aid!  Now coming in delicious Cool Corona flavor!!

 

[living sounds]

I don't think they are exempt from the constitution but this is not a simple issue. They appear to be imposing their elite values on the masses by restricting selected speech.

Big  data is big power... if you want something new to worry about the joint venture between apple and google to use smartphone apps for potential contact tracing....

Hmm how could that be abused?  : Let me count the ways.

JR

I'm not an expert, but from my understanding the constitution applies for people vis-a-vis the government. I'm all for regulating these companies (I belief in democratically controlled regulation), of course, but I don't think it was what the framers had in mind (again, I may be wrong, as I don't have expertise in US constitutional law).

I find it ironic how this suddenly become an issue for conservatives once it affects them. For instance, they tended not to have a problem with the elite values of big money donors in politics, as long as it served their interests... Nor did I recognize you protesting the massive voter suppression efforts by the right in the US, for example the shamefull actions in Georgia last cycle...

 

[JohnRoberts]

I'm not an expert, but from my understanding the constitution applies for people vis-a-vis the government.

I searched "vis a vis" (latin/french for face to face) and am still unsure what you are saying.

The first amendment had been inspected by the courts wrt internet communication and it is generally considered similar to newspaper publications, with lots of case law. This mostly refers to their right to say/print unpopular stuff. Facebook restricting opinion/speech seems a new area needing more clarity. Just like free speech does not allow you to scream "fire" in a crowded theater, FB seems to be arguing that they are just supporting local governments trying to prevent public protests for safety concerns.  I consider this a slippery slope fraught with larger implications. Of course my mind reading is no better than yours.

I'm all for regulating these companies

they are literally begging for regulation because they know they have the scale to pay the cost of regulation and that would only increase their moat preventing competition from new smaller players. I suspect EU is more than happy to regulate them for a fee...  I would like to see more competition but that ship may have already sailed, as they buy up new small challenging technology companies (anti-trust issue??). 

(I belief in democratically controlled regulation),

As compared to republican controlled  (joking)? A search for democratically controlled regulation does not illuminate, are you joking? (probably not)

of course, but I don't think it was what the framers had in mind (again, I may be wrong, as I don't have expertise in US constitutional law).

I am confident they did not anticipate facebook, but their focus was on protecting individual rights and this seems in that area.

I find it ironic how this suddenly become an issue for conservatives once it affects them. For instance, they tended not to have a problem with the elite values of big money donors in politics, as long as it served their interests... Nor did I recognize you protesting the massive voter suppression efforts by the right in the US, for example the shamefull actions in Georgia last cycle...

huh?  My criticism of social media is not something sudden... try different talking points. Glad I can amuse you.

JR

 

[john12ax7]

There are certainly issues with FB that need to be addressed.  But regarding a political slant they are allowed to do so.  Much like Fox News,  MSNBC,  and CNN.  It's unfortunate but currently legally acceptable.

The 1st amendment would come into play if the government came in and told them what they could or couldn't say.

 

[cyrano]

No point...

I'm always interested in seeing what people glean out of something .  It's more interesting to me sometimes than an actual source..

But I like remixes too...lol

Seems like some shady stuff going on I guess.... Sure it happens all over...  Not sure I even understand anything tbh....

It's on every level. Like Philips being awarded a contract to supply some 18.000$ respirators and coming up with 34.000$ ones. I don't think they were trying to really scam the US govt, as they can be pretty otherworldly, but who knows?

 

[Tubetec]

Ten pack of the most basic 'spittle masks' here , 18euros, as if chemist/pharmacy mark up wasnt enough to begin with .
I store my N95 with a wad of tissue soaked in 80% ethanol sanitiser , I get a little drunken giggle off it when I go food shopping .