6 ms·

This is news?! All software has bugs. NYTimes is taking advantage of the general public’s ignorance of this fact to imply something sinister. Without additional

This is news?! All software has bugs. NYTimes is taking advantage of the general public’s ignorance of this fact to imply something sinister. Without additional information - such as it specifically targeted certain transactions - that is misleading. Remember this when you read articles about subjects you are not knowledgeable about. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect

mola 7y ago
On the other hand, these businesses cause the public ignorance For example companies that offer all sort of AI solution as some magic bullet. While covering up the inherent "bugs" in such systems.
skywhopper 7y ago
It's a bad headline and low-content article, but that's not really the point. The bug presumably made some filter for suspicious transactions ineffective, and this was detected by some sort of manual process audit. The headline should have been "Deutsche Bank fails to properly audit its money laundering detection for 10 years".
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
PhasmaFelis 7y ago
When a company publicly apologizes for a bug and says things like "Deutsche Bank is working on correcting the error as quickly as possible and is in close contact with the regulators," a reasonable person infers that they're talking about a serious issue in core functionality, not a GUI rendering glitch.
fareesh 7y ago
It seems to me as an outsider that everyone's standard for honesty has been reduced because it's an acceptable sacrifice if it means sliming the opposing political party. This has undertones of conveying that the President "got away" with this activity, which is the intended takeaway from the article. The quality of journalism seems to have been hit hardest by this philosophy. For over a year all of us around the world have been hearing about something called a Mueller Investigation from the news media in the USA, and now despite the fact that it has cleared the President and his campaign of the allegations made, not a single media outlet has walked back the insinuations made with this style of reporting which, through lawyerspeak essentially declared him guilty without saying it outright, but close enough for it to convince the general public. It's really unfortunate because the media has a very important responsibility. Based on the behavior of journalists that I see on social media, it seems like overgrown children are running things. One such example is a lady named Sarah Jeong who has written some really disgusting tweets on social media, and was given a relatively important position at NYT.
- sjg007 7y ago
  The Mueller Report that totally exonerates the President and yet the President won't release it in full to Congress. The only one sliming the President is Trump himself.
  - fareesh 7y ago
    Why would that affect the principal conclusions of the report? The conclusion can't change when the redacted portion is unredacted. The person who came to the conclusion did so after writing those redacted sections, right?
    - sjg007 7y ago
      It's called showing your work. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/mueller-complained-that-barrs-letter-did-not-capture-context-of-trump-probe/2019/04/30/d3c8fdb6-6b7b-11e9-a66d-a82d3f3d96d5_story.html?utm_term=.cb96f919a588 https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/muell...
      - fareesh 7y ago
        Yes but he showed the work and arrived at a conclusion as well. I am not referring to Mr. Barr's letter so the article you linked is not really relevant. The investigation team themselves reviewed all material and came to a conclusion. The premise is that this investigation team was seen by the entire country as a fair party to conduct an investigation and reach a conclusion. Now that the conclusion is not what the news media was suggesting all this time, there's all kinds of skepticism and wanting to see the work. This is an echo of 2016 again. The news media alluded to an entirely different election result, the result was the complete opposite, and slowly everyone started to question how the media could be so wrong again. It seems like everyone's standard for truth is "if reality contradicts the media it means something is being hidden" as opposed to "the media was wrong because they are bad at this"
        sjg007 7y ago
notfromhere 7y ago
DB has been caught laundering money multiple times over the years, is under a Treasury order to crack down on it, and has faced billions of dollars in fines over its money laundering activities. You don't need to imply anything sinister, the sinister stuff is fact
Spooky23 7y ago
Consider that a former US state governor was pinched within hours by his bank transferring a few thousand bucks domestically to an escort service. Mysterious "software bugs" that allow people to transfer millions of dollars to questionable characters in known corrupt countries are excuses, not defects. I guarantee that if you or your LLC wired >$5k regularly to somebody in the Ukraine every once in awhile, the best case for you would be your account being frozen.

mola 7y ago

On the other hand, these businesses cause the public ignorance For example companies that offer all sort of AI solution as some magic bullet. While covering up the inherent "bugs" in such systems.

skywhopper 7y ago

It's a bad headline and low-content article, but that's not really the point. The bug presumably made some filter for suspicious transactions ineffective, and this was detected by some sort of manual process audit. The headline should have been "Deutsche Bank fails to properly audit its money laundering detection for 10 years".

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

PhasmaFelis 7y ago

When a company publicly apologizes for a bug and says things like "Deutsche Bank is working on correcting the error as quickly as possible and is in close contact with the regulators," a reasonable person infers that they're talking about a serious issue in core functionality, not a GUI rendering glitch.

fareesh 7y ago

It seems to me as an outsider that everyone's standard for honesty has been reduced because it's an acceptable sacrifice if it means sliming the opposing political party. This has undertones of conveying that the President "got away" with this activity, which is the intended takeaway from the article. The quality of journalism seems to have been hit hardest by this philosophy. For over a year all of us around the world have been hearing about something called a Mueller Investigation from the news media in the USA, and now despite the fact that it has cleared the President and his campaign of the allegations made, not a single media outlet has walked back the insinuations made with this style of reporting which, through lawyerspeak essentially declared him guilty without saying it outright, but close enough for it to convince the general public. It's really unfortunate because the media has a very important responsibility. Based on the behavior of journalists that I see on social media, it seems like overgrown children are running things. One such example is a lady named Sarah Jeong who has written some really disgusting tweets on social media, and was given a relatively important position at NYT.

sjg007 7y ago
The Mueller Report that totally exonerates the President and yet the President won't release it in full to Congress. The only one sliming the President is Trump himself.
- fareesh 7y ago
  Why would that affect the principal conclusions of the report? The conclusion can't change when the redacted portion is unredacted. The person who came to the conclusion did so after writing those redacted sections, right?
  - sjg007 7y ago
    It's called showing your work. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/mueller-complained-that-barrs-letter-did-not-capture-context-of-trump-probe/2019/04/30/d3c8fdb6-6b7b-11e9-a66d-a82d3f3d96d5_story.html?utm_term=.cb96f919a588 https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/muell...
    - fareesh 7y ago
      Yes but he showed the work and arrived at a conclusion as well. I am not referring to Mr. Barr's letter so the article you linked is not really relevant. The investigation team themselves reviewed all material and came to a conclusion. The premise is that this investigation team was seen by the entire country as a fair party to conduct an investigation and reach a conclusion. Now that the conclusion is not what the news media was suggesting all this time, there's all kinds of skepticism and wanting to see the work. This is an echo of 2016 again. The news media alluded to an entirely different election result, the result was the complete opposite, and slowly everyone started to question how the media could be so wrong again. It seems like everyone's standard for truth is "if reality contradicts the media it means something is being hidden" as opposed to "the media was wrong because they are bad at this"
      - sjg007 7y ago

notfromhere 7y ago

DB has been caught laundering money multiple times over the years, is under a Treasury order to crack down on it, and has faced billions of dollars in fines over its money laundering activities. You don't need to imply anything sinister, the sinister stuff is fact

Spooky23 7y ago

Consider that a former US state governor was pinched within hours by his bank transferring a few thousand bucks domestically to an escort service. Mysterious "software bugs" that allow people to transfer millions of dollars to questionable characters in known corrupt countries are excuses, not defects. I guarantee that if you or your LLC wired >$5k regularly to somebody in the Ukraine every once in awhile, the best case for you would be your account being frozen.