CIRCLE WITH A DOT

@nina_kali_nina @jkn @citrusui Oh and you know how the README claims "This investigation was conducted by a human researcher who [...] wrote the public-facing posts"? Well here's the last commit to the .md file containing a copy of the Reddit post. The previous version shares a lot of text with the final post, but also has the standard signs of chatbot output, like random emoji and em-dashes - look near e. g. "Despite NCOSE's website" and "a Democratic consulting firm".

Update reddit_post_meta_dark_money.md · upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings@2f3f4df

Contribute to upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings development by creating an account on GitHub.

GitHub (github.com)

@nina_kali_nina @jkn @citrusui Also look at this "raw" data. That's not what "raw" means. A Markdown file with a collection of statements on 6 different topics and from many different sources, with notes like "(CONFIRMED)" and "OPEN THREADS FOR FOLLOW-UP", is the opposite of "raw".

meta-lobbying-and-other-findings/data/raw/osint_990 at main · upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings

Contribute to upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings development by creating an account on GitHub.

GitHub (github.com)

@nina_kali_nina @jkn @citrusui It looks like very bad research. Literally the first chart doesn't match its sources.
For 2023, the chart says "$18.9M", but the cited OpenSecrets website says "$19,300,000".
For 2024, the chart says "$24.0M" and cites two sources that don't state any concrete numbers for 2024. OpenSecrets says "$24,430,000". So this value in the chart is just made up.
For 2025, the chart says "$26.3M", which matches OpenSecrets' "$26,290,000", but does not match the cited sources!

@0xabad1dea at one point I encountered some software (don't remember what it was) that clearly had an incomplete German translation, so the theme selector literally had the two options "Dark" and "Hell"

@nina_kali_nina Still alive and well in some corners of Europe!

https://www.ard-text.de/
https://nos.nl/teletekst