5 ms·

China has more. They have enough that this is a drop in the bucket. While they might be as blatant and ineffective as Russia by interfering with an election,

China has more. They have enough that this is a drop in the bucket. While they might be as blatant and ineffective as Russia by interfering with an election, they want a low profile and to maximize capture of revenue, so they are more about making money than trying to put feces on the face of the American political process. You people should pick your battles. It would help if you knew the battlefield first.

mistermann 9y ago
How about this idea: what if the Russian bots aren't actually Russian? How has no one considered this possibility?
- threeseed 9y ago
  Yes they have considered it. And they have identified they are Russian. You really think governments wouldn't have checked this ?
  - mistermann 9y ago
    I thought the public might be a bit more skeptical. How did they identify with certainty that they are Russian? Is there any way for someone without top secret clearance to verify this?
    - stevenwoo 9y ago
      How - the special counsel Mueller has subpoena authority. First link from indictments in list form. The one I saw on TV was that guy with Hillary in a cage in parades - he was paid by Russians to make it. I also remember reading about the pro and anti gun rallies at that Texas state park - the Russians made the Facebook page for both sides in that little incident. https://mashable.com/2018/02/16/indictment-russian-trolls-interference-election/#SD5UuJloE5ql https://mashable.com/2018/02/16/indictment-russian-trolls-in... Presumably Mueller used that subpoena on Facebook and internet providers and the Russians didn't try to hide very hard and used mostly Russian ip addresses. There's also the fact Facebook admitted it sold ads and post promotion to Russian agencies and told Congress the reach of those ads and posts. Recently Facebook revealed to all users in North America whether or not they had interacted with those ads/posts. Several news organizations have independently found the data from other sources including actual interviews with the people working in Russia. One technique the Russians used was to impersonate Americans of some extreme view to stow discord and inflame the other side of some debate. https://www.thedailybeast.com/exclusive-russians-impersonated-real-american-muslims-to-stir-chaos-on-facebook-and-instagram https://www.thedailybeast.com/exclusive-russians-impersonate... There was also several different Facebook campaigns where they got Africans with pidgin English to pretend to be Americans and try to inflame white nationalists and latent racists fears.
      - mistermann 9y ago
        I've heard all sorts of the juicy details, it makes a great story there's no doubt. What I'm looking for is some substantial, verifiable evidence to overcome my suspicions at how perfect of a story it is, as well as some of the inconsistencies. For example: > Presumably Mueller used that subpoena on Facebook and internet providers and the Russians didn't try to hide very hard and used mostly Russian ip addresses. So on one hand, article after article tells us how sophisticated these hackers are, yet these very same hackers didn't hide their ip addresses, and also openly posted links on twitter that were supportive of Russia. Doesn't something about that seem a little off to you? If it does, you'll be the first person I've encountered who think it does, everyone else is completely confident that this is an open and shut case. Yet, none of these same people can point to any specific evidence that could convince me. Sure, everyone has some articles full of juicy stories, usually containing confident statements from high ranking government officials assuring us crimes have been committed and they have proof, but I've never been able to find a person who could point me directly to any proof. 1/3 of the way through https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download, rather than having my mind changed, my skepticism is stronger than before. This feels a bit like some things we've experienced in the past, where the "facts" about an enemy, that we're are assured are 100% completely true and verified, trust us turn out to not be true several years down the road. But by then, we've already spent trillions of dollars and waged a war killing thousands of innocent people. I'd rather not go down that path again, so I'm sorry if I can't join in the party vilifying the evil Russians, because based on the information I have so far, it seems like classic misdirection with the primary beneficiary once again being military budgets, and everyone is just a bit too enthusiastic to believe anything they're told. EDIT: There is no shortage of internet downvotes for people like me who aren't willing to go along with this story, but there is a severe shortage of people who will put me in my place with actual content. You can probably imagine the effect this might have on the certainty I feel in the correctness of my stance. Unlike others, I'm open to having my mind change, but for some reason no one can muster any effort beyond a condescending and intellectually lazy "let me google that for you".
        willstrafach 9y ago
        > Russians didn't try to hide very hard and used mostly Russian ip addresses. This is incorrect. The indictment explains it. They routed their connections through US-based VPNs to appear as if they were American users.
threeseed 9y ago
> You people should pick your battles. It would help if you knew the battlefield first. I am so glad you know more than the UK, EU, US etc governments who have identified Russia as the primary source of instability for elections. And since when has this been an either/or scenario. You can focus on both Russia and China.

mistermann 9y ago

How about this idea: what if the Russian bots aren't actually Russian? How has no one considered this possibility?

threeseed 9y ago
Yes they have considered it. And they have identified they are Russian. You really think governments wouldn't have checked this ?
- mistermann 9y ago
  I thought the public might be a bit more skeptical. How did they identify with certainty that they are Russian? Is there any way for someone without top secret clearance to verify this?
  - stevenwoo 9y ago
    How - the special counsel Mueller has subpoena authority. First link from indictments in list form. The one I saw on TV was that guy with Hillary in a cage in parades - he was paid by Russians to make it. I also remember reading about the pro and anti gun rallies at that Texas state park - the Russians made the Facebook page for both sides in that little incident. https://mashable.com/2018/02/16/indictment-russian-trolls-interference-election/#SD5UuJloE5ql https://mashable.com/2018/02/16/indictment-russian-trolls-in... Presumably Mueller used that subpoena on Facebook and internet providers and the Russians didn't try to hide very hard and used mostly Russian ip addresses. There's also the fact Facebook admitted it sold ads and post promotion to Russian agencies and told Congress the reach of those ads and posts. Recently Facebook revealed to all users in North America whether or not they had interacted with those ads/posts. Several news organizations have independently found the data from other sources including actual interviews with the people working in Russia. One technique the Russians used was to impersonate Americans of some extreme view to stow discord and inflame the other side of some debate. https://www.thedailybeast.com/exclusive-russians-impersonated-real-american-muslims-to-stir-chaos-on-facebook-and-instagram https://www.thedailybeast.com/exclusive-russians-impersonate... There was also several different Facebook campaigns where they got Africans with pidgin English to pretend to be Americans and try to inflame white nationalists and latent racists fears.
    - mistermann 9y ago
      I've heard all sorts of the juicy details, it makes a great story there's no doubt. What I'm looking for is some substantial, verifiable evidence to overcome my suspicions at how perfect of a story it is, as well as some of the inconsistencies. For example: > Presumably Mueller used that subpoena on Facebook and internet providers and the Russians didn't try to hide very hard and used mostly Russian ip addresses. So on one hand, article after article tells us how sophisticated these hackers are, yet these very same hackers didn't hide their ip addresses, and also openly posted links on twitter that were supportive of Russia. Doesn't something about that seem a little off to you? If it does, you'll be the first person I've encountered who think it does, everyone else is completely confident that this is an open and shut case. Yet, none of these same people can point to any specific evidence that could convince me. Sure, everyone has some articles full of juicy stories, usually containing confident statements from high ranking government officials assuring us crimes have been committed and they have proof, but I've never been able to find a person who could point me directly to any proof. 1/3 of the way through https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download, rather than having my mind changed, my skepticism is stronger than before. This feels a bit like some things we've experienced in the past, where the "facts" about an enemy, that we're are assured are 100% completely true and verified, trust us turn out to not be true several years down the road. But by then, we've already spent trillions of dollars and waged a war killing thousands of innocent people. I'd rather not go down that path again, so I'm sorry if I can't join in the party vilifying the evil Russians, because based on the information I have so far, it seems like classic misdirection with the primary beneficiary once again being military budgets, and everyone is just a bit too enthusiastic to believe anything they're told. EDIT: There is no shortage of internet downvotes for people like me who aren't willing to go along with this story, but there is a severe shortage of people who will put me in my place with actual content. You can probably imagine the effect this might have on the certainty I feel in the correctness of my stance. Unlike others, I'm open to having my mind change, but for some reason no one can muster any effort beyond a condescending and intellectually lazy "let me google that for you".
      - willstrafach 9y ago
        > Russians didn't try to hide very hard and used mostly Russian ip addresses. This is incorrect. The indictment explains it. They routed their connections through US-based VPNs to appear as if they were American users.

threeseed 9y ago

> You people should pick your battles. It would help if you knew the battlefield first. I am so glad you know more than the UK, EU, US etc governments who have identified Russia as the primary source of instability for elections. And since when has this been an either/or scenario. You can focus on both Russia and China.