I think most HN'ers can appreciate the idea that the way we read technical news articles is distinctly different from how non-technical people (say, your Grandm

I think most HN'ers can appreciate the idea that the way we read technical news articles is distinctly different from how non-technical people (say, your Grandma) would read them. Two different parties can read the exact same article, but come away with very different interpretations. (Some of the reasons for this are obvious, but depending on the topic there are also others that are not so obvious.) In the spirit of cultivating understanding of the differences between individual people with the goal of working towards a more harmonious, peaceful future, and also just for a little tongue-in-cheek fun on a Friday morning, here is a bit of insight into how (eye-catching key phrases excerpted) a distrustful-of-all-authority, possibly insane, unapologetic conspiracy theorist hyper-critically reads articles like this... > Transparency is at the heart of everything we do at Twitter. "transparency", "everything" > That’s why we routinely disclose datasets of information operations we can reliably link to state actors. "That’s why", "reliably", "link to" > Today, we are sharing comprehensive data about 5,929 accounts which we have removed for violating our platform manipulation policies. "Comprehensive" > Rigorous investigations by our Site Integrity team have allowed us to attribute these accounts to a significant state-backed information operation on Twitter originating in Saudi Arabia. I wonder what the terms "investigations", "attribute", and "originating in Saudi Arabia" mean, precisely? Is source code available so we can see for ourselves what they actually mean? What with transparency being at the heart of everything they do at Twitter and all. > In order to protect the privacy of potentially compromised accounts repurposed to engage in platform manipulation, and in response to researcher feedback requesting that we pre-filter unrelated spam, we have not disclosed data for all 88,000 accounts. Hmmm. > In the interest of offering meaningful transparency, the dataset we are disclosing includes a representative, random sample of the fake and spammy accounts associated with this broader network. "Meaningful" transparency. "Representative, random" sample. "associated with" > Our investigations have traced the source of the coordinated activity to Smaat, a social media marketing and management company based in Saudi Arabia. "Traced", "the source" > Our in-house technical indicators show that Smaat appears to have created, purchased, and/or managed these accounts on behalf of — but not necessarily with the knowledge of — their clients. "technical indicators", "show", "appears to have" ----------------------- Now, an obvious shortcoming (in addition to the obvious mental health issues) contributing to my ludicrous interpretation of such articles is my lack of knowledge in current, (known) state of the art capabilities in spoofing identity on the internet (all criticism welcome), as well as the confidential processes and capabilities within Twitter. For the latter, there is some PR-speak information here: https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/information-ops-on-twitter.html https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/informati... > How do we do it? > Our Site Integrity team is dedicated to identifying and investigating suspected platform manipulation on Twitter, including potential state-backed activity. In partnership with teams across the company, we employ a range of open-source and proprietary signals and tools to identify when attempted coordinated manipulation may be taking place, as well as the actors responsible for it. We also partner closely with governments, law enforcement, and our peer companies to improve our understanding of the actors involved in information operations and develop a holistic strategy for addressing them. "identifying", "suspected", "potential", "a range", "proprietary", "signals", "identify", "may be", "actors responsible", "improve our understanding" ----------------------- Possibly related: https://toinformistoinfluence.com/2012/06/15/images-a-matter-of-perspective/ https://toinformistoinfluence.com/2012/06/15/images-a-matter... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology https://www.epsilontheory.com/gell-mann-amnesia/ https://www.epsilontheory.com/gell-mann-amnesia/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_address_spoofing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_address_spoofing https://theintercept.com/2017/02/20/how-to-run-a-rogue-government-twitter-account-with-an-anonymous-email-address-and-a-burner-phone/ https://theintercept.com/2017/02/20/how-to-run-a-rogue-gover... https://www.expressvpn.com/support/troubleshooting/spoof-location-google-chrome/ https://www.expressvpn.com/support/troubleshooting/spoof-loc... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/4g7jay/updated_compilation_of_confirmed_conspiracy/ https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/4g7jay/updated_... ----------------------- Meta: How a non-conspiracy theorist might read this comment: "So what you're saying is", you believe that this article, and all articles like it, are 100% fake news, that everything is a vast conspiracy. Possibly related: https://reformedperspective.ca/so-what-youre-saying-is/ https://reformedperspective.ca/so-what-youre-saying-is/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_distortion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_distortion https://medium.com/datadriveninvestor/we-human-machines-hallucinate-our-reality-in-diluted-states-of-consciousness-90a15e94834d https://medium.com/datadriveninvestor/we-human-machines-hall...