5 ms·

I'm fascinated by the comments here, which seem to be assuming that Twitter is operating in an environment in which the predominate source of trending informati

I'm fascinated by the comments here, which seem to be assuming that Twitter is operating in an environment in which the predominate source of trending information is well-meaning individuals and not motivated state-level actors intent on disrupting an election.

JPKab 6y ago
"predominate source of trending information is well-meaning individuals and not motivated state-level actors intent on disrupting an election." What evidence do you have that the predominant source of trending information is motivated state-level actors? That is an incredibly bold statement, and the framing you chose is such that there needs to evidence to the contrary, rather than evidence to support such a claim. Edit: A bunch of responses are mistakenly thinking I am denying the presence of Twitter bots created and operated by state actors. I'm not. I'm arguing with the incredibly bold statement that they are the PREDOMINANT SOURCE of trending information.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  > What evidence do you have that the predominant source of trending information is motivated state-level actors? I didn't make that post. But the fact that state level actors have manipulated Twitter topics with bots, astroturfing, and other artificial means is pretty well established. I'm not sure I'd agree it's the "Predominant" source of trending information, that there has been state-level influence from foreign actors has been well documented.
  - JPKab 6y ago
    I didn't argue that. I was arguing with the "predominant" part he stated. I'm not a blind moron. I'm fully aware of bot manipulation. Who isn't? Yet I was downvoted for simply trying to reign in the completely overblown nature of these statements. These assertions since 2016 have been repeatedly made with partial and/or zero evidence. There is still zero evidence that the manipulation of social media by Russian assets in 2016 actually affected the votes of the American public. As far as I can tell, the blue collar whites in the Rust Belt don't exactly have a large presence on social media, let alone any record of statements saying they are changing their vote because of an advertisement. This is all just playing into the hands of the DNC, who for two successive elections have manipulated the Democratic primary to kill Bernie Sanders, and immediately resort to "the lesser of two evils" mode to bamboozle his supporters into supporting their oppressors.
    - ogre_codes 6y ago
      > I was arguing with the "predominant" part he stated. I'm fully aware of bot manipulation. Who isn't? You could have easily pointed this out above without being so argumentative. If you are so concerned about downvotes, perhaps you should avoid being so confrontational.
- staplers 6y ago
  You could simply google "twitter bots state level actors" and find plenty of reading.
  - Covzire 6y ago
    There is plenty about the earth being flat too, doesn't prove anything.
    - catears 6y ago
      But if you google "twitter bots state level actor" the first three links are two government sites and one is nature.com (as in the big journal Nature). I can give lots of examples of googling that gets you to conspiracy sites, but I am not sure how those examples would prove anything...
2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
That's a bingo
konjin 6y ago
I'm curious, have you lived outside of a 100k US city in the last 10 years?
- shadowgovt 6y ago
  How is that relevant?
  - konjin 6y ago
    If you have never met a representative sample of half the country it seems reasonable to assume anything you don't like is done by someone evil outside it.
    - nobody9999 6y ago
      >If you have never met a representative sample of half the country it seems reasonable to assume anything you don't like is done by someone evil outside it. That's part of the problem. You are assuming that everyone who doesn't live in a small town or rural area believes that those who do are bad, evil or wrong. Well I'm here to tell you that you're mistaken. The vast majority of my fellow Americans (regardless of where they live) are decent people who just want to have a country that respects the rule of law, provides equality under those laws and gives everyone a fair shake to succeed. There is a very small group that doesn't want that. And they seem to have successfully pitted us against each other, rural vs. urban, white vs. black, young vs. old, etc., etc., etc. But those are false divisions. Sure, we disagree about a bunch of things. But the vast majority of us agree about much more than we disagree. So please, don't just paint everyone that's different (in this case, the population density of their residence) with such a broad brush. I was born and live in the largest city in the US. I've also traveled all over this country, and lived in cities, suburbs and small towns. What I've seen in my more than half-century of living, is that we mostly want the same things. The problem is that we're not getting them! But it's not the city dweller or the rural resident that's keeping us from doing so. We could make this country a good place for just about all of us if we stop hurling insults at one another and work together to make our government work for us. Because, in the end, the government is us. That we allow ourselves to be divided, keeps us from working together to create the change we all want. If we do that, and build bridges of communication to do so, we're in a much better position to communicate and compromise about the stuff we disagree upon. I don't care where you live or what you look like. Americans are my brothers and sisters, and I want you to have the life you want to live. And I want to have the life I want to live. Let's not let those who don't want that keep us from getting it.
shadowgovt 6y ago
I get the strong sense that a lot of commenters on HN don't have any understanding of either espionage propaganda operations or their efficacy, and it shows.
- convery 6y ago
  Probably more the idea of "it's better to have 10 guilty men walk free than to jail an innocent man". A tweeter may be a propaganda account, or it may simply be a guy with a strong opinion on something.
  - shadowgovt 6y ago
    That's a critical threshold for depriving someone of their rights. Depriving someone the privilege of a world-casting megaphone is a totally different category of concern.

JPKab 6y ago

"predominate source of trending information is well-meaning individuals and not motivated state-level actors intent on disrupting an election." What evidence do you have that the predominant source of trending information is motivated state-level actors? That is an incredibly bold statement, and the framing you chose is such that there needs to evidence to the contrary, rather than evidence to support such a claim. Edit: A bunch of responses are mistakenly thinking I am denying the presence of Twitter bots created and operated by state actors. I'm not. I'm arguing with the incredibly bold statement that they are the PREDOMINANT SOURCE of trending information.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ogre_codes 6y ago
> What evidence do you have that the predominant source of trending information is motivated state-level actors? I didn't make that post. But the fact that state level actors have manipulated Twitter topics with bots, astroturfing, and other artificial means is pretty well established. I'm not sure I'd agree it's the "Predominant" source of trending information, that there has been state-level influence from foreign actors has been well documented.
- JPKab 6y ago
  I didn't argue that. I was arguing with the "predominant" part he stated. I'm not a blind moron. I'm fully aware of bot manipulation. Who isn't? Yet I was downvoted for simply trying to reign in the completely overblown nature of these statements. These assertions since 2016 have been repeatedly made with partial and/or zero evidence. There is still zero evidence that the manipulation of social media by Russian assets in 2016 actually affected the votes of the American public. As far as I can tell, the blue collar whites in the Rust Belt don't exactly have a large presence on social media, let alone any record of statements saying they are changing their vote because of an advertisement. This is all just playing into the hands of the DNC, who for two successive elections have manipulated the Democratic primary to kill Bernie Sanders, and immediately resort to "the lesser of two evils" mode to bamboozle his supporters into supporting their oppressors.
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    > I was arguing with the "predominant" part he stated. I'm fully aware of bot manipulation. Who isn't? You could have easily pointed this out above without being so argumentative. If you are so concerned about downvotes, perhaps you should avoid being so confrontational.
staplers 6y ago
You could simply google "twitter bots state level actors" and find plenty of reading.
- Covzire 6y ago
  There is plenty about the earth being flat too, doesn't prove anything.
  - catears 6y ago
    But if you google "twitter bots state level actor" the first three links are two government sites and one is nature.com (as in the big journal Nature). I can give lots of examples of googling that gets you to conspiracy sites, but I am not sure how those examples would prove anything...

2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago

That's a bingo

konjin 6y ago

I'm curious, have you lived outside of a 100k US city in the last 10 years?

shadowgovt 6y ago
How is that relevant?
- konjin 6y ago
  If you have never met a representative sample of half the country it seems reasonable to assume anything you don't like is done by someone evil outside it.
  - nobody9999 6y ago
    >If you have never met a representative sample of half the country it seems reasonable to assume anything you don't like is done by someone evil outside it. That's part of the problem. You are assuming that everyone who doesn't live in a small town or rural area believes that those who do are bad, evil or wrong. Well I'm here to tell you that you're mistaken. The vast majority of my fellow Americans (regardless of where they live) are decent people who just want to have a country that respects the rule of law, provides equality under those laws and gives everyone a fair shake to succeed. There is a very small group that doesn't want that. And they seem to have successfully pitted us against each other, rural vs. urban, white vs. black, young vs. old, etc., etc., etc. But those are false divisions. Sure, we disagree about a bunch of things. But the vast majority of us agree about much more than we disagree. So please, don't just paint everyone that's different (in this case, the population density of their residence) with such a broad brush. I was born and live in the largest city in the US. I've also traveled all over this country, and lived in cities, suburbs and small towns. What I've seen in my more than half-century of living, is that we mostly want the same things. The problem is that we're not getting them! But it's not the city dweller or the rural resident that's keeping us from doing so. We could make this country a good place for just about all of us if we stop hurling insults at one another and work together to make our government work for us. Because, in the end, the government is us. That we allow ourselves to be divided, keeps us from working together to create the change we all want. If we do that, and build bridges of communication to do so, we're in a much better position to communicate and compromise about the stuff we disagree upon. I don't care where you live or what you look like. Americans are my brothers and sisters, and I want you to have the life you want to live. And I want to have the life I want to live. Let's not let those who don't want that keep us from getting it.

shadowgovt 6y ago

I get the strong sense that a lot of commenters on HN don't have any understanding of either espionage propaganda operations or their efficacy, and it shows.

convery 6y ago
Probably more the idea of "it's better to have 10 guilty men walk free than to jail an innocent man". A tweeter may be a propaganda account, or it may simply be a guy with a strong opinion on something.
- shadowgovt 6y ago
  That's a critical threshold for depriving someone of their rights. Depriving someone the privilege of a world-casting megaphone is a totally different category of concern.