3 ms·

That related technique, the Gish gallop (also mentioned in the article), is seen very frequently: your opponent makes numerous wild claims, often very different

by FabHK 6y ago

That related technique, the Gish gallop (also mentioned in the article), is seen very frequently: your opponent makes numerous wild claims, often very different in truth and applicability, but hoping that some will stick and cast doubt on your position, or the listener thinks “it’s too complicated, I give up”. The latter, that people give up and conclude that there is no truth or “all politicians lie”, is sometimes the main goal. It removes accountability. Often seen with creationists, covidiots, Qanon, and political propaganda. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop

Tuna-Fish 6y ago
This was also an important part of Soviet Maskirovka in WW2. Soon after being attacked by the Germans, the Soviets realized that their military codes had been thoroughly broken. However, due to material, time, and skilled manpower constraints, they did not have the ability replace the codes with ones that actually worked while also fending off the largest coordinated invasion the world had ever seen. So, what to do when the enemy can read all the orders you give your troops pretty much immediately after you give them? Do you let them have this amazing intelligence advantage, or do you stop using radio altogether and thus give yourself a massive communication handicap? The Soviets took the third option. They kept giving their troops orders using the compromised codes, and eventually also in the clear, but also started giving a lot of conflicting orders to formations that did not exist, or were in fact elsewhere. Or fake orders to real formations that were specifically told beforehand to ignore any orders starting with a certain phrase. And by a lot, I really mean massive quantities. Once they really got the hang of it, the ratio of bullshit to real orders on the air was often well above 1000:1. The idea being that it was so much easier to manufacture bullshit that survived superficial scrutiny, but would collapse under any real investigation, than conducting those investigations, that you could bury the enemy intelligence officers under the workload. By the time of Stalingrad, the Germans had mostly given up on sigint.
specialist 6y ago
As an activist, I finally figured out that advocating an affirmative agenda is easier than trying to stop someone else's agenda. tldr: offense beats defense. I try to share this hard earned wisdom with other noob activists. "Ya, ya, ya. I agree. Now tell me what you're FOR. What changes, reforms do you advocate?" It's not an easy sell. People are strongly inclined to punch back, join the food fight, get dirty.

by FabHK 6y ago

Tuna-Fish 6y ago

This was also an important part of Soviet Maskirovka in WW2. Soon after being attacked by the Germans, the Soviets realized that their military codes had been thoroughly broken. However, due to material, time, and skilled manpower constraints, they did not have the ability replace the codes with ones that actually worked while also fending off the largest coordinated invasion the world had ever seen. So, what to do when the enemy can read all the orders you give your troops pretty much immediately after you give them? Do you let them have this amazing intelligence advantage, or do you stop using radio altogether and thus give yourself a massive communication handicap? The Soviets took the third option. They kept giving their troops orders using the compromised codes, and eventually also in the clear, but also started giving a lot of conflicting orders to formations that did not exist, or were in fact elsewhere. Or fake orders to real formations that were specifically told beforehand to ignore any orders starting with a certain phrase. And by a lot, I really mean massive quantities. Once they really got the hang of it, the ratio of bullshit to real orders on the air was often well above 1000:1. The idea being that it was so much easier to manufacture bullshit that survived superficial scrutiny, but would collapse under any real investigation, than conducting those investigations, that you could bury the enemy intelligence officers under the workload. By the time of Stalingrad, the Germans had mostly given up on sigint.

specialist 6y ago

As an activist, I finally figured out that advocating an affirmative agenda is easier than trying to stop someone else's agenda. tldr: offense beats defense. I try to share this hard earned wisdom with other noob activists. "Ya, ya, ya. I agree. Now tell me what you're FOR. What changes, reforms do you advocate?" It's not an easy sell. People are strongly inclined to punch back, join the food fight, get dirty.