5 ms·
That the author is peddling the absurd “Russians hacked muh servers” popular myth makes the comment all the more poignant. Social networks tolerate fake traffi
by sk2020 5y ago
That the author is peddling the absurd “Russians hacked muh servers” popular myth makes the comment all the more poignant.
Social networks tolerate fake traffic because it increases their perceived value. The real crime is the fictive usage and engagement metrics they use to set ad pricing.
- GavinMcG 5y agoThe "popular myth" is sourced to both independent security firms and multiple U.S. intelligence agencies, and isn't a partisan issue: https://www.wired.com/2017/03/marco-rubio-says-hack-attempts-russia-targeted/ https://www.wired.com/2017/03/marco-rubio-says-hack-attempts...
- xqcgrek2 5y agoOh it most definitely is a partisan issue. I'll wait for your evidence for if any votes were changed in machines, the only thing that could truly be construed as "hacking" a election.
- GavinMcG 5y agoBut that's not what anyone was saying. You're making up an easier position to defend. What about the claim that was actually made in the article? > target misleading messages based on material stolen in the Russian hack of Democratic National Committee servers
- 93po 5y agoMy understanding is that the only group that ever got access to Hillary's servers to do forensics was a service that Hillary paid directly and is absolutely not "independent".
- Pokepokalypse 5y agoWell, I prefer to victim-blame the idiots who shell out astronomical sums of money for ads; based on these fraudulent "statistics".