4 ms·

Did you even read the article? If they cared to actually silence someone, they would, and you would never know. People (or even robots) disagreeing with you on

by LLWM 12y ago

Did you even read the article? If they cared to actually silence someone, they would, and you would never know. People (or even robots) disagreeing with you on an internet forum is so far from effective that it's almost insulting to accuse them of it.

arca_vorago 12y ago
"People (or even robots) disagreeing with you on an internet forum is so far from effective that it's almost insulting to accuse them of it." The evidence and movement of the "cyber war department" says otherwise. Within the last 5 years or so there has been an explosion of government requests for bids for persona management and other sock puppetry accounts, and quite a few companies have been making quite a bit of money off it, very quietly of course. Now, lets not be hasty and call anyone who disagrees with a thing a "shill", but also lets not bury our head in the sand and pretend it's not happening and a very real threat to the normal evolution of discussion on the internet. Instead of dumping a ton of RFB links I'll just give you a guardian article. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-ope...
- LLWM 12y ago
  When is the last time you saw an argument on an internet message board change anyone's mind? I am sure there are plenty of government and military bureaucrats who aren't bothered by futility of their efforts, but the leaks we've seen so far suggest that the NSA, at least, are competent at achieving their goals.
  - arca_vorago 12y ago
    Strange, for some reason I couldn't reply to your comment for a while. I have seen minds changed quite frequently on the internet, and I think the cynical attitude towards internet discussions isn't helpful. It largely depends on the forum and it's quality though. For example, HN is a great place for people to find factual correction from peers, and I see it daily here. On reddit, subs like /r/askhistorians or /r/engineering are also places where I see factual correction taken as it should be, that is to say as constructive criticism. Now, regarding the "effectiveness" you refer to, I think you need to broaden your idea of the definition. If you are thinking that sock puppets are there to change minds, you are severely mistaken. I would venture to say that most sock puppet tactics are based on some variance of distraction or pushing of topic or conversational tone. It's a complex topic with a myriad of techniques that can be applied by corporate PR just as easily as a government. If you want to know more, try the following: http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5 http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5
    - krapp 12y ago
      Deep threads have an increasing delay attached to them to prevent flamewars, because HN assumes the quality of a comment is inversely proportional to its depth. Like a lot of Hacker News' attempts at social engineering, it doesn't really work but it is annoying. This is one of the details which should probably be considered when trying to spot the presence of shills or agents here, that HN is engineered with a bias to begin with. Although, according to that clearly authoritative pastebin, questioning a conspiracy is evidence of a conspiracy.
    - LLWM 12y ago
      Factual correction is not the same as changing someone's mind. On a subject like what is an acceptable level of domestic espionage, the contention is about moral values and priorities within society. Disagreement about facts doesn't come into it. And if all government propaganda agents did was correct peoples' factual errors, I would welcome them wholeheartedly.

by LLWM 12y ago

arca_vorago 12y ago

"People (or even robots) disagreeing with you on an internet forum is so far from effective that it's almost insulting to accuse them of it." The evidence and movement of the "cyber war department" says otherwise. Within the last 5 years or so there has been an explosion of government requests for bids for persona management and other sock puppetry accounts, and quite a few companies have been making quite a bit of money off it, very quietly of course. Now, lets not be hasty and call anyone who disagrees with a thing a "shill", but also lets not bury our head in the sand and pretend it's not happening and a very real threat to the normal evolution of discussion on the internet. Instead of dumping a ton of RFB links I'll just give you a guardian article. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-ope...

LLWM 12y ago
When is the last time you saw an argument on an internet message board change anyone's mind? I am sure there are plenty of government and military bureaucrats who aren't bothered by futility of their efforts, but the leaks we've seen so far suggest that the NSA, at least, are competent at achieving their goals.
- arca_vorago 12y ago
  Strange, for some reason I couldn't reply to your comment for a while. I have seen minds changed quite frequently on the internet, and I think the cynical attitude towards internet discussions isn't helpful. It largely depends on the forum and it's quality though. For example, HN is a great place for people to find factual correction from peers, and I see it daily here. On reddit, subs like /r/askhistorians or /r/engineering are also places where I see factual correction taken as it should be, that is to say as constructive criticism. Now, regarding the "effectiveness" you refer to, I think you need to broaden your idea of the definition. If you are thinking that sock puppets are there to change minds, you are severely mistaken. I would venture to say that most sock puppet tactics are based on some variance of distraction or pushing of topic or conversational tone. It's a complex topic with a myriad of techniques that can be applied by corporate PR just as easily as a government. If you want to know more, try the following: http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5 http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5
  - krapp 12y ago
    Deep threads have an increasing delay attached to them to prevent flamewars, because HN assumes the quality of a comment is inversely proportional to its depth. Like a lot of Hacker News' attempts at social engineering, it doesn't really work but it is annoying. This is one of the details which should probably be considered when trying to spot the presence of shills or agents here, that HN is engineered with a bias to begin with. Although, according to that clearly authoritative pastebin, questioning a conspiracy is evidence of a conspiracy.
  - LLWM 12y ago
    Factual correction is not the same as changing someone's mind. On a subject like what is an acceptable level of domestic espionage, the contention is about moral values and priorities within society. Disagreement about facts doesn't come into it. And if all government propaganda agents did was correct peoples' factual errors, I would welcome them wholeheartedly.