Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Effort to Expose Russia’s ‘Troll Army’ Draws Vicious Retaliation

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 96 posts

Re: Effort to Expose Russia’s ‘Troll Army’ Draws Vicious Retaliation

#71

Post by woodandsteel »

dijit wrote: post #60
woodandsteel wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My view is that when it comes to internet censorship, and human rights in general, Britain has problems but on the whole is ten times better than Putin's Russia. dijit, what is you position on this?

I agree on that point. But remembering that British people know what freedom is, I believe that british people would push back harder than russians. I believe the british government would try to get away with much more if it was in russias position. But that's my feeling and it's not founded in any facts.

I agree with you about the different expectations. Putin can get away with being a dictator because the Russians have never had the experience of a well-functioning democracy.

But that is tied Russia's international history. When you need to be united against dangerous enemies, you need a strong-man ruler to suppress disagreement. And, going the other way, if domestic rule is having unpopular results like damaging the economy, then one way to get support is to tell the public the country is danger from abroad. So a paranoid view of the external world and an oppressive government are mutually reinforcing, and the Russian people, alas, have never known any other pattern.

Re: Effort to Expose Russia’s ‘Troll Army’ Draws Vicious Retaliation

#72

Post by kbenson »

woodandsteel wrote: post #54
kbenson wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I may be wrong, but I am guessing you are following a standard Russian troll tactic... There are ways to word this paragraph that both don't accuse the parent of trolling, and still get across the point that you don't think a specific bit of evidence is as damning as may have been implied, or if just unsupported. Do you really think accusations of trolling are really going to result in a more useful discussion?

Trolling does take place, and we need some way to defend against it. A key way is to educate people so they can recognize it. Do you deny that Russian trolls do regularly use this tactic? >There are ways to word this paragraph... Could you present an example of this? You're right, though, that it was somewhat problematic for me to make a semi-accusation against a particular comment. It makes me think what we need is…

> Do you deny that Russian trolls do regularly use this tactic?

I don't have information either way, but attacking motives instead of arguments never seems to lead anywhere useful, in my experience. The response from a troll or an innocent is often the same; indignation. This often results in confirmation bias taking over, and an argument from one side believing the other is acting in bad faith, and the pother believing they are talking to assholes.

> Could you present an example of this?

"First, while you've stated Clinton has a link to Russia, I'm unfamiliar with the parties involved or the evidence, and you didn't substantiate your claim. Can you point me towards resources where this is explained?

Secondly, while there may be a link with Clinton, a link, by itself, does not mean anything. A link is not the same thing and influence. I am probably linked to President Obama through a chain of three to four (or less) people. I also likely have an almost zero chance to get a specific message to him, much less exert influence. Not all links are equal, and I would be surprised if most the career politicians didn't have links to people in almost all the major nations, on purpose. If I was in that career, I would cultivate these links and people with more of them, as those can be extremely useful in communication. Do we all truly believe the Obama and Putin communicate purely through speeches and official visits, and have no way to express specific desires and sentiments through back-channels? What's a back-channel but a link by another name?

The important thing to consider here is not whether there is a link, but what type of link it is and what influence it may exert."

> It's awfully hard to have a useful discussion when trolls are trying to take things over.

Keep in mind that the purpose of trolling might well be to stir the pot enough that normal discourse has no chance, not just to discredit a specific idea. Who cares if a good discussion happens if nobody is around to see it as it's lost in a sea of vitriol? There was even a moment prior to my original reply, when I wondered where you were trolling in this manner. I quickly discounted it, but I imagine if I had acted on that thought, our conversation would be much less useful to all involved.

Re: Effort to Expose Russia’s ‘Troll Army’ Draws Vicious Retaliation

#73

Post by xiaoma »

vetinari wrote: post #59
xiaoma wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it worked that way, most of Russia would belong to Mongolia.

If you want to be intellectually honest towards yourself, you must admit that Russia was going to be cheated off Crimea. They didn't accept that. That's all.

I am being intellectually honest. Going back generations and claiming historical territory doesn't work peacefully in the long run.

Re: Effort to Expose Russia’s ‘Troll Army’ Draws Vicious Retaliation

#74

Post by zzzcpan »

Balgair wrote: post #70

The biggest elephant in the room is: Why pay people to do this? FB, Apple, Amazon, Google, etc could easily make astro-turf 'bots to do this job for them, by a billion+ more, and with very good 'masking' that the 'bots are useful idiots. Surely, these highly funded agencies could do at least a tenth as well in terms of masking and the number of bots. The real question is then, why pay people to do this for them? It i…

> Why pay people to do this?

At the moment bots cannot gain neither trust of the people nor reputation and without that they cannot be effective.

Re: Effort to Expose Russia’s ‘Troll Army’ Draws Vicious Retaliation

#75

Post by zzzcpan »

guelo wrote: post #62

I'm sure these comments will be filled with Russian propaganda operatives, either the paid or "useful idiot" variety. I used to think the web would be an engine for democracy and transparency but now that view just seems naive. With powerful surveillance and propaganda tools the web is and will continue to be a powerful force for state control. And states will increasingly use it to exert power outside their borders.

I'm pretty sure they were here long before you posted your comment. As usual for subjects like this.

Re: Effort to Expose Russia’s ‘Troll Army’ Draws Vicious Retaliation

#76

Post by vetinari »

valcker wrote: post #69
vetinari wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that change the fact, that NATO did forcibly take a territory from Serbia? That is supposed to be OK? For all intents and purposes, the Kosovo government will do whatever the US government wants. The terminus technicus is puppet government. Even Crimea itself is an example of stolen territory. It was part of Russia, until (Ukrainian) Khrushchev moved it under administration of Ukrainian SSR in 1954. It was excus…

> Even Crimea itself is an example of stolen territory. It was part of Russia, until (Ukrainian) Khrushchev moved it under administration of Ukrainian SSR in 1954. It was excused as being in the same country anyway. Not entirely true as it was not a single-handed decision, it has been voted by a council. > When USSR dissolved, the Crimean referendum about returning it back to Russia was ignored by the newly-formed go…

The 1991 referendum was: Do you support re-establishing the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic as a subject of USSR and a party to the Treaty on the Creation of the USSR? That means to be on the same level as Ukraine in the USSR, not under Ukraine.

There were additional referendums, in 1992 and 1994, but they were asking questions with the reality of being part of Ukraine.

Re: Effort to Expose Russia’s ‘Troll Army’ Draws Vicious Retaliation

#77

Post by vetinari »

xiaoma wrote: post #73
vetinari wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to be intellectually honest towards yourself, you must admit that Russia was going to be cheated off Crimea. They didn't accept that. That's all.

I am being intellectually honest. Going back generations and claiming historical territory doesn't work peacefully in the long run.

It's not generation. The generation born when it was part of Russia still lives there. Their land was stolen from them, they took it back.

Trying to cheat them does not work in the long run.

Re: Effort to Expose Russia’s ‘Troll Army’ Draws Vicious Retaliation

#78

Post by mc32 »

woodandsteel wrote: post #21
mc32 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's not as though for example, people in Hillary's team don't have connections to the nomenklatura. So I don't think those connections are especially illustrative of anything extraordinary.

Huh? You present that as something everyone knows, but I have never even heard anyone make the accusation. I may be wrong, but I am guessing you are following a standard Russian troll tactic. This is when someone makes an accusation, accuse the West or someone in it of the same thing. For instance, when someone says the Russian government is immensely corrupt, say there is corruption in the West, too. The goal is not…

My reply was in response to:

"they see Trump as ideologically aligned with Putin's own highly nationalistic and oligarchial platform and worldview (Trump's campaign manager Paul Manafort has direct close ties to Putin's oligarchy"

So the argument is, Trump's advisors have ties to Putin's advisors, that therefore proves the allegation that Putin's admin sees a possible Trump admin as some kind of natural or kindred allies. That proof is very thin. So I refute that by saying that lots of people have ties to the Kremlin and that does not prove any kind of "alliance".

Re: Effort to Expose Russia’s ‘Troll Army’ Draws Vicious Retaliation

#79

Post by pinaceae »

hewhowhineth wrote: post #57
aaronchall wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Russia occupied half of Europe, against the will of the countries occupied, for nearly 50 years. Good point. Seems like we forget this.

We also seem to forget that most of those countries were part of Hitler's forces that attacked the Soviet Union a few years before that. Small example would be Hungary that sent ~500,000 soldiers to the eastern front. That invasion resulted in ~5 million civilians being killed, let's ignore the military casualties and general destruction. Every country/nation did all kinds of nasty shit, it's just a matter of how far…

Poland? Czechoslovakia? What the fuck is going on here at HN? Is this Bizarro World?

Re: Effort to Expose Russia’s ‘Troll Army’ Draws Vicious Retaliation

#80

Post by pinaceae »

guard-of-terra wrote: post #33
aaronchall wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Russia occupied half of Europe, against the will of the countries occupied, for nearly 50 years. Good point. Seems like we forget this.

How would you define "against their will"? I mean, their representatives signed the Warsaw Pact without gun to their heads (however I'm aware about Hungary'56 and Chezhoslovakia'68) This isn't a fair argument. Imagine, tomorrow USA fails, a lot of its former allies get current marginal opposition in power. They'll line up telling how USA occupied them, did this and that against their will. And they'll be partially ri…

The occupying Red Army did not force anyone? People were DYING trying to get away from this shit and here you are, spouting this nonsense. Humans were shot trying to cross over a wall built in the middle of Europe.

The Red Army PURGED the Polish elite, starting in Katyn.

What the fuck.

Post reply on HN