411–420 of 562 posts
j_s,password4321,carolinew,colinwright,kuharich etc.
https://stylometry.net/user?username=j_s https://stylometry.net/user?username=carolinew https://stylometry.net/user?username=colinwright https://stylometry.net/user?username=password4321
Lowest match for j_s is 0.80 and all but one is black.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’d figured it would be some kind of n-gram frequency analysis. Would be interesting to code that up and compare.
It is. The description on the about page is a little simplified but I basically I look at the most common word and character ngrams of size 1,2,3 (200 each), put all the frequencies in an array and then compare to all the other users with https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/generated/sklearn.me... .
Have you considered doing rune rather than word ngrams? I can imagine that might be prohibitively expensive, but I really don’t know. I did something like that long long ago in C for automatic document language detection. It was quite accurate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you! I was trying to find the original essay I learned it from. I’m now pretty sure it was by Poe, but all I can remember is the main advice: avoid common metaphors. I vaguely remember one of the metaphors in the essay was about a chicken coop melting, or something like that. It was vivid enough to leave a big impression.
I remember this being from Politics and the English Language ( https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel... ): “ Dying metaphors. A newly invented metaphor assists thought by evoking a visual image, while on the other hand a metaphor which is technically ‘dead’ (e. g. iron resolution) has in effect reverted to being an ordinary word and can generally be used without loss of vividness. But in betwee…
(It’s remarkable how often a vague description can yield an HN comment with an answer from a clever sleuth like yourself. Much appreciated.)
This found an alt that I created specifically to see if I could write artificially to defeat this kind of analysis. I have seen other tools like it posted to HN, but none before had found that account. I guess I need to up my game.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have 7 bolded names (0.53-0.62) in the top 20 list, and none are alts of mine.
I'm one of them and I can confirm. But then again that's what I'd say if I was.
They were always communicating in some kind of meme-russian, and their texts were funny to read. [1]
I believe their writing mostly defeated this kind of analysis, at the cost of looking like idiots (which was probably the reason no one sent them crypto-dollars to buy that stuff exclusively).
Here's an excerpt:
"Attention government sponsors of cyber warfare and those who profit from it !!!!
How much you pay for enemies cyber weapons? Not malware you find in networks. Both sides, RAT + LP, full state sponsor tool set? We find cyber weapons made by creators of stuxnet, duqu, flame. Kaspersky calls Equation Group. We follow Equation Group traffic. We find Equation Group source range. We hack Equation Group. We find many many Equation Group cyber weapons. You see pictures. We give you some Equation Group files free, you see. This is good proof no? You enjoy!!! You break many things. You find many intrusions. You write many words. But not all, we are auction the best files."
[1] https://archive.ph/20160815133924/http://pastebin.com/NDTU5k...
This is a super interesting tool for self reflection. Looking at the top 10 similar accounts to mine, it gives me an arms-length view of how other people probably interpret my tone. I appear to be a well-educated, over-confident know-it-all.
The most noticeable similarity is that we both clearly have strong opinions about some things, and like to share information, but also like to be clear about our unknowns or opinions. So, lots of “sounds likes,” “probably,” “could be” and so on.
The downside is, I guess, this could be seen as a bit weasel-word-y or indirect.
Ingenious idea. At the very least, this is just about finding people who write like us, the same way we seek those with similar tastes (music...) How long before large commercial indexers start offering an efficient (AI based ?) stylometry to agencies and states ? wait... do you think the NSA is already doing this?
They would be silly not to ( apart from creepish profiling of an entire globe population you also get to potentially identify bots ). We all have mannerisms that can easily 'betray us' online. I honestly thought my writing style is more unique, but as it turns out it is somewhat common.
What's up with cluster of users like: j_s,password4321,carolinew,colinwright,kuharich etc. https://stylometry.net/user?username=j_s https://stylometry.net/user?username=carolinew https://stylometry.net/user?username=colinwright https://stylometry.net/user?username=password4321 Lowest match for j_s is 0.80 and all but one is black.