Censorship 2.0: Shadowy forces controlling online conversations

Are the sock puppets that frequent HN simply much harder to detect? It often surprises me that HN is not a target for these kinds of people; I like to think that I have a good sense of when this kind of thing is going on, but probably I'm less sophisticated than I think I am.

Re: Censorship 2.0: Shadowy forces controlling online conversations

#5

Post by higherpurpose » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 4:39 PM UTC

That's a pretty scary concept when we have the rise of the unstoppable, unaccountable and highly secretive spy agencies. Things will probably get even worse when Strong AI exists.

Re: Censorship 2.0: Shadowy forces controlling online conversations

#6

Post by woah » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 4:40 PM UTC

Seems like it would be an important public service to game as much online discussion as possible, persistently. Right now, the vulnerability of these discussion media is not detrimental to those running them. Make gameability of discussion media something that is actually visible, and the vulnerabilities will be patched.

Re: Censorship 2.0: Shadowy forces controlling online conversations

#7

Post by fidotron » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 4:42 PM UTC

Of course, this place isn't immune to it. That includes all the usual suspect discussions (NSA, Palestine, China, Russia etc.) but more visibly with the employees of certain companies.

One of the more curious things you can do on HN to distract from a story is to start a tangential flamewar in the comments on it, but my single favourite way I see to bury things around here is to ask for detailed citations to data for something which really doesn't need it, as that results either in a flamewar or if left the post loses any momentum completely.

Re: Censorship 2.0: Shadowy forces controlling online conversations

#8

Post by gburt » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 4:42 PM UTC

legutierr wrote: post #4

Are the sock puppets that frequent HN simply much harder to detect? It often surprises me that HN is not a target for these kinds of people; I like to think that I have a good sense of when this kind of thing is going on, but probably I'm less sophisticated than I think I am.

It is widely claimed (in comment threads) that many tech. companies directly or indirectly operate this sort of targeting here. I'm not certain there's any evidence of this though.

Re: Censorship 2.0: Shadowy forces controlling online conversations

#9

Post by penprog » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 4:43 PM UTC

legutierr wrote: post #4

Are the sock puppets that frequent HN simply much harder to detect? It often surprises me that HN is not a target for these kinds of people; I like to think that I have a good sense of when this kind of thing is going on, but probably I'm less sophisticated than I think I am.

hn is without a doubt a target for these kinds of people. I'm honestly surprised that this thread hasn't been flag killed considering how it shows how blatantly idf are gaming this system.

edit: nothing against Israel and Jews in general, just that there was some pretty clear evidence specific to the IDF in the article

Re: Censorship 2.0: Shadowy forces controlling online conversations

#10

Post by jacquesm » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 4:48 PM UTC

legutierr wrote: post #4

Are the sock puppets that frequent HN simply much harder to detect? It often surprises me that HN is not a target for these kinds of people; I like to think that I have a good sense of when this kind of thing is going on, but probably I'm less sophisticated than I think I am.

HN is definitely a target for these kind of people. It has gone so far as high level contacts between the bosses of these kind of people and the stewards to sort things out. That doesn't mean that it has stopped nor does it mean there won't be repetitions. Astroturfing, burying, and derailing all happen. The scariest aspect to me is not those that are paid to do this sort of thing, because I can see their motivation but their little helpers in the form of the gullible public. From the above you could probably conclude I'm a cynical old bastard these days and you wouldn't be to far off.

I suspect that any forum with more than a few thousand participants has elements that are trying to actively shape the conversation to serve their goals on it.