We all wear tinfoil hats now • Hacker News Board

Re: We all wear tinfoil hats now

#111

Post by quanticle » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 6:38 PM UTC

QuantumGood wrote: post #92

dangerface wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know first hand that people are willing to pay me to do a ton of things that don't actually work. (They often continue trying to do so after I tell them it doesn't work and it's a bad idea) Hehehe very true. I tell people what works then they ask me to do random shit. I can't deny you are right at the end of the day I do what they will pay for whether it works or not.

Evaluating what works by what the dumbest people do is not science. Marketing results are measurable. That people will measure improperly, not at all, or ignore proper measurement approaches is not about what is measured, it's about the people. Yes, there are things that can't be measured well. Smart operators tend to not do those things, no matter how common or popular they are. The very old joke "Half the money I s…

>Smart operators tend to not do those things, no matter how common or popular they are.

What evidence do you have that political campaigns are "smart operators"? Every experience I've had working with political campaigns has indicated otherwise. The performance of political campaigns is exactly what one would expect if you mixed together a bunch of inexperienced volunteers with snake-oil salesmen and showered them with money.

Re: We all wear tinfoil hats now

#112

Post by billmalarky » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 6:49 PM UTC

ameister14 wrote: post #59

dangerface wrote: post #52

The op doesn't seem to know the first thing about advertising and is in denial of how it works. Op asks head of facebook advertising if advertising influences people, their response "No companies spend millions on advertising with us because it doesn't work!". > The gullibility of the latter two may have stemmed from wishful thinking: If Brexit and Trump could be traced to the malign influence of a single company The…

>As an ad insider I know first hand that the tactics used by Cambridge Analytica and other agencies work, thats why people pay me to do it. As another ad insider I know first hand that people are willing to pay me to do a ton of things that don't actually work. (They often continue trying to do so after I tell them it doesn't work and it's a bad idea) People and companies pay millions for things that don't work all t…

Reminds me of the old phrase John Wanamaker coined in the late 1800s:

"Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half."

Re: We all wear tinfoil hats now

#113

Post by linuxftw » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 6:50 PM UTC

toss1 wrote: post #99

linuxftw wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it was to suppress and divert turnout of the opponent's supporters. Surely you're aware that political mudslinging ads have been a thing since like, forever, right? > finding black voters and highlighting Hillary's 25-year-ago comment on "superpredators" Maybe don't say such crazy things, don't have to worry about someone calling you out on it. I don't recall her campaign ever addressing this issue, I don't recall…

Yes, I'm very well aware that this has been a thing since, like, forever. A fine example was in the 2000 South Carolina primary when Karl Rove working for Bush, distributed door-to-door flyers just ahead of the primary that implied that John McCain had an illegitimate black baby from an affair. McCain had actually adopted a child from Bangladesh. McCain lost the primary. Similarly with the HRC issue. It is one thing…

> It is one thing to have it in the news - or not

If by "news" you mean gate-keeping establishments owned by very large conglomerates. There's very little local independent news for the average person. There is only politicized news.

It's up to every individual to be their own arbiter of truth and morality. It's my opinion that both major parties in the US lie and deceive, so the things you're referring to have no special merit with me. Remember when Donna Brazile leaked the debate questions to Hillary? Hillary got up on that stage and lied to your faces. Manipulating voters is manipulating voters, the method is immaterial.

The only solution is to let the system buckle under it's own weight. You, as an individual, have to admit to yourself and others that the system is rigged and full of liars, criminals, and cronies regardless of side.

Re: We all wear tinfoil hats now

#114

Post by sm4rk0 » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 6:51 PM UTC

jfengel wrote: post #70

mech1234 wrote: post #25

I strongly urge all people who wish to be informed citizens to consume news sources from diverse sources. Selection bias of what events get covered is a huge source of political spin, and using diverse sources is the only way to eliminate selection bias. Consider any statement with morally-significant wording to be the spin, and whatever is left over to be the facts on the ground worth considering. The vast majority…

By way of alternative, I'd suggest not consuming news at all. Or at least, delaying your consumption of news to sources that have had a chance to digest and consider the news, such as a weekly news magazine. It's very, very rare that you require up-to-the-minute news. Continually-updated news sources, like Internet sources or 24 hour news channels, are more for entertainment than information. They focus on keeping yo…

Except for HN (:

Re: We all wear tinfoil hats now

#115

Post by squarefoot » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 6:58 PM UTC

34679 wrote: post #39

I'll put my "hat" on for a moment and ask: Why doesn't the FEC enforce its policy on the identification of political advertisements and who paid for them when it comes to social media activity? Why is it that a 30 second radio ad needs to have "Paid for by the Candidate X campaign", but millions of dollars worth of paid online trolls needn't disclose a thing? According to their own published rules, this sort of activ…

"Why is it that a 30 second radio ad needs to have "Paid for by the Candidate X campaign", but millions of dollars worth of paid online trolls needn't disclose a thing?"

I don't know, however it probably wouldn't make a difference (1). It's all about psychology, especially in politics, where the debate has been carefully transformed into fanboyism for the simple reason that people who embrace an idea can still be convinced of the same idea being wrong, while fanboys of that idea will defend it no matter how much evidence one throws at them. We want to hear what resonates with our opinions, education, etc, and when someone manages to turn us into fans of those ideas, then we're screwed. When the ancient Romans conquered a foreign population, they practiced sowing discord among people, so that opposite factions would emerge then fight each other rather than unite against the oppressor. The term "divide et impera" (divide and conquer) means exactly that practice, which is alive and well in the modern world either outside the national borders (by igniting wars between smaller nations in developing countries, as an example, so that they keep being easier to control) and sowing discord among people within national borders through fear of each other, the external enemy of the day and the usual tricks, for the same purpose: making the mass easier to herd.

How do we fight this today? We don't, just no way. There's some hope for future generations though. I think we should act while they're not yet morphed into disinformation zombies, that is, in schools. What, for example, if kids were taught Carl Sagans' Baloney Detection Kit applied to the proliferation of fake news on the Internet, with examples? Just my .2 nibbles.

1: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2115421-fake-news-shape...

Re: We all wear tinfoil hats now

#116

Post by moosey » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 7:08 PM UTC

greendestiny_re wrote: post #31

Advertisements are mind control. Look around you. How many brand logos do you see? Each brand logo is an attempt to influence and manipulate how you feel, think and spend your money but your subconscious blocks them all out.

I believe advertisements should be declared illegal psychological experimentation and manipulation: abusive tools of gaslighting designed to shape our identities and perception away from healthy norms.

Re: We all wear tinfoil hats now

#117

Post by grecy » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 7:25 PM UTC

moosey wrote: post #116

greendestiny_re wrote: post #31

Advertisements are mind control. Look around you. How many brand logos do you see? Each brand logo is an attempt to influence and manipulate how you feel, think and spend your money but your subconscious blocks them all out.

I believe advertisements should be declared illegal psychological experimentation and manipulation: abusive tools of gaslighting designed to shape our identities and perception away from healthy norms.

In certain countries billboards are illegal (New Zealand) and for example cigarette advertising of any kind is illegal in Australia.

Re: We all wear tinfoil hats now

#118

Post by chrisco255 » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 7:26 PM UTC

QuantumGood wrote: post #92

dangerface wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know first hand that people are willing to pay me to do a ton of things that don't actually work. (They often continue trying to do so after I tell them it doesn't work and it's a bad idea) Hehehe very true. I tell people what works then they ask me to do random shit. I can't deny you are right at the end of the day I do what they will pay for whether it works or not.

Evaluating what works by what the dumbest people do is not science. Marketing results are measurable. That people will measure improperly, not at all, or ignore proper measurement approaches is not about what is measured, it's about the people. Yes, there are things that can't be measured well. Smart operators tend to not do those things, no matter how common or popular they are. The very old joke "Half the money I s…

That joke was made precisely because it's difficult to measure results from advertising. Sure, online banner ads can be precisely measured for click rates, but having spent money on things like billboards, magazine ads, etc. It's difficult to consistently capture the particular ad or place that someone heard about a business. It's difficult to know how many exposures it takes to make an ad effective without going overboard (you can oversaturate, as Bloomberg has proven).

Also, IQ is no defense for persuasion techniques. If you're not keen on the biases influencing your decisions and filters on the world, no amount of intelligence will save you. I think that requires practicing skepticism, both of yourself and of others.

Re: We all wear tinfoil hats now

#119

Post by mcshay79 » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

banads wrote: post #57

tom-thistime wrote: post #40

So to pick one example, we're under surveillance. It's a fact of life now. It pretty much wasn't a fact of life in the 19th century. Fine. But the author keeps changing the subject to insane conspiracy theories. The author seems a little reluctant to distinguish between surveillance and insanity. I think those are two separate topics.

>seems a little reluctant to distinguish between surveillance and insanity. I think those are two separate topics. Paranoid schizophrenia is often defined as having symptoms such as "the government is spying on you" https://www.webmd.com/schizophrenia/schizophrenia-paranoia

Isn't that convenient? The government is not spying on you and if you think otherwise then you are a paranoid schizophrenic.

Re: We all wear tinfoil hats now

#120

Post by jariel » Tue, Mar 03, 2020, 7:47 PM UTC

Good article but strategic influencing on social can help change outcomes.

The Russians apparently have put up a lot of FB pages, invented 'movements' with FB pages out of nothing, have agitators posting contentious content all in the hopes that it gets picked up by secondary or mainstream outlets.

They've met with at least some success, though it's doubtful they've changed electoral outcomes.

The issue is that sometimes elections are narrow, and more often, there's a single 'event' or bit of publicity that can overturn momentum of a political group.

In Canada, Trudeau has all but completely disappeared during and time when dozens of aboriginal protesters put up blockades. Same for the Premiere of Ontario. Same for the Ontario and Federal (ie RCMP police) police leaders. Nobody wants to deal with the issue due to the risk of someone blaming them for any violence that happens, or images of RCMP in riot gear with smoke etc. having to physically disarm/dismantled protests.

Cynically, the politicians are right to run for cover because if the public gets angry and blames them, the shift in support would have very material consequences.

So this is one example of an issue, that if perceived the wrong way, could have significant outcomes. Agitators who effectively try to run the narrative might have the ability to swing the outcome.