Live data from Hacker News

Undercover reporter reveals life in a Polish troll farm

theguardian.com

251–260 of 333 posts

Re: Undercover reporter reveals life in a Polish troll farm

#251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, but maybe discussing it will bring some light to this subject? Maybe a system/method to determine who is a professional troll? ----- Pro-Troll Filter: (first draft) 1. Is the commenter able to rationally discuss the downsides of their position? NO? Possibly a pro-troll or an irrational comment. 2. Is the commenter willing to admit past errors in implementing of their ideal solution, and also consider th…

Why would a paid troll degenerate to irrationally? If anyone is going to have a script and long list of references to draw from, wouldn’t it be the paid shill? Provided by their employer? It seems more likely to me that most people are just an emotional wreck and don’t perform well in debate.

The leader of a mob spouts irrational things, not logic or sound reasoning. The goal is to inspire outrage and offence not present sound solutions. Stir up strife and ignite passion in the masses.

This is why they use irrationality as a weapon.

Re: Undercover reporter reveals life in a Polish troll farm

#252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No way. Sadly, the sole existence of troll farms is enough to create and reinforce political paranoia. Your message (parent) here, for example, is exactly the kind of stuff I've come to associate with Russian and similar trolling (sowing distrust in institutions etc.)...

But you have to be extremely naive to not believe it. Work somewhere near marketing and you realize everything is shilled upon you. The politicians have used these tricks hundreds of years ago, things are just different with a new platform. Have you thought about the idea that you yourself are a victim of a marketing department if you believe every criticism is related to Russian campaigns?

Wouldn't people leak out information about it just like this journalist did?

Re: Undercover reporter reveals life in a Polish troll farm

#253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, but maybe discussing it will bring some light to this subject? Maybe a system/method to determine who is a professional troll? ----- Pro-Troll Filter: (first draft) 1. Is the commenter able to rationally discuss the downsides of their position? NO? Possibly a pro-troll or an irrational comment. 2. Is the commenter willing to admit past errors in implementing of their ideal solution, and also consider th…

Your filter sucks. Pro trolls don’t become irrational. They just defuse or disappear. Only fanboys dig in and defend a subject with senseless arguments once they become emotional. If you’re trying to come up with a filter, decide: do you want to filter out trolls or just people that are fans of topics that hurt your feelings? Right now it just looks like a filter for any conversation with a human you disagree with.

> Pro trolls don’t become irrational.

Yes, they do. They want their followers to behave irrationally, so they lead with it. A group of well considered and thoughtful people can change their mind with new evidence and information.

A pro-troll doesn't want that, they want blind devoted followers that repeat a message blindly, loudly and often.

Re: Undercover reporter reveals life in a Polish troll farm

#254
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: I'm not saying any of these except the first has happened - Tory Bruno (CEO of ULA) promoting ULA on reddit under his own name providing useful information: Definitely ok (thanks Tory! https://old.reddit.com/user/torybruno ) - Tory Bruno promoting ULA on reddit under a pseudonym: Almost acceptable, not the best since he has money involved and isn't disclosing it, but he probably honestly thinks most of wh…

>A PR person hired to promote ULA promoting ULA on reddit under 10 different pseudonyms: Completely unacceptable, this should probably be made outright illegal. The only purpose of using pseudonyms like this is to trick people into thinking you have support that you do not. Isn't this how Reddit itself became a platform? I understand they had no traffic/users and the Reddit Platform was seeded with bots to post, comm…

In the beginning there were no comments, after a lackluster start, they seeded the site with interesting links to attract people who would like those links and themselves provide more. They did not engage in opinion shaping for a third party for financial gain.

Re: Undercover reporter reveals life in a Polish troll farm

#255
post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you have to be extremely naive to not believe it. Work somewhere near marketing and you realize everything is shilled upon you. The politicians have used these tricks hundreds of years ago, things are just different with a new platform. Have you thought about the idea that you yourself are a victim of a marketing department if you believe every criticism is related to Russian campaigns?

Paid for troll farms are waste of money when the general public already agrees with the party. Thus, many parties have no reason to do this when members of the general public are willing to do it for free.

Troll farms are polarizing: parties hire them to pretend to be two extreme sides to spread FUD.

Re: Undercover reporter reveals life in a Polish troll farm

#256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't say it surprises me. But I think by now every government is using such farms. I find it difficult to believe otherwise based on recent FCC issues ( https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jsvine/net-neutrality-f... ). Yes, sadly, I am invoking everyone is doin' it.

If a party did that in a country where voters respond appropriately to this kind of thing, that political party would be wiped out for a generation. If a party manages to dupe people into thinking their populist cause is important enough to see past the use of troll factories for message control, then that I think says a lot about the health of a democracy. I can imagine this happening in Poland, Hungary or perhaps e…

Yes, it would work in a country that has viable opposition. In Poland we have a choice between: party 1-Used to be in power for 8 years, has lots of huge scandals to its name including closing their eyes to billions of VAT fraud. Unjustified repossessions of homes based on made up documents for tens of thousands of people. Right on stealing of people's retirement funds they said they wouldnt touch. Raising of retirement age when they campaigned on keeping it same and changing the retirement system instead. Raising taxes immediately after gaining power despite campaigning on a platform of lowering them to so called 3x15%. This party instantly started talking about a "crisis of democracy" the moment they lost the election. Before they went they managed to attempt to unlawfully replace 3 of the high Court judges. This proved to be a great trap for newcomers which then proceeded in exact same manner with regard to high court. Party 2 - Ex communists plus "new left". Ex communists were always known as homophobes, "old boys club", but they are on the left so new left that pushes values like tolerance etc aligned themselves with those old bastards which makes them loose all credibility in my eyes. - Party 3- a super nationalist party started by a guy who used to be a free market libertarian most of his life and gained fame by using a live elephant, and a South American style "el presidente" suit as main items during his campaign. In other news the guy is a known shovinist and was stabbed in the gut by his own daughter. Allegedly 20% of young people support that clown. Party 5 - A small party that tries to pass itself as farmers party but in reality exists to further interests of few large landowners.

Now in addition to the above we have the currently ruling party that is correctly characterised as being way too religious even going as far as equating Catholicism with being Polish in some of their talks, being stupid in their attempts to reform the openly corrupt justice system causing correct accusations of breaking the law. At the same time they proven not to be corruptible by sorting out the tax system to the effect of increasing the budget almost by half (it turns out we had massive Vat fraud previous guys knew and did absolutely minimum about and half of small businesses were cheating at taxes). The currently ruling party implemented a system where if you "forget" about a vat invoice it'll text you about it making people much more honest about paying. Additionally, the ruling party is the only political force ever in Poland that actually implemented all of their campaign promises. Many people like myself don't like the religiousness, but value that those the only people that went into politics to actually implement their campaign promises. This is completely unheard of in Poland. As a result of the lack of open thievery the previous guys were engaging in and their social programs which increase the amount of money in hands of previously poor people the economy is much better. The unemployment is non existent in big cities etc.

The bottom line is, who would you vote for: A dishonest person)(a known thief and conman) who tells you what you want to hear, or honest people you disagree with on some principles? That's why the ruling party won its second election. Not because it is great, but because they are seen as the only force that is non-corrupt(or at least less corrupt) and fulfilling its promises.

The opposition are either dishonest, incompetent or a joke depending on who you look at. I really wish there is time we have honest opposition in Poland. Maybe the new left once they drop the ex-communists will become that for the next election. We'll see.

Re: Undercover reporter reveals life in a Polish troll farm

#257
post #43

This really is a critical juncture for the internet; the moment wherein the democratization of information has empowered those with the resources to overwhelm the signal with noise. I wish I saw a way out.

Google has largely solved the spam problem for end users. What I can't figure out is why platforms like Facebook and Twitter couldn't mark these sort of posts as, essentially, spam, by the same sort of rules and heuristics as email spam. Why can't they look at the metadata of verified troll-farm-generated clickbait/junk/spam/fake news, and make their own filters, and demote that content? Simple. Because they're makin…

Google hasn't solved "spam". Solving email spam is pretty easy.

Solving comments isn't.

Also, google has the same incentives as facebook and twitter. I don't see why you are separating google from facebook and twitter.

Re: Undercover reporter reveals life in a Polish troll farm

#258
post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thee larger problem is factual accuracy. With all the propaganda going around, it is hard to find the truth. Any attempt to classify such opinions will inevitably further a propaganda. As someone said, we live in strange timeline where comedians are more trustworthy than politicians.

FB does work with 3rd party fact checkers. We should be able to trust people from places like Reuters to remain fairly neutral.

When they use Breitbart as a 3rd party fact checker how can we trust them?

Re: Undercover reporter reveals life in a Polish troll farm

#259
post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thee larger problem is factual accuracy. With all the propaganda going around, it is hard to find the truth. Any attempt to classify such opinions will inevitably further a propaganda. As someone said, we live in strange timeline where comedians are more trustworthy than politicians.

FB does work with 3rd party fact checkers. We should be able to trust people from places like Reuters to remain fairly neutral.

3rd party fact checkers themselves are highly biased. If you think reuters is neutral, then you really don't understand the "news" business. The "news" business isn't in the business of news. It's in the influence business. The founder of reuters started off peddling radical revolutionary propaganda.

Paul Julius Reuter worked at a book-publishing firm in Berlin and was involved in distributing radical pamphlets at the beginning of the Revolutions in 1848.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters#History

Besides, the problematic part with "news" involve "non-factual" news but rather political "news". Whether globalism is good or bad. What, if anything, to do about climate change. Nonsense like veganism, etc. There, by nature, can't be fact-checked because it is a value/contextual judgment rather than a factual one. Capitalism vs communism, nationalism vs globalism, immigration vs nativism, alt-right vs alt-left, traditional media vs social media, etc.

Re: Undercover reporter reveals life in a Polish troll farm

#260
post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a party did that in a country where voters respond appropriately to this kind of thing, that political party would be wiped out for a generation. If a party manages to dupe people into thinking their populist cause is important enough to see past the use of troll factories for message control, then that I think says a lot about the health of a democracy. I can imagine this happening in Poland, Hungary or perhaps e…

In case of Poland the party increased social spending several times, paying people with 2 kids half the median salary every month and lowering retirement age. They could go on TV saying "we are corrupt and we are stealing from you" and they would still win these elections just because they paid for the votes. That's how populism works. Frankly I'm amazed they managed to lose the Senate and only won the Sejm (lower ho…

> That's how populism works.

That's how socialism works. You take some money from people, give half of it back to them and they cheer you for it.

Post reply on HN