Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

This item could go in under the Rigging thread rubric, but it also kind of glances off the idea of 'faked voices,' in the sense of an 'artificially intelligent' chat bot interacting with a human being.

 

So, the idea is that bots are going to change votes? A few hundred exposures to bot conversations, and a Trump-hater is going to suddenly stop hating, and then vote for Trump? A person who wants freebies, and who loves voting to punish those from whom he hopes to acquire the freebies, is going to be swayed by bots to become productive and responsible, and abandon the slacker, blame-others lifestyle? Lefties who are dedicated to controlling others are going to be convinced by bots to give up that urge?

Sounds like a lot of techie overconfidence, as well as the continuation of the Narrative™ that pretends to explain why dear, wonderful, brilliant Hillary lost.

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Jonathan said:

So, the idea is that bots are going to change votes? ...

J

The idea I get is not that bots change votes, but just that the attempt to change votes through undisclosed advertising, or propaganda if you like, from a disguised source, is probably election interference.

Since the secret ballot was introduced, straight payment for votes became unreliable on the large scale, so bots seem a logical avenue to take to reach the "hearts and minds" with the facts, alternative or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, caroljane said:

The idea I get is not that bots change votes, but just that the attempt to change votes through undisclosed advertising, or propaganda if you like, from a disguised source, is probably election interference.

Since the secret ballot was introduced, straight payment for votes became unreliable on the large scale, so bots seem a logical avenue to take to reach the "hearts and minds" with the facts, alternative or not.

Still, I see no evidence of any danger. No one has demonstrated that undisclosed attempts to influence others has any effect at all, let alone enough to influence or "interfere" in an election. It's a pretend problem.

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The misinformation effect is important, as is an understanding the arts of suasion. Return What Michael could tell us about the history of propaganda, information Warfare, the age-old effect in American politics of quote false news unquote quotation mark! Paragraph Hard return Please s***.

Left square bracket... This is using Chrome's built-in dictation machine. I really like it, but I haven't recalled the special phrase it requires to return a . I just wrote quote on a New, paragraph. The software in my speech Act of and word followed by p word.

So I have to use one hand to hit the return key.

Anyway this message will self-destruct once I switch over to my other editing browser which is outside in the Smoky backyard. The tablet keyboard slows down my composition because I only use one phone. Bum. Thumb. Growl

I hypothesize that the persuasion landscape so to speak, the world of persuasion, the big bucks paid to often secretive organizations and schemes to provide so-called Target targeted targeted recipients is not a science but an art. Those of our dear readers who have plunged into the pool of information concerning Cambridge analytica for example, might wonder what the big box and secrecy inside Ewing was all about

. I noted numeral to items where Facebook and Twitter head each removed accounts which were not in their words authentic.

My words are not flowing so I will return to this later you may laugh and shame me for the rambling incoherence until I return. Insert emoticon of Grimm pleasure.

[Added: since this is quoted, I won't bother to tidy it up.  After 6,222 posts I am allowed an incoherent ramble if not two]

Edited by william.scherk
Fear and shame are mighty motivators

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

The misinformation effect is important, as is an understanding the arts of suasion. Return What Michael could tell us about the history of propaganda, information Warfare, the age-old effect in American politics of quote false news unquote quotation mark! Paragraph Hard return Please s***.

Left square bracket... This is using Chrome's built-in dictation machine. I really like it, but I haven't recalled the special phrase it requires to return a . I just wrote quote on a New, paragraph. The software in my speech Act of and word followed by p word.

So I have to use one hand to hit the return key.

Anyway this message will self-destruct once I switch over to my other editing browser which is outside in the Smoky backyard. The tablet keyboard slows down my composition because I only use one phone. Bum. Thumb. Growl

I hypothesize that the persuasion landscape so to speak, the world of persuasion, the big bucks paid to often secretive organizations and schemes to provide so-called Target targeted targeted recipients is not a science but an art. Those of our dear readers who have plunged into the pool of information concerning Cambridge analytica for example, might wonder what the big box and secrecy inside Ewing was all about

. I noted numeral to items where Facebook and Twitter head each removed accounts which were not in their words authentic.

My words are not flowing so I will return to this later you may laugh and shame me for the rambling incoherence until I return. Insert emoticon of Grimm pleasure.

Could not find emoticon appropriate, but posts do provide us pleasure Sir Scherk.

Respects from Jacob and Wilhelm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, william.scherk said:

The misinformation effect is important, as is an understanding the arts of suasion. Return What Michael could tell us about the history of propaganda...

Yeah, um, political propaganda isn't very effective unless combined with brutality, and the brutality part of it is really what does the job.

Adding voices and numbers, and even bots is the opposite of that. Fretting about undue influence, and then proposing the inevitable solution of government-approved truth and fact checking is where the shit gets real, not in countless competing fake info sources adding to the noise with clashing and contradictory (including self-contradictory) messages.

Bots interfering in elections is a pretend problem, and the solution generally supported by Election Worrywarts is what's actually attempted interference.

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, caroljane said:

Could not find emoticon appropriate, but posts do provide us pleasure Sir Scherk.

Respects from Jacob and Wilhelm

It's gush time again?

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Jonathan said:

It's gush time again?

J

Just keep minding your manners and who knows, one of these days these posts are  gonna gush all over you...click click, click click....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, caroljane said:
27 minutes ago, Jonathan said:

It's gush time again?

J

Just keep minding your manners and who knows, one of these days these posts are  gonna gush all over you...click click, click click....

You may each refer to case number 2018-03. The clerk at the Compliment Clinic will take your statements and collect fees:  

 

Edited by william.scherk
A splash of self-regard meets Buddha, who sez Itz All About Ze Conversation
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tech giants are trying to guarantee the midterm election results by shutting down Trump-supporters.

They will learn a hard lesson if the Dems don't take the House, which they will not.

In other words, they are playing a dangerous game with their own future.

And they are being warned.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

The tech giants are trying to guarantee the midterm election results by shutting down Trump-supporters.

 

No, no, no. They're just protecting us from bots and meddling and undue influence and election interference! They're not activists and advocates, but guardians and protectors!

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Jonathan said:

...Bots interfering in elections is a pretend problem, and the solution generally supported by Election Worrywarts is what's actually attempted interference.

J

Speaking of which, Coulter has a good piece on the history of the Russian Narrative™:

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2018-08-22.html#

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kim just nailed it.

Obama's the guy who seduced them. Starting with Arab Spring as the first big outcome.

But Kim's doing something about it.

I can't wait to see what he comes up with.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And another on fake social media.

This cuts deeper in philosophical terms.

Ayn Rand often said that censorship applies only to governments.

But I'm going to embrace the term applying to crony corporatist social media giants, too.

This is for two reasons:

1. Open any dictionary and you will see that words have more than one meaning. So, legally, I agree with Rand, that censorship applies only to governments. But there are other contexts where this word fits perfectly. And that leads to:

2. Free speech as a legal right is not the only context for free speech. It is also a principle. So, as there can be a principle of free speech, there also can be a principle of censorship. Styx mentions that giant social media platforms are the current equivalent of the town square. Legally, such town squares may have private owners (although I dispute that "private" characterization when the owner is a crony corporatist entity), but as a principle (a public gathering place), the principle of free speech should also apply. That means the principle of censorship is a valid criticism for that context.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tech giants want to draw attention to the problem of fake news.

They're getting it, but not in the way they imagined.

and

I think they just pissed away their chance at stealing the midterms for the Democrats. They needed to sit tight a little while longer before censoring the conservative, libertarian and pro-Trump voices so they could blast the "October surprises" the Dems dream up in October nonstop until the elections. By going in too quickly, they have given very powerful people the time to stage a defense.

I don't think they imagined that President Trump would be crazy enough to use his own megaphone to shine light on this. I think the pro-Trump people have some October surprises of their own coming. And then there's the joker in the pack. Trump knows how to make the fake news media do nothing but talk about him 24/7 in a caricatured outrage--and the effect is always the opposite of what the fake news media thinks it's doing.

Bad times are coming for some of the tech giants. But they are asking for it. They will learn that when you lie down with nasty dogs, you wake up with mange.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ayn Rand strikes in the belly of the beast.

From Zero Hedge:

Facebook Engineer's Stunning Admission: "We Tear Down Posters Welcoming Trump Supporters"

From the article:

Quote

As for the outspoken Facebook engineer, Amerige - who started working at Facebook in 2012 - said on his personal website that he followed philosophical principles laid out by the philosopher and writer Ayn Rand.

I hope Brian Amerige keeps his job, but for now, great job, Mr. Amerige.

:) 

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Google?

What about Google?

You can't make this up (from Breitbart):

Top Google News Story: CNN Claiming Google News Isn’t ‘Rigged’

In other words, as one guy in the article put it: "The top story on Google News is that Google isn't rigged."

LOL...

:)

They don't even see themselves for what they are.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's started for real.

This is called laying the groundwork for making the case.

That means a case will be made. A real case, not just media talk.

Don't think this will be the only example, either.

These tech giants have been very, very busy with their covert propaganda.

Michael

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2018 at 3:10 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Trump knows how to make the fake news media do nothing but talk about him 24/7 in a caricatured outrage--and the effect is always the opposite of what the fake news media thinks it's doing.

Steve Bannon laid some positions down ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other 'fake social media' news (or is that fake faked?), the rise of Deepfakes ... Deepfakes: Here’s how to detect fake online political videos with one simple tell

Quote

 

A new form of misinformation is poised to spread through online communities as the 2018 midterm election campaigns heat up. Called “deepfakes” after the pseudonymous online account that popularized the technique – which may have chosen its name because the process uses a technical method called “deep learning” – these fake videos look very realistic.

So far, people have used deepfake videos in pornography and satire to make it appear that famous people are doing things they wouldn’t normally. But it’s almost certain deepfakes will appear during the campaign season, purporting to depict candidates saying things or going places the real candidate wouldn’t.

It’s Barack Obama – or is it?

Because these techniques are so new, people are having trouble telling the difference between real videos and the deepfake videos. My work, with my colleague Ming-Ching Chang and our Ph.D. student Yuezun Li, has found a way to reliably tell real videos from deepfake videos. It’s not a permanent solution, because technology will improve. But it’s a start, and offers hope that computers will be able to help people tell truth from fiction.
What’s a ‘deepfake,’ anyway?

Making a deepfake video is a lot like translating between languages. Services like Google Translate use machine learning – computer analysis of tens of thousands of texts in multiple languages – to detect word-use patterns that they use to create the translation.

Deepfake algorithms work the same way: They use a type of machine learning system called a deep neural network to examine the facial movements of one person. Then they synthesize images of another person’s face making analogous movements. Doing so effectively creates a video of the target person appearing to do or say the things the source person did.

[...]

Detecting blinking

There are still flaws in this new type of algorithm. One of them has to do with how the simulated faces blink – or don’t. Healthy adult humans blink somewhere between every 2 and 10 seconds, and a single blink takes between one-tenth and four-tenths of a second. That’s what would be normal to see in a video of a person talking. But it’s not what happens in many deepfake videos.

[...]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, william.scherk said:

... the rise of Deepfakes...

William,

That's amateur BS.

Here comes the real snitcharoonie:

China launches AI-backed platform to eliminate ‘online rumors’

The Google brass can't wait until they figure out a censorship algorithm For China, too. They salivate over it. The employees are pissed, though, even the SJW's.

The other Silicon Valley potentates can't wait to suck up to the Chinese government, also.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fake videos are detectably fake by analysis.

Shocking and real videos are coming soon and the fake news MSM is trying to pre-muddy the waters by planting the notion that any video could actually be fake, since "real and fake are indistinguishable now." It is a lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Odd little coda to a story making the rounds about Fake Twitter Social Media ... (story originally reported at the Wall Street Journal):

Twitter CEO personally weighed in on company's handling of Alex Jones, Richard Spencer accounts: report

In other words, in other words, @jack overruled the termination of at least the two noted accounts.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adjacent to "Deep Fake" videos ... from Peter Rejcek at Singularity Hub.

The New AI Tech Turning Heads in Video Manipulation

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...