“I’m not convinced on this bot thing,” said Watts, the cofounder of a project that is widely cited as the main, if not only, source of information on Russian bots. He also called the narrative “overdone.”http://www.newsweek.com/schumershutd...schumer-786784
Getting bukkakked
muh Hamilton 68 told me so
The dashboard monitors 600 Twitter accounts “linked to Russian influence efforts online,” according to its own description, which means the accounts are not all directly traced back to Kremlin efforts, or even necessarily to Russia. “They are not all in Russia,” Watts said during a phone interview last week. “We don’t even think they’re all commanded in Russia — at all. We think some of them are legitimately passionate people that are just really into promoting Russia.” So, not bots.
——————
“We never connect any of this directly to if you see one thing on the dashboard, that this somehow is a Kremlin-approved influence operation,” said Bret Schafer, an analyst with the dashboard.
They are a useful tool for seeing how social media operations are tied into other Russian Propaganda.
Tell me more about Hamilton68 RandomGuy
The only thing really funny here is that you think your weak sauce criticisms are somehow better than they are.
They said so, so it must be true.“I’m not convinced on this bot thing,” said Watts, the cofounder of a project that is widely cited as the main, if not only, source of information on Russian bots. He also called the narrative “overdone.”
The dashboard monitors 600 Twitter accounts “linked to Russian influence efforts online,” according to its own description, which means the accounts are not all directly traced back to Kremlin efforts, or even necessarily to Russia. “They are not all in Russia,” Watts said during a phone interview last week. “We don’t even think they’re all commanded in Russia — at all. We think some of them are legitimately passionate people that are just really into promoting Russia.” So, not bots.
——————
“We never connect any of this directly to if you see one thing on the dashboard, that this somehow is a Kremlin-approved influence operation,” said Bret Schafer, an analyst with the dashboard.
One is the cofounder of Hamilton68 and the other is an analyst with Hamilton68
do i believe it, like without a doubt am i certain there is a space station as described? i can believe it but i can not without a doubt say there is one. once again, what do i know? i'm just some dude who doodles on people.
Pick a lane.One is the cofounder of Hamilton68 and the other is an analyst with Hamilton68
When you made this thread you called them out for being shady and now you're hailing them as truth tellers.
You're what they call an unreliable narrator.
I called out their flawed methodology as did Twitter and Facebook and now Hamilton68 is admitting it themselves.
...and nothing in his statement means that the tool is invalid or not useful.One is the cofounder of Hamilton68 and the other is an analyst with Hamilton68
Essentially:
"it isn't perfect".
It is a bit like someone who develops a test for cancer admitting that it isn't 100% accurate.
Even tests that aren't wholly accurate still give information worth considering.
Sorry, you still fail, stupid mother er.
I'm not convinced on this bot thing said the Hamilton68 cofounder
So I am right. Hamilton all good now.I called out their flawed methodology as did Twitter and Facebook and now Hamilton68 is admitting it themselves.
Don't care.do you personally believe we landed on the moon in 1969?
Don't care.do you personally believe the earth is spherical (not a perfect sphere, but you get the gist)?
dodge
dodgeDon't care.
Do you personally believe we landed on the moon in 1969?
Do you personally believe the earth is spherical? (not a perfect sphere, but you get the gist)
saying "dont care" actually takes more effort than "yes" or "no"
not sure why you'd go to such lengths to hide your opinions
I seriously don't care. You can call it a dodge. Fine.
It wouldn't be convincing in and of itself.I'm not convinced on this bot thing said the Hamilton68 cofounder
The problem for dumb s like yourself is that there are first hand accounts of disinformation efforts by the Russians. They aren't really all that secret/secure about it.
In critical thinking, and especially when taking information as a whole, you don't just consider one thing in context. When you get multiple sources beginning to all paint the same picture, you have to start taking that seriously.
Unlike the way anyone should take your opinion about what is true.
Wow, you really think the moon landings are fake, and the earth is flat. Holeeeee .
this is where my su ion came fromWow, you really think the moon landings are fake, and the earth is flat. Holeeeee .
The dome theory is one of kooky bible .
The thinking a thousand+ years ago was that of an earth with a dome, and water above that dome.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologe...f_heavens.htmlThe Bible teaches that the earth was "flat and circular sitting on pillars with a rotating solid sky dome overhead which carried the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars and allowed water to leak through 'windows of heaven' or sluice gates to form clouds and rain
Chris has hinted at his primitive supers ions before. It would explain a lot.
Actually critical thinking should result after observing TSA, Chris and most of the other spam accounts painting a picture of their lack of credibility.
I'm a spam account now.
and also, i heard you been rubbing shoulders with a special "someone"
Bots don't have shoulders.
The Russian disinfo disinfo op is a thing.
Does that prove the absence of Russian disinfo? Not at all.
What it tends to prove, if anything, is the prevalence of political disinformation.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote