Yes, though we have been on edge for deep fakes for a good while now, and remain constantly impressed at how well cheap-fakes and simple manipulations work. Deep fakes are the caviar of the trade, when McNuggets work just fine.

Four years ago this month, there was an uproar among analysts (and the public) about whether Cambridge Analytica was a PSYOP. The word is triggering; it tends to get people animated, makes people think of conspiracy theories, implies a grand master plan, shadowy operators, etc.

I have a good memory of that. What's happening now re: QAnon and whether it was a PSYOP and by whom is comparable. And it's a pointless debate. Any operation that 1) does target audience analysis, 2) deploys messaging against audiences, 3) tries to alter behavior, is a PSYOP.

The origin of this particular operation is complicated, networked, and muddied by people who wish to both claim and disclaim it. But it is functionally a PSYOP, has borrowed from that heritage, and can be analyzed in those terms. Miss me with claims to the contrary.

Researchers, journalists, and historians need to get to the bottom of how it evolved (and it did evolve, vs. a unified top-down plan), and we can do that if we work in good faith together. But we have to accept the fact that these kinds of operations are now commonplace.

It also helps to use the lens of emergence; information ops evolve, and incorporate DNA from everything that has come before: LARPs, ARGs, PSYOPs, the general public's participation + gullibility. In that context, one doesn't need top-down orchestration, necessarily.

1/ Hey guys, remember that time Steve Bannon ran an army of game virtual currency miners in Asia, for sale to westerners at discount prices, arbitraging attention for profit?

That was

2/ “The company was founded by former child star Brock Pierce, and Bannon was an investor. Bannon managed to convince Goldman Sachs to plow $60 million into a company that sold imaginary goods in an imaginary world.”

In 2020, Brock Pierce ran for President. Guess who...

3/ was Pierce’s campaign manager?

Brittany Kaiser, the fake whistleblower who left Cambridge Analytica in late March 2018 — right *after* it blew

4/ Guess who was all excited about today’s $GME activity? Steve Bannon and Russia shill, Jack Posobiec. They called it a “populist uprising against Wall Street.” That’s cool... just leftists, Steve Bannon, and Russia shills cheerleading for the same stuff. It happens...

Investigating networked disinformation and influence campaigns is hard. SIGINT is often scarce, and encrypted. But people are sloppy; HUMINT is vital, and developing it requires an iterative approach. Each cycle of reporting exposes more players, which attracts more sources.

THREAD: It’s time to clarify an ethical stance regarding QAnon, and those who research and report on it. It is a disease — a mind virus — with real victims, people who have been lied to and alienated from their families and communities.

2/ First, we must help the victims, and focus on helping them restore their bonds to family and community. Second, we must hold the perpetrators accountable. Third, we must shun all those who profit from its continuance.

THREAD: Now that @Amazon @awscloud has announced they will no longer host @parler_app, many have speculated that they will just “find another host.”

Here is why that’s not so simple and what it will likely mean for the app’s future. First, let’s look at where things are...

2/ Google and Apple have removed the app from their app stores, effectively terminating growth on mobile devices. People can still access the (not good) web UI until Amazon terminates them today. CEO Matze has said they may be down “up to a week” while they find new hosting.

3/ Translated to English, that’s code for “we have no idea what’s going to happen next.” No US cloud provider (Microsoft, Google, IBM, Digital Ocean) is likely to touch this, as it could be seen as providing material support for sedition. No CEO or counsel wants to get near this.

4/ They could potentially “roll their own” data center by buying servers and putting them in a co-location facility. But that’s a single point of failure, and many colo providers would be just as likely to decline their business. It would be hard and risky to pursue this.

5/ Imagine, after they sweated like pigs to get this hardware all setup, if they get told their colo provider is booting them. That’s a lot of metal to then move somewhere else. Meanwhile, the user base is deteriorating because chaos and dying apps. They will go to other venues.

TRIANGLE MASTERCLASS - a thread.

what's the simplest, most effective method of trading a market that trends as hard as cryptocurrencies?

trendlines.

one trendline on its own is strong, but when you put two together you quickly realize just how powerful this simple tool can be.

i've been using triangles for as long as i can remember.

it seems dumb, and almost counter-intuitive to approach such a complex game like trading with such a simple approach like shapes...but maybe when markets start acting stupid its okay to dumb down our approach.

look, not all triangles are the same.

anybody can draw some lines on a chart any way they'd like. sometimes, we let our bias affect our charts rather than the other way around.

i personally have done this more times than i can count.

you see...triangles (and analysis as a whole) is not necessarily intended to make trading easier as much as it is to make trading simple.

you want a fluid bias that can change easily, rather than one relying on 10 steps of conflicting confirmation before entering a new trade

trendlines enable us to maintain a fluid bias.

i mean, how much simpler can it be than "above this line bullish, below this line bearish" ? 😂

one trendline on its own can be enough to make a good trade, but when you put two together it can turn a good trade into a great one.

The Psychology of Persuasion 🧠

6-Principles to Influence and Control every encounter.

Take Back Your Control 👊🏽

-THREAD-

1. Scarcity creates more demand

When an opportunity becomes less available to us, we desire it more.

A good example of this would be the brand “Supreme”

They’ve created the ultimate scarcity around their products which makes them sell out almost instantly.

2. Humans feel an obligation to return favours

A great example of this would be when someone buys you something expensive for your birthday...

You almost feel obligated to return the favour and buy them something equal in value for their birthday.

Let’s continue...

3. The harder we have to work for something, the more we value it

Nothing worth having ever comes easy.

The more time and effort we invest into something, the more meaning it has behind it.

Relationships, business, life...

This applies to all aspects.

4. We seek social proof when we are unsure

Humans by nature are social animals, so it only makes sense that we seek social proof as reassurance.

Use societies FOMO to your advantage by showing potential clients what they’re missing out on.

Next...👇🏽

The psychologist Daniel Kahneman won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 2002.

His book Thinking Fast & Slow distills his work on human decision making. In doing so, it highlights both the brilliance & limitations of the human mind.

Here’s a summary.

🧵 Thread 🧵

Kahneman begins by introducing the mind’s two modes of thought.

System 1 is automatic, fast, unconscious & effortless.

System 2 is deliberate, slow, conscious & effortfull.

The first accounts for around 95% of all our mental processing. The second, 5%.

To operate efficiently, System 1 uses shortcuts to produce “good enough” solutions whilst expending as little time & energy as possible.

This creates imperfections in human decision making that economists, and their rational-agent perspective, rarely account for.

Here’s 12:

01: Priming

System 1 is an associative machine. When presented with a word such as “lime”, it will easily generate others, such as “green” or “sour”.

This makes us susceptible to priming, in which a common association is invoked to move us in a given direction.

02: Cognitive Ease

System 1 welcomes information which is more easily processed.

Cognitive ease can arise from repetition and simplicity. Even falsehoods will be accepted if they are simple and familiar enough to be effortlessly processed.

Four years ago this month, there was an uproar among analysts (and the public) about whether Cambridge Analytica was a PSYOP. The word is triggering; it tends to get people animated, makes people think of conspiracy theories, implies a grand master plan, shadowy operators, etc.

I have a good memory of that. What's happening now re: QAnon and whether it was a PSYOP and by whom is comparable. And it's a pointless debate. Any operation that 1) does target audience analysis, 2) deploys messaging against audiences, 3) tries to alter behavior, is a PSYOP.

The origin of this particular operation is complicated, networked, and muddied by people who wish to both claim and disclaim it. But it is functionally a PSYOP, has borrowed from that heritage, and can be analyzed in those terms. Miss me with claims to the contrary.

Researchers, journalists, and historians need to get to the bottom of how it evolved (and it did evolve, vs. a unified top-down plan), and we can do that if we work in good faith together. But we have to accept the fact that these kinds of operations are now commonplace.

It also helps to use the lens of emergence; information ops evolve, and incorporate DNA from everything that has come before: LARPs, ARGs, PSYOPs, the general public's participation + gullibility. In that context, one doesn't need top-down orchestration, necessarily.