Tag Archives: Trollrensics

What the media silences

Yes, that is again the topic of discussion. The BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61709782) gives us ‘Elon Musk threatens to walk away from Twitter deal’, in there we see “Mr Musk has said he believes spam and fake accounts represent a far greater share than the less than 5% of daily users that Twitter reports publicly.” The media knows this to be true, several others know this to be true, I know this to be true and one other party that we are about to be introduced to knows this to be true too.

You see, Twitter seemingly hides itself behind ‘daily users’ yet the truth is not that nice. Ever since Covid things have escalated. Anti vaxxers creating account after account, supporting each other and their fake accounts. The Ukrainian war made things worse. Russian Trolls, politicians supporting Russian needs in the Netherlands all. Connected to trolls and troll like behaviour. There we see a new player (since around 2014). It is the firm Trollrensics (at https://www.trollrensics.com) that shows actual data. And do not get fooled by the shy “His software and algorithms have helped uncover and analyse a significant number of troll networks and disinfo campaigns.” They have 8 years of data from all kinds of sources including Twitter showing millions of fake accounts. Even as I personally thought that the fake accounts are around 20%, they have numbers that indicate that these numbers are much closer to 50% and the media is steering clear. Others are steering clear. Twitter represents billions and the media loves people who have billions no matter what foundation it is on. And there we get the new stage. With ““As Twitter’s prospective owner, Mr Musk is clearly entitled to the requested data to enable him to prepare for transitioning Twitter’s business to his ownership and to facilitate his transaction financing. To do both, he must have a complete and accurate understanding of the very core of Twitter’s business model – its active user base,” lawyer Mike Ringler wrote in the letter.” We get to see the other side. Twitter hopes for $45,000,000,000 for a 50% population, so in what universe will an intelligent person pay twice the price? In what universe will any person pay for fake data, altered and weighted data? It is raw data that counts and too much comes from Russian and Chinese trolls. Too much of it come from click farms. Too much of this comes from non people. The game has for over a decade been about engagement and Twitter failed that test (miserably) and is now in a stage where they prefer to get out with a $45,000,000,000 camping voucher. Speculatively where the women are loose, the sun always shines and the booze pours uninterrupted. 

So when we see the option below, some people might get the idea. 

Below we see the assurance and under there is how these things come to play. 

The third is a random click-farm and this one might not have been used for Twitter activities, however considering that these matters have been going on since well before 2019. 

The impact is real and it is also all over Twitter. Several sources give us that most of these activities are in China and the profits are lucrative as this is not labour intensive. Twitter is keeping its doors locked and the media is not knocking on these doors, even though there is news all over the globe on click farms. So why is the media not digging deeper? Simple it is fear. The media needs Twitter and it needs Facebook and Google (who they pissed off), so they are letting Twitter be. That is how I personally see it and in all the settings Elon Musk is correct and he is a lot more intelligent than anyone gives him credit for. He has seen what Twitter is, what Twitter can be and he is willing to pay a fair price and that goes against the grain of its board of directors who are all about ‘daily users’ all whilst some sources are setting the stage that well over 40% are fake accounts. And the 5% and its ‘daily user’ label is not bringing home the bacon and as such Elon Musk and via him Mike Ringler are asking questions. Questions that people at Twitter do not want to answer. And it is important that you do not believe me, dig yourself! When we tart digging into engagement locations and time frame of certain accounts, a new timeline becomes visible, a timeline too many do not want to see, because the impact could indicate that Elon Musk could get Twitter for a mere $15,000,000,000 and that is the fear of some. OK, I get it I would not want to lose $30 billion either, but in that is it not strange that the media is not all over Twitter asking questions? They merely need to dig into the engagement line and where these engagements come from and when you see the click farm, you might realise that a location large enough for about 15 people should not house a click farm with 150-300 mobile phones. It is like being in a sweets shop wth 150 children. You wouldn’t last a minute, but one person can click on 300 phones easily enough and there is enough data, merely an unwilling media digging deeper and as we see the Twitter folly evolve more people should be catching on how the media is BS’ing us. Because this data has ben out in the open for the longest time. And even now as the BBC gives us “Texas attorney general Ken Paxton entered the debate on Monday, saying he had launched an investigation into Twitter for “potentially false reporting over its fake bot accounts”. Twitter has until 27 June to respond to his request for information.” It does not take away the stage that this has been out in the open and the media ignored a lot of this, I personally believe that they ignored it intentionally, to what end is anyone’s guess.

The fact that players like Trollrensics have had data spanning years with supporting evidence makes the acts of the media even more debatable, but that might merely be my view on the matter.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

The bird and the cat

Yes, who has not heard of that setting, Tweety and the cat Sylvester, in real life duplicated by Twitter and fat cat Elon Musk. And in that setting most people will group behind the little budgie, yet is that a correct step? Reuters gives us ‘Musk says $44 bln Twitter deal on hold over fake account data’, the article (at https://www.reuters.com/technology/musk-says-44-billion-twitter-deal-hold-2022-05-13/) gives us “Musk, the world’s richest person, decided to waive due diligence when he agreed to buy Twitter on April 25, in an effort to get the San Francisco-based company to accept his “best and final offer.” This could make it harder for him to argue that Twitter somehow misled him.” I have an issue here. Face accounts in Twitter have been the setting of conversation in many nations. 

Trolls, click farms, and many fake accounts, all thee to give people false impressions, to fake that some care about issues no one cares about and to create flames. The problem is that Twitter is (or should) be aware of this. The element that is overlooked is engagement, Some looked into a similar setting in Facebook and it seems nice that one can buy clicks, but when someone in Utah sees that they get 150,000 clicks and 65% are all in Sri Lanka (or some other vague location), who does it serve? The one buying the clicks, and the one facilitating the clicks and it has evolved in an actual economy. So when I see “This could make it harder for him to argue that Twitter somehow misled him”, I wonder just how delusional they are at Twitter. There is a larger need to have two books, one with all the numbers and one filtering for expected fake accounts and it is not some small issue, the numbers are deep in the double digits at present, and as far as I can tell, Twitter and its CEO Parag Agrawal should know better. And now that we see “The estimated number of spam accounts on the microblogging site has held steady below 5% since 2013, according to regulatory filings from Twitter, prompting some analysts to question why Musk was raising it now. “This 5% metric has been out for some time. He clearly would have already seen it … So it may well be more part of the strategy to lower the price,” said Susannah Streeter, an analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown.” In this I wonder what (and how much) Susannah Streeter is getting paid for that view? I personally reckon that it has not been as low as 5% since 2 October 2018, when that columnist that no one gives a fuck about went missing, you know the one. And since the events Covid (2019) and The Russian invasion in Ukraine (2022) we are confronted with an even larger explosion of fake accounts. So when I see “The estimated number of spam accounts on the microblogging site has held steady below 5% since 2013”, my slightly less diplomatic view will be “Give me a fucking break please”. 

If there is one side where Parag Agrawal failed it will be to set a more realistic side to finding and creating a clear marker for fake accounts. Now, I get it, it will not be a simple setting, but I think we can agree that even Mother Goose will not tell the children in Digital Sleepy Town that 5% is realistic, no one is THAT delusional.

So when we see “prompting some analysts to question why Musk was raising it now”, the answer is rather simple, the analysts should have raised it themselves at any time since 2018 and who did? I reckon that list is rather short, perhaps non-existent.

So as some are willing to blame fat cat Sylvester, there are plenty of indications that Twitter is hiding behind some granny knowing that it was wrong from the very beginning. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Coming from simpler times

I have been thinking of the simple time, the past, the adherence to simplicity that is within all of us. It is the time before the Romans (original Italians). It was the Greek setting of life. We worked for the glory of Zeus, Poseidon and Hades. I reckon I would work for the glory of Hades, not because the others were not worthy, it would be that Hades seemed more real than the others. We are all confronted with our mortality, as such we would move towards the realm for Hades and it would be up to him if I serve him in the afterlife, or if I was destined for another place. And I would not be alone, 5000-3000 years ago many would be like me. If it was the greens versus the blues, I reckon I would be a blue. But overall the setting would be similar. Now we move to recently (1941), if any non-German would openly side with Adolf Hitler, if anyone would opt to not vote actions against Adolf Hitler, the populous (populism) would find that person and string him up  at the nearest tree. There are at times actions that are completely unacceptable and the Russians did that by cluster bombing CIVILIAN targets. And still they are malnourished, their equipment breaks down at the earliest notion and I see all levels of inactions. Just like Syria, just like Yemen and other places. Inaction for a reason that makes no sense. As such can anyone explain this list?

This is not right versus wrong, this is not communism versus the other side, this is acceptable versus unacceptable and the Russian actions have been unacceptable. People will state that I was in favour of Putin, I never stated this, I never was. Read the articles. I thought it was a stupid move to push politics into sports, sports and politics need to remain separated, it always does for all kinds of reasons, but in the first to stop sports to become the stepping stone for politics. I always oppose stupidity and the west has shown to adhere to greed over common sense (aka greed driven stupidity) too often. Consider the stage (as I see it), a nation (Ukraine) elects an entertainer (a clown) as the president of the Ukraine. We see the people laugh, giggle and I giggled too. I had nothing against the man, he was democratically elected and I am fine with that. In the time he put his positive marker on the Ukraine. I took little notice because the Ukraine is on the other side of the planet and I personally do not know too many people from there.
I am familiar with Alexei Ponikarovsky (Maple Leafs),  Dmytro Tolkunov (Ramparts) and a few others. But I know little of the Ukraine. Now as escalations have come to THEIR towns, I learn a lot more about the governments around me and their initial inactions and after that sending stuff (military and non military) all whilst civilian organisations take intelligence to a greater level (Trollrensics), all whilst the stage evolves we see their people take effort and the Dutch Nieuwsuur seemingly (according to what I have) cancelling what these people had to tell them. A person who translates, knows the places that are hit and the people that are there and the media turns away? That is what our sophistication brought, inactions towards what some call a tyrant. I am on the fence on that term, but there is an upside. Russia is 28 times the size of the Ukraine, there is more and I can list them, but I found a nice image that does it easier. 

And that image should tell you something about karma too. When the military power in 21st place can hold back the military power in 2nd place for a week, what does that tell you about the spending of the second best and the impact it has had on its population for decades? Also there are voices that are telling me that the FSB is opposing this war, how wrong was acting against the Ukraine from the very first minute?

And whilst I stop myself from posturing, taking the comedian side, I can tell you that Bette Midler stated (tweeted) it the best.

Consider where you stand, consider who you allow to represent your voice, I really hope it is not one of the earlier names seen, because in that case you are in deep trouble, because no matter how this ends, there will be a reckoning, it is the populist approach and it is bout to be turned against those relying on the populist voice to advance their political strategies. What comes around really comes around this time around. 

So for the glory of Hades, all hail the Comedian.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

Half a story

Yes, I am as guilty as anyone, yet in this case I say it upfront. I feel that is essential as I see stories from Reuters and others pass us by. Now, I have nothing against Reuters, and nothing negative on Reuters, yet the story is taking a turn as one of my best friends, a good and respected journalist, also one of the founding fathers of Trollrensics (a social media investigation tool) gives us “This is not true, Zelensky did not say that in the video posted on Facebook”, this is quite the setting.

In the Hill (at https://thehill.com/policy/international/594151-zelensky-says-ukraine-has-been-informed-feb-16-will-be-day-of-attack) we see ““We are told that February 16 will be the day of the attack,” he said, according to a Facebook translation of his comments.” The question becomes is the Hill incompetent? I can see that they are hiding behind “according to a Facebook translation of his comments”, but that does not cut the mustard, as I personally see it, the editorial of the Hill in engaging in misleading comments. So what exactly is ‘a Facebook translation’? 

The Hill also gives us “The Associated Press, citing intelligence obtained by the U.S., reported that Russia was eyeing Wednesday as the target date for an attack.” This sounds as vague “the Chinese tailor, a Chinese woman told me where the MH-370 went down whilst she was going down on me”, yes the obvious vague setting of China being mentioned twice. There is a lot wrong with the setting and the (as I personally see it) intentional misinformation of this event is a dangerous thing. Yet in all this the Dutch journalist gives the most reliable stage, the least reliable stage comes from the Hill. The question becomes what was ACTUALLY said, and the issue here is that I do not speak Ukrainian, so I can only give you half a story, but in this case it is a lot more and more reliable then that other news you were given. The rest of the story is as shallow as “”Asked about Zelensky’s statement and the mention of Feb. 16, Kirby said “I’m not going to talk about specific intelligence assessments, I think you can understand that. We have said for a while now that military action could happen any day.”” You see, there is no intelligence lost by giving the CLEAR translation of what Zelensky really said, but that did not work in favour of the doomsayers, did it? There is still a case, but it is not the statement of Zelensky, it is “We have said for a while now that military action could happen any day”, you see, if Putin does nothing the US will have been played for suckers, they will have been played for fools and all the clambake noises we all heard are empty gestures of an administration too close to total collapse. Yes, be aware that my stage setting could be equally wrong, but I am willing to say this upfront, I give you what some (journalists say) so even as FoxNews is loudly repeating what the Hill tells you, there is clearly a debate and no one is giving us the ACTUAL translation, it seems that is not in the interest for the press at this time. I reckon it will be on Thursday, after the event. And Reuters?

They give you ““They tell us Feb. 16 will be the day of the attack. We will make it a day of unity,” Zelenskiy said in a video address to the nation.” It is seen (at https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-hints-concessions-russia-scholz-heads-region-2022-02-14/), so what was ACTUALLY said by Zelensky? 

I leave it with you to get to the bottom of this.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics