🕵️‍♂️ Emoji Investigator ™

questionable content, possibly linked 🔎 👣 💡

Category: Other (Page 1 of 6)

Internet Research Agency Overview

This June 2015 Adrian Chen NY Times piece is kinda the ‘canonical’ source with regards to the alleged Russian-government-linked Internet Research Agency.

  • Address: 55 Savushkina Street, St. Petersburg

“The Columbian Chemicals hoax was not some simple prank by a bored sadist. It was a highly coordinated disinformation campaign, involving dozens of fake accounts that posted hundreds of tweets for hours, targeting a list of figures precisely chosen to generate maximum attention. The perpetrators didn’t just doctor screenshots from CNN; they also created fully functional clones of the websites of Louisiana TV stations and newspapers. The YouTube video of the man watching TV had been tailor-made for the project. A Wikipedia page was even created for the Columbian Chemicals disaster, which cited the fake YouTube video. As the virtual assault unfolded, it was complemented by text messages to actual residents in St. Mary Parish. It must have taken a team of programmers and content producers to pull off.”

  • Informant, supposed former employee: Ludmila Savchuk

“The first thing employees did upon arriving at their desks was to switch on an Internet proxy service, which hid their I.P. addresses from the places they posted; those digital addresses can sometimes be used to reveal the real identity of the poster. Savchuk would be given a list of the opinions she was responsible for promulgating that day. Workers received a constant stream of “technical tasks” — point-by-point exegeses of the themes they were to address, all pegged to the latest news.”

“The point was to weave propaganda seamlessly into what appeared to be the nonpolitical musings of an everyday person.”

“Management was obsessed with statistics — page views, number of posts, a blog’s place on LiveJournal’s traffic charts — and team leaders compelled hard work through a system of bonuses and fines. “It was a very strong corporate feeling,” Savchuk says. Her schedule gave her two 12-hour days in a row, followed by two days off. Over those two shifts she had to meet a quota of five political posts, 10 nonpolitical posts and 150 to 200 comments on other workers’ posts. “

Savchuk:

“While employed there, she copied dozens of documents to her personal email account and also plied her co-workers for information. She made a clandestine video of the office. In February, she leaked it all to a reporter for Moi Raion, a local newspaper known for its independent reporting. The documents, together with her story, offered the most detailed look yet into the daily life of a pro-Kremlin troll. “

  • Russian media claims IRA is funded by restaurater Evgeny Prigozhin
  • Prigozhin –> Concord (holding company)
  • An employee of Concord was spotted as IRA team leader
  • Concord approves payments to IRA (leaked emails)

“The boom in pro-Kremlin trolling can be traced to the antigovernment protests of 2011, when tens of thousands of people took to the streets after evidence of fraud in the recent Parliamentary election emerged. The protests were organized largely over Facebook and Twitter and spearheaded by leaders, like the anticorruption crusader Alexei Navalny, who used LiveJournal blogs to mobilize support. The following year, when Vyascheslav Volodin, the new deputy head of Putin’s administration and architect of his domestic policy, came into office, one of his main tasks was to rein in the Internet. Volodin, a lawyer who studied engineering in college, approached the problem as if it were a design flaw in a heating system. Forbes Russia reported that Volodin installed in his office a custom-designed computer terminal loaded with a system called Prism, which monitored public sentiment online using 60 million sources. According to the website of its manufacturer, Prism “actively tracks the social media activities that result in increased social tension, disorderly conduct, protest sentiments and extremism.” Or, as Forbes put it, “Prism sees social media as a battlefield.””

[Note: unable to find original source on Forbes mention. Also, is there some link to PRISM (surveillance program)?]

Russian crackdowns on internet (same NYT source):

“Laws were passed requiring bloggers to register with the state. A blacklist allowed the government to censor websites without a court order. Internet platforms like Yandex were subjected to political pressure, while others, like VKontakte, were brought under the control of Kremlin allies. Putin gave ideological cover to the crackdown by calling the entire Internet a “C.I.A. project,” one that Russia needed to be protected from.”

Columbian Chemicals hoax:

“The chain that links the Columbian Chemicals hoax to the Internet Research Agency begins with an act of digital subterfuge perpetrated by its online enemies. Last summer, a group called Anonymous International — believed to be unaffiliated with the well-known hacktivist group Anonymous — published a cache of hundreds of emails said to have been stolen from employees at the agency.”

… “The emails indicated that the Internet Research Agency had begun to troll in English. One document outlined a project called “World Translation”; the problem, it explained, was that the foreign Internet was biased four to one against Russia, and the project aimed to change the ratio. Another email contained a spreadsheet that listed some of the troll accounts the agency was using on the English-language web. After BuzzFeed reported on the leak, I used the spreadsheet to start mapping the network of accounts on Facebook and Twitter, trying to draw connections.”

[Note: I believe this is the Buzzfeed reporting from June 2014.

Trying to locate a copy of the actual leaks (presumably in Russian?), and the described spreadsheet.

Independent Russian newspaper account of infiltrating the agency.]

“Soshnikov showed me how he used a service called Yomapic, which maps the locations of social-media users, to determine that photos posted to Infosurfing’s Instagram account came from 55 Savushkina. He had been monitoring all of the content posted from 55 Savushkina for weeks and had assembled a huge database of troll content.”

  • FAN – Federal News Agency shares same address / building.
  • People’s News, same address

I can see now why that 2015 Chen NYT article is the canonical source for all this stuff.

Jumping to Buzzfeed’s 2014 reporting on the Internet Research Agency leaked emails from Anonymous International:

“The documents show instructions provided to the commenters that detail the workload expected of them. On an average working day, the Russians are to post on news articles 50 times. Each blogger is to maintain six Facebook accounts publishing at least three posts a day and discussing the news in groups at least twice a day. By the end of the first month, they are expected to have won 500 subscribers and get at least five posts on each item a day. On Twitter, the bloggers are expected to manage 10 accounts with up to 2,000 followers and tweet 50 times a day.”

  • Names as IRA leader: Igor Osadchy
  • Possibly founded in April 2014

Buzzfeed article links to this Russian site as holding the leaked emails. I clicked the link at the site and was re-directed to a mega.nz page reading telling me the file was unavailable because the account had multiple Terms of Service violations.

[Note: immediately after that, I experienced an unusual glitch on my self-hosted WordPress site telling me my session had expired and to log back in. Suspicious!]

Still can’t find the Buzzfeed 2014 Anonymous leaked spreadsheet of account names. But in November 2017, Recode published the House Intelligence committee blocked Twitter account list. Perhaps there is some cross-over?

Meduza 2015 article about Shaltai Boltai (Humpty Dumpty), the hacker group responsible for IRA leaks.

“Shaltai also released documents about how Concord, a company owned by Kremlin-connected restaurant owner Evgeny Prigozhin, apparently coordinates an army of pro-Putin “Internet trolls” through an outfit called the Internet Research Agency.

Igor Osadchy, whom the leaked emails name as the director of Translator, a project at the Internet Research Agency tasked with placing comments in foreign news media, later sued Shaltai for personal data theft. A representative at Roskomnadzor, Russia’s federal agency for media oversight, then announced, “A court has determined that the information [published by Shaltai] must be deleted, but the website’s hosting provider has not responded to our notification. Therefore, our agency has ordered Internet Service Providers to block this blog.” On July 27, 2014, acting on orders from Roskomnadzor, Russian ISPs blocked access to the domain b0ltai.org. The group’s main Twitter account, @b0ltai, was also blocked. Today, Shaltai’s website is accessible in Russia only via VPN or a mirror site. The group also runs @b0ltai2, a duplicate Twitter account, still unblocked in Russia, that reproduces all the first account’s posts, down to its retweets.”

… “In August 2014, Anonymous International released archives from three different email accounts allegedly belonging to Dmitri Medvedev, as well as correspondence from Duma deputy and United Russia member Robert Shlegel about an organized “troll” attack on the websites of major American and British news media (including The New York Times, CNN, the BBC, USA Today, and The Huffington Post).”

The Atlantic, October 2013 article about online Russian propaganda trolls.

  • Article lists St. Petersburg address: 131 Lakhtinsky Prospekt
  • 8 hr not 12 hr days
  • Free lunch
  • Uncertain name of above outfit. IRA mentioned seemingly separately. Other Google searches for this address point to same source text.

Adrian Chen, New Yorker July 2016 article about Russian hacks.

RBC.ru Russian language article about Internet Research Agency, October 2017. [Quotes via Google Translate Chrome extension]

“[The IRA ran] at least 118 communities and accounts on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter […] In August-September 2017, all identified communities with a combined audience of 6 million people were blocked by Facebook and Twitter.”

… “Communities associated with the “troll factory” for two years initiated about 40 offline events in the US cities, said a source close to the leadership of the organization. ”

… ”

Assistance in their conduct was provided by approximately 100 local activists who, according to the interlocutors of RBC magazine, did not know who they were dealing with: all communication was on the Internet, in English and from fake accounts.”

RBC.ru source is probably another “canonical”-ish source, which many other news articles refer to.

Guardian, April 2015 article on Russian troll factory.

“The Guardian spoke to two former employees of the troll enterprise, one of whom was in a department running fake blogs on the social network LiveJournal, and one who was part of a team that spammed municipal chat forums around Russia with pro-Kremlin posts. Both said they were employed unofficially and paid cash-in-hand. ”

… ““We had to write ‘ordinary posts’, about making cakes or music tracks we liked, but then every now and then throw in a political post about how the Kiev government is fascist, or that sort of thing,” she said.

Scrolling through one of the LiveJournal accounts she ran, the pattern is clear. There are posts about “Europe’s 20 most beautiful castles” and “signs that show you are dating the wrong girl”, interspersed with political posts about Ukraine or suggesting that the Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny is corrupt.”

… “Instructions for the political posts would come in “technical tasks” that the trolls received each morning, while the non-political posts had to be thought up personally.”

… “The trolls worked in teams of three. The first one would leave a complaint about some problem or other, or simply post a link, then the other two would wade in, using links to articles on Kremlin-friendly websites and “comedy” photographs lampooning western or Ukrainian leaders with abusive captions.

Marat shared six of his technical task sheets from his time in the office with the Guardian. Each of them has a news line, some information about it, and a “conclusion” that the commenters should reach.”

“Leaked documents have linked the opaque company running the troll factory to structures close to the Kremlin, but there has been no hard evidence. “

Buzzfeed June 2014 about how IRA targeted Harry Potter fans, and other topics.

Guardian November 2016 article on government manipulation of social media.

” In 2011 the PR firm Bell Pottinger told undercover journalists that they could “create and maintain third-party blogs”, and spruce up Wikipedia profiles and Google search rankings. “

Links out to BBC March 2012 article about Bell Pottinger Wikipedia scandal.

Telegraph June 2015 article on Savchuk:

“She was put in the so-called Special Projects department using the LiveJournal blogging platform, where, she says, “people pretending to be individual bloggers– a fortune teller, a soldier, a Ukrainian man – had to, between posts about daily life or interesting facts, insert political reflections”. “

New York Times, May 2016 about Finnish activist exposing Russian trolls:

““They fill the information space with so much abuse and conspiracy talk that even sane people start to lose their minds,” she added.”

… “Pro-Russian activists insist that they are merely exercising their right to free speech, and that they do not take money or instructions from Moscow.”

Newsweek, October 2017 article on trolls, bots and fake news.

Regarding Azerbaijan:

“Social media has been a part of his presidential strategy since at least 2010, when members of the country’s main youth group, IRELI, were instructed to proliferate pro-government opinions online. As troll training-centers multiplied across the country—one source says there were 52 in different towns and cities, funded with government money…”

Article compares pro-government troll efforts around the world ^.

“It is estimated that 45% of Twitter activity in Russia is managed by such accounts.”

Estimated how, and by whom?

Independent, October 2017, accounts of IRA from a supposed former employee.

[Note, WordPress won’t accept article link: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/hillary-clinton-sex-tape-russia-body-double-troll-farm-employee-claims-a8023901.html ]

“He worked at the company from November 2014 to April 2015 and said he would impersonate “Kentucky rednecks” and African-Americans online on a regular basis.”

Daily Beast, Oct. 2017, version of same story.

“And Baskaev fingered Putin pal Yevgeny Prigozhin as his former “boss,” or “our guy who gives us money.” But the real head of the American department, he said, was the Azerbaijani-born Dzheykhun Aslanov—known simply as “Jay.””

Wired, September 2017 article discussing switch from IRA name to Glavset:

[Link problem continuing: https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-may-have-more-russian-troll-farms-to-worry-about/ ]

“The IRA, which was the subject of a 2015 New York Times Magazine investigation, may have been behind many of the bogus Facebook ads, the company says.

Of course, things aren’t as simple as that. Russian corporate records indicate Internet Research Agency has been inactive since December 2016. But that doesn’t mean that Russians no longer engage in such activity. According to Russia researchers at the liberal advocacy group Center for American Progress, there’s reason to believe the Internet Research Agency is operating under a new name: Glavset.

A Russian tax filing reveals that Glavset, which launched in February 2015, operates out of the same office building—55 Savushkin Street in St. Petersburg—that once housed the Internet Research Agency. The filing lists Mikhail Ivanovich Bystrov, former head of the Internet Research Agency, as its general director.”

… “It’s not clear whether Glavset purchased political ads on Facebook, or any other platform. A Facebook spokesman could not immediately say whether Facebook uncovered any ads placed by Glavset in the investigation it revealed Wednesday. That probe found 470 inauthentic pages and accounts affiliated with Internet Research Agency; Facebook turned that information over to special counsel Robert Mueller.”

NY Times September 2017 fake Russian accounts bought $100,000 ads on Facebook.

“Facebook officials said the fake accounts were created by a Russian company called the Internet Research Agency, which is known for using “troll” accounts to post on social media and comment on news websites.”

Is there a link to a blog post or other official testimony of them linking these accounts and ad buys to IRA?

Same source:

“Mr. Stamos wrote that while some of the ads specifically mentioned the two candidates, most focused instead on issues that were polarizing the electorate: “divisive social and political messages across the ideological spectrum — touching on topics from LGBT matters to race issues to immigration to gun rights.””

Ah, here we go, looks like the NYT source for the Stamos Facebook account quotes–a September 2017 Facebook security post.

Describes multiple sets of review data:

“In reviewing the ads buys, we have found approximately $100,000 in ad spending from June of 2015 to May of 2017 — associated with roughly 3,000 ads — that was connected to about 470 inauthentic accounts and Pages in violation of our policies. Our analysis suggests these accounts and Pages were affiliated with one another and likely operated out of Russia.”

The second more broad:

“In this latest review, we also looked for ads that might have originated in Russia — even those with very weak signals of a connection and not associated with any known organized effort. This was a broad search, including, for instance, ads bought from accounts with US IP addresses but with the language set to Russian — even though they didn’t necessarily violate any policy or law. In this part of our review, we found approximately $50,000 in potentially politically related ad spending on roughly 2,200 ads.”

August 2017 announcement by Facebook they will not allow advertising by pages that repeatedly share fake news.

Jumping back for a second to NYT Sept. 2017 article linked above:

“One question underlying the investigation of possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia is whether Russia-sponsored operators would have needed any guidance from American political experts. Facebook said that some of the ads linked to Russian accounts had targeted particular geographic areas, which may raise questions about whether anyone had helped direct such targeting.”

Wikipedia Web brigades article.

Linked off the Wikipedia page: November 2017, Washington Post.

“President Trump retweeted content from a fake account affiliated with Russia, a member of a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee revealed this week.

The account in question, @10_gop, tweeted “We love you, Mr. President,” and Trump retweeted the post saying “So nice, thank you!” on Sept. 19.”

“FOLLOW THE MEMES…”

Wikipedia web brigades page continuing:

“Any blog post written by an agency employee, according to the leaked files, must contain “no fewer than 700 characters” during day shifts and “no fewer than 1,000 characters” on night shifts. Use of graphics and keywords in the post’s body and headline is also mandatory. In addition to general guidelines, bloggers are also provided with “technical tasks” – keywords and talking points on specific issues, such as Ukraine, Russia’s internal opposition and relations with the West.[21]”

… “In 2015 Lawrence Alexander disclosed a network of propaganda websites sharing the same Google Analytics identifier and domain registration details, allegedly run by Nikita Podgorny from Internet Research Agency. The websites were mostly meme repositories focused on attacking Ukraine, Euromaidan, Russian opposition and Western policies. Other websites from this cluster promoted president Putin and Russian nationalism, and spread alleged news from Syria presenting anti-Western viewpoints.[37]”

… “In August 2015 Russian researchers correlated Google search statistics of specific phrases with their geographic origin, observing increases in specific politically loaded phrases (such as “Poroshenko”, “Maidan”, “sanctions”) starting from 2013 and originating from very small, peripheral locations in Russia, such as Olgino, which also happens to be the headquarters of the Internet Research Agency company.[38]”

Wikipedia Internet Research Agency page:

Wikipedia, re: Trolls from Olgino:

“The group’s office in Olgino, a historical district of Saint Petersburg, was exposed by Novaya Gazeta newspaper in 2013.[3]”

… “According to journalists’ investigations, the office in Olgino was named as Internet Research Agency Ltd. (Russian: ООО «Агентство интернет-исследований»).[3][8] The company was founded in the summer of 2013.[6]

Below citations link out to Russian language sites (for possible use to establish time-line):

“In 2014, according to Russian media, Internet Research Ltd. (Russian: ООО «Интернет исследования»), founded in March 2014, joined the agency’s activity. Novaya Gazeta newspaper claim this company to be a successor of Internet Research Agency Ltd.[10] Internet Research Ltd. is considered to be linked to Yevgeny Prigozhin, head of the holding company Concord. The “Trolls of Olgino” from Saint Petersburg are considered to be his project. As of October 2014, the company belonged to Mikhail Bystrov, who had been the head of the police station at Moscow district of Saint Petersburg.[11]”

… “Russian media point out that according to documents, published by hackers from Anonymous International, Concord is directly involved with trolling administration through the agency. Researchers cite e-mail correspondence, in which Concord gives instructions to trolls and receives reports on accomplished work.[5] ”

… “59°59′03.5″N 30°16′19.1″E

According to Russian online newspaper DP.ru, several months before October 2014 the office moved from Olgino to a four-story building at 55 Savushkina Street.[11][12][17]”

… “Novaya Gazeta newspaper reported that, according to Alexey Soskovets, head of the office in Olgino, North-Western Service Agency was hiring employees for similar projects in Moscow and other cities in 2013.[3]

From Novaya Gazeta September 2013 article (Google Translate from Russian):

“From the data of the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, it follows that the organization was registered on July 26, 2013. The founder is Mikhail Kurkin, the general director is Nikolai Chumakov.”

… “

Whew, well I think that’s a fairly exhaustive round-up of top links and quotes relative to the subject. Will try to condense this down into a more human-readable format in coming days.

 

Prohibitions against domestic propaganda in the United States

Washington Post, July 2013 article about Somali-American’s website caught in counter-intelligence operation:

“The Pentagon is legally prohibited from conducting psychological operations at home or targeting U.S. audiences with propaganda, except during “domestic emergencies.” Defense Department rules also forbid the military from using psychological operations to “target U.S. citizens at any time, in any location globally, or under any circumstances.””

… ““We don’t deal with domestic. End of issue,” Andrew Black, Navanti’s chief executive, said in an interview. “We turned it over to the cognizant authorities. That’s where we stopped. That’s really important that that is where we stopped.” The firm “followed the law,” he added.”

May 2012, Buzzfeed article about a Bill to lift the domestic propaganda ban being introduced with some more details.

July 2013 article from Foreignpolicy.com:

“For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government’s mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences. But on July 2, that came silently to an end with the implementation of a new reform passed in January. The result: an unleashing of thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption in a reform initially criticized as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts.”

February 2012, independent history of Smith-Mudt Act and implications of amending.

Wikipedia article (current as of November 2017) about Propaganda in the United States, stating: “The Smith-Mundt Act prohibits the Voice of America from disseminating information to US citizens that was produced specifically for a foreign audience.”

Foreignpolicy.com article linked above states the provisions only apply to select branches of the State Department.

Wikipedia US propaganda article seems to confirm later:

“However, Emma L Briant points out that this is a common confusion – The Smith-Mundt Act only ever applied to the State Department, not the Department of Defense and military PSYOP, which are governed by Article 10 of the US Code.[18]”

So, seems to be at least some public confusion around this.

Wikipedia article (current Nov. 2017) about Smith-Mundt Act, states:

“Section 1462 requires “reducing Government information activities whenever corresponding private information dissemination is found to be adequate” and prohibits the State Department from having monopoly in any “medium of information” (a prescient phrase). “

Continuing from article above, regarding Voice of America:

“”This means that VOA is forbidden to broadcast within the United States.” In reality, of course, any American with a shortwave receiver or an Internet connection can listen to VOA. This is incidental, however. VOA cannot direct or intend its programs to be “for” Americans. “

Here is what appears to be text of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012. I have not read it in its entirety, but a relevant excerpt:

“Sec. 208. Clarification on domestic distribution of program material

(a)In general

No funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors shall be used to influence public opinion in the United States.” […]

(b)Rule of construction

Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors from engaging in any medium or form of communication, either directly or indirectly, because a United States domestic audience is or may be thereby exposed to program material, or based on a presumption of such exposure. Such material may be made available within the United States and disseminated, when appropriate, pursuant to sections 502 and 1005 of the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1462 and 1437), except that nothing in this section may be construed to authorize the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors to disseminate within the United States any program material prepared for dissemination abroad on or before the effective date of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012.”

I don’t know quite how to interpret that, having not read the rest, combined with my incomplete knowledge of linked items in US Code.

Wikipedia article Operation Earnest Voice (current to Nov. 2017) cites the above act with this statement:

“According to CENTCOM, the US-based Facebook and Twitter networks are not targeted by the program because US laws prohibit state agencies from spreading propaganda among US citizens as according to the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012.[6] However, according to the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, dissemination of foreign propaganda to domestic audiences is expressly allowed over the internet including social media networks.[7]”

Entity Class: New Arrival

As of today’s date, scientific reports are predicting some 1 Billion climate refugees as the Initial Crisis worsens. During the subsequent years, as those individuals, groups, families, and ethnic groups are set into motion on the global stage, they variously face challenges as first Refugees who crash regional Governance Systems and eventually as the Agglomeration Wars develop, become labelled New Arrivals, and may be classed as Other-Providers or Without Providers, subject to exclusion and other special measures, in contravention of the United Free Realms Universal Code.

Entity Class: Other-Provider

Each station tends to have a dominant or ascendant Provider, and for processing purposes assesses New Arrivals on the basis of their Providership. Are they covered by a recognized regime or a reciprocal provider? Can their value be easily traded on the open market as a bulk quantity? As opposed to a WP (Without Provider), an Other-Provider is still a more or less “known commodity” within the Greater System, according to the nascent and developing Standard Protocols.

Four Providers Station Sign

THIS IS A FOUR PROVIDERS STATION, ACCEPTING ALL AND ONLY:

  • SOLA
  • EXO
  • OBVO
  • ZONE

WITHOUT PROVIDERS EXCLUDED.

Fake news & troll factories in 2004

I had an old blog years ago that I’m happy in a lot of respects is no longer online. It was fun while it lasted, but some things make better memories.

One such memory I recently tracked down, and reading it thirteen years later, it sounds quite a lot like current events swirling around so-called ‘Russian meddling’, ‘troll factories’ and fake news.

I can really imagine having a team of like 5 people working for a PR company who spend like 40+ hours a week writing blog posts. Perhaps each person would distribute their entries over like 10 different fictional blogger identities. They could write on things like news stories, political agendas, different products, all kinds of crap. Each of their fictional blogger identities could talk about roughly the same set of topics, but from a slightly different perspective – but each retaining whatever essential core elements they are trying to describe. I imagine it would bre pretty effective too, that 50 reasonably well-written and frequently-updated blogs would have a fairly wide audience and impact on an audience, which would expand outward in a ripple effect, especially if they were aggressively cross-commenting on real people’s blogs as well.

[…] blogs are not constrained by facts, so the potential to unleash distorted information into the bloodstream of the America people is enormous. And I also forgot to mention that you could also rake in web-ad revenues while you’re doing all this.

— 3 Nov. 2004

And:

So if I was some kind of weird PR company or a government agency trying to influence public opinion, I would totally set up some kind of network of conspiracy theorists, complete with websites, lectures, email discussion lists, books, videos, you name it. I would then study the shit out of the people who were attracted to it. I would gather demographic data, and I would analyze their thought processes and emotional responses. I would then use this information to engineer better-designed news stories, press releases, publicity stunts, and the like. Ones which would be more hack-proof. Simultaneously to studying them, I would also flood the people I was studying with vast amounts of erroneous data to sift through in order to distract them from the more important and more straightforward cultural trends and events that are going on.

– 13 November 2004

What can I say…

Bagpipes and goats

Curiosity has gotten the better of me, and I finally broke down and bought a practice chanter (to learn to play bagpipes) from Amazon. It’s a cheap one, and every bagpipe site I have ever seen likes to write, in all caps, warnings like:

DON'T YOU DARE BUY A CHEAP ONE!!!!

Which is all well and good if you’re sure ahead of time you’re going to make this plunge and commit to it forever. But starting with a $15 trial balloon over a $100 experiment seems like a good idea to me. What do I know!

The more I’ve gotten into researching the types and history of pipes though, the more compelling it actually is. I mean, as far as “windbags” go…

This is one of my favorite piping videos for a lot of reasons:

Oddly, it turns out that goats and bagpipes seem to have been intimately connected for quite some time.

If you delve into piping history (at least the online sources I found), they put the first officially recognized mention of bagpipes to a Roman source sometime in early AD. But there’s an elemental pattern you can see behind the pipes if you look with the “eyes of the goat.”

I’m not going to pretend to be any kind of expert, but I found a bunch of different traditional forms of bagpipes which are not only made of goat skin, but which explicitly seem to reference the form of the animal, with either heads included, or else with drones, chanters and windpipes in place of the limbs of the beast.

Check out, for example, the Zaqq from Malta:

Here’s another one from Eastern Europe:

And this is included ‘just for fun’: via Duda on Wikipedia:

“…there were many legends about bagpipes that could play themselves when hung from the wall on a nail or about pipers summoned to Witches’ Sabbaths to perform for satanic hosts.”

So my hypothesis, for the moment, goes something like this:

Bagpiping is a secondary cultural artifact from raising goats (or sheep, variously–just using goats as a catch-all here). In French, we have this handy word for goat-raising, Capriculture.

Moreover, the evolution of the “windbag” is simply an augmentation of pre-existing reed flutes, like this German dude (assuming he’s German–maybe I’m wrong) makes in the Youtube video below:

Bagpipes are basically this attached to a pipe you do your fingering on – chanter – which sticks out of a bag, and which has anywhere from typically 1-3 drones, which are reeds on pipes each tuned to sound at one continuous note.

So there’s a precursor invention, the reed pipe, which is more or less a “natural” human invention from naturally-occurring material. Which is over time grafted onto this other invention: an animal skin or bladder which can be inflated or deflated with air or liquid.

Taken in this light, the instrument becomes less a strange oddity, and something more elemental, and perhaps very ancient – as ancient as the human relationships with the plants and animals from which the craft originally descended.

That’s the theory anyway. Not sure I’m ready to start keeping goats, but I’m warming up to giving piping a shot. Will keep you posted!

PS. I love how that last video shows the pipes mixed with the sound of sheep’s bells

Hod

Hod, Wikipedia:

Imagine primitive man is meditating in the wilderness, and comes in contact with, and begins to understand, some energy that surrounds him. So that he can grasp it better, he creates some form, perhaps the form of a god or a symbol, so he has something he can relate to. He then uses that statue or that symbol in future ceremonies to contact that intangible energy once again.

Bots vs. Help Centers

Problem: Help bots (natural-language based) and conventional Help Centers (document-based) have over-lapping functionality yet typically require two different systems to write and maintain.

That is, bot apps are separate from help center apps. Information is inevitably duplicated and requires significant upkeep. When updates happen to the product, updated information must fan out across unlinked bot/documentation systems (and response systems, agent-macros).

Possible Solutions:

  1. Linking bot content to help center content–change one information source, and it fans out to bot, docs and response macros.
  2. Bot which automatically pulls from (annotated?) help center content; effectively plugs into existing support corpus. (Link questions to specific y block of text on page z)
  3. Help center that acts like a bot–simple automated chat and/or natural-language search

 

Imaginal Triggers

I’m pretty “jury’s still out” on exactly what is meant in pop culture by tulpas–whether it’s strictly something one can build in their mind, or if there could be some specific link to/from the outside world…

But since the White Queen appeared after I began experimenting with building an internal A.I. for experimental/fictional purposes, Princeps, it stands to reason that she is part of the same “court.” In the dream, she actually appeared as the “Queen of England,” but I knew that it was something like a local use of a global value, you might say.

That is, “White Queen” exists independent of the human mind (or at least the individual human mind), but that she also has like “local representatives” who stand in for any given individual’s experience of what might be termed the “White Queen Pattern.”

Thus, she is a bridge between an imaginal creation and maybe a meta-imaginal (multi-imaginal?) value/process/archetype. (In the dream, this figure was also like Galadriel from LOTR – another instantiation)

Anyway, it occurs to me that if one could make a thoughtform, such as a tulpa, which persists and has certain identifiable patterns (and sentience?), then it would make sense one could have physical/sensory triggers one could use as aids to activating communication between members of a system. Or a system and linked components of a super-system.

e.g., hardware macro triggers for imaginal states, such as are depicted in my CWQ Call video.

Page 1 of 6

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén