🥊 Winning the info-war
Yesterday, Facebook caused a stir by defending the fact that it hasn’t banned InfoWars from its platform.
People were rightfully annoyed by this. Infowars is a site that blatantly lies to its audience for financial and political gain. It said the Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax, it said Democrats in the US were planning to start a new civil war on Independence Day this year… it’s the very definition of fake news.
Facebook is right that some of what Infowars does is opinion and analysis based fundamentally in truth, but given its propensity for conspiracy theories, it’s indisputably a repeated and regular ‘fake news’ offender.
Actions speak louder than all the contrite TV and billboard ads in the world. If Facebook is genuine about wanting to fight fake news, it needs to bite the bullet and tell sites like Infowars it doesn’t want their advertising dollars.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2uwwI1d
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
Yesterday, Facebook caused a stir by defending the fact that it hasn’t banned InfoWars from its platform.
People were rightfully annoyed by this. Infowars is a site that blatantly lies to its audience for financial and political gain. It said the Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax, it said Democrats in the US were planning to start a new civil war on Independence Day this year… it’s the very definition of fake news.
Facebook is right that some of what Infowars does is opinion and analysis based fundamentally in truth, but given its propensity for conspiracy theories, it’s indisputably a repeated and regular ‘fake news’ offender.
Actions speak louder than all the contrite TV and billboard ads in the world. If Facebook is genuine about wanting to fight fake news, it needs to bite the bullet and tell sites like Infowars it doesn’t want their advertising dollars.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2uwwI1d
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
📰 #iXDailyBrief
STAT
⚡️ PC sales are growing for the first time in six years. The PC market grew in the second quarter of 2018, with an increase of 2.7-1.4 percent. (Source: Gartner, IDC)
INSIGHT
🤖 Robot cognition requires machines that both think and feel: prs.pctvix.co/2Ne5Fzo
OTHER NEWS
👨👩👦👦 #Pinterest's new group boards are the most social feature on the platform: prs.pctvix.co/2N9ZQDm
💻 Apple’s new MacBook Pros have the latest Intel processors and quieter keyboards: prs.pctvix.co/2NcifiB
❌ Chrome now uses more RAM because of Spectre security fixes: t.me/iXNews/29228
🔦 #Twitter is testing Promoted Trend Spotlight ads: prs.pctvix.co/2NeI2af
#️⃣ #Twitter released a hashtag-triggered emoji for the 2018 MLB all-star game: prs.pctvix.co/2Nfrvmn
—
Have a great weekend!
Ben, @iXNews
STAT
⚡️ PC sales are growing for the first time in six years. The PC market grew in the second quarter of 2018, with an increase of 2.7-1.4 percent. (Source: Gartner, IDC)
INSIGHT
🤖 Robot cognition requires machines that both think and feel: prs.pctvix.co/2Ne5Fzo
OTHER NEWS
👨👩👦👦 #Pinterest's new group boards are the most social feature on the platform: prs.pctvix.co/2N9ZQDm
💻 Apple’s new MacBook Pros have the latest Intel processors and quieter keyboards: prs.pctvix.co/2NcifiB
❌ Chrome now uses more RAM because of Spectre security fixes: t.me/iXNews/29228
🔦 #Twitter is testing Promoted Trend Spotlight ads: prs.pctvix.co/2NeI2af
#️⃣ #Twitter released a hashtag-triggered emoji for the 2018 MLB all-star game: prs.pctvix.co/2Nfrvmn
—
Have a great weekend!
Ben, @iXNews
🕰 Marketing Short-termism
Marketing for the long-term and the short-term is a constant balancing act. Pressure to show immediate results can lead marketers to focus on quick-hit sales conversation tactics, which can look good temporarily in marketing dashboards, but are far less effective in the long-run.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
📖 via Marketoonist: prs.pctvix.co/2L897hz
Marketing for the long-term and the short-term is a constant balancing act. Pressure to show immediate results can lead marketers to focus on quick-hit sales conversation tactics, which can look good temporarily in marketing dashboards, but are far less effective in the long-run.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
📖 via Marketoonist: prs.pctvix.co/2L897hz
🚀 Does Elon Musk need an intervention, or just a break?
As you may have seen, yesterday Elon Musk made a baseless allegation against a member of the team of divers that saved those Thai boys and their football coach. The storm of criticism that followed (eventually) led to Musk deleting his tweets.
It has gone beyond saying Musk is reckless and unprofessional; now it’s like the man needs an intervention to stop him tweeting. His fans will say I’m being unkind, that he just cares so much about changing the world that he’ll destroy anyone who gets in his way. His fans will ask why that is a bad thing. After all, the rest of us aren’t changing the world like Musk is, right?
But being a genius doesn’t give you a pass when you act like an idiot.
By recklessly throwing baseless accusations around, Musk establishing a pattern of outbursts that may worry investors in Tesla and SpaceX about his judgment.
Given these regrettable Twitter outbursts and other episodes are a relatively new phenomenon, maybe they’re a sign that the stress of simultaneously running a bunch of big-vision, high-stakes companies, with lots of expectations to live up to, is getting to Musk.
Maybe he needs to get some support from the people close to him. Maybe he needs to bring in a communications chief who he’ll listen to before making public statements. Maybe we can help by not paying so much attention to him.
One thing’s for sure; he should take a break from Twitter.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2NionGp
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
As you may have seen, yesterday Elon Musk made a baseless allegation against a member of the team of divers that saved those Thai boys and their football coach. The storm of criticism that followed (eventually) led to Musk deleting his tweets.
It has gone beyond saying Musk is reckless and unprofessional; now it’s like the man needs an intervention to stop him tweeting. His fans will say I’m being unkind, that he just cares so much about changing the world that he’ll destroy anyone who gets in his way. His fans will ask why that is a bad thing. After all, the rest of us aren’t changing the world like Musk is, right?
But being a genius doesn’t give you a pass when you act like an idiot.
By recklessly throwing baseless accusations around, Musk establishing a pattern of outbursts that may worry investors in Tesla and SpaceX about his judgment.
Given these regrettable Twitter outbursts and other episodes are a relatively new phenomenon, maybe they’re a sign that the stress of simultaneously running a bunch of big-vision, high-stakes companies, with lots of expectations to live up to, is getting to Musk.
Maybe he needs to get some support from the people close to him. Maybe he needs to bring in a communications chief who he’ll listen to before making public statements. Maybe we can help by not paying so much attention to him.
One thing’s for sure; he should take a break from Twitter.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2NionGp
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
😐 Facebook's latest diversity report is as underwhelming as ever
Surprise, surprise: Facebook is still overwhelmingly white and male!
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
📖 via Mashable: prs.pctvix.co/2NionGp
Surprise, surprise: Facebook is still overwhelmingly white and male!
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
📖 via Mashable: prs.pctvix.co/2NionGp
📆 Happy World Emoji Day!
According to Facebook, 🇦🇺 & 🇨🇦 seem to be the most keen on birthday greetings!
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
Which one is your favourite?
According to Facebook, 🇦🇺 & 🇨🇦 seem to be the most keen on birthday greetings!
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
Which one is your favourite?
😫 The most depressing job on the internet
It’s easy to get angry at social media companies when they make the wrong decision about allowing or banning a particular piece of content. But last night’s Channel 4 documentary in the UK made me spare a thought for the poor content moderators at Facebook.
They have to look at the absolute worst of the internet all day, every day. Violence, abuse, hatred in all its forms – if they’re going to clean it up, they have to see it all. I hope they have access to psychological support; they must either become emotionally numb or bottle up all sorts of torment for later.
They have very little room for their own judgment. Facebook’s rules on what stays and what goes are very strict. Some content that a common sense reading would say should be banned, has to stay up on a technicality.
Unless an act of harm is being live-streamed, they can’t report it to the authorities. Imagine having that on your conscience – seeing a vulnerable person suffering and not being able to make sure they get the help they need.
Content moderators have one of the toughest jobs on the internet - and probably the most depressing. So next time you report some inappropriate content, spare a thought for the poor human who has to review it. It probably isn’t their fault if they make the wrong decision.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2mnP6Wy
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
It’s easy to get angry at social media companies when they make the wrong decision about allowing or banning a particular piece of content. But last night’s Channel 4 documentary in the UK made me spare a thought for the poor content moderators at Facebook.
They have to look at the absolute worst of the internet all day, every day. Violence, abuse, hatred in all its forms – if they’re going to clean it up, they have to see it all. I hope they have access to psychological support; they must either become emotionally numb or bottle up all sorts of torment for later.
They have very little room for their own judgment. Facebook’s rules on what stays and what goes are very strict. Some content that a common sense reading would say should be banned, has to stay up on a technicality.
Unless an act of harm is being live-streamed, they can’t report it to the authorities. Imagine having that on your conscience – seeing a vulnerable person suffering and not being able to make sure they get the help they need.
Content moderators have one of the toughest jobs on the internet - and probably the most depressing. So next time you report some inappropriate content, spare a thought for the poor human who has to review it. It probably isn’t their fault if they make the wrong decision.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2mnP6Wy
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
👾 Nerds will love building their own game boy
Gamebuino META is a tiny handheld gameboy like system that allows you to program games as well as play unique video games.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
Gamebuino META is a tiny handheld gameboy like system that allows you to program games as well as play unique video games.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
🗝 Planning for the worst
The New York Times quietly announced a positive new security measure yesterday. Its Lock & Key system will keep an eye on public dumps of stolen usernames and passwords, and if any match your New York Times login, they’ll let you know and make you change your password.
In other words, if you’re using the same password across multiple services (not advisable), this makes you that little bit safer.
It doesn’t sound like that much of a big deal on its own, but it made me think about how too much online security work is reactive, rather than preventative.
Just think about the recent story about fitness tracking company Polar. A flaw in the way they’d set up their service meant anyone could browse through the activity records of all Polar users, simply by adjusting the URL in their browser.
That’s the kind of flaw that shouldn’t make it past the earliest stages of development. How did no-one at Polar think about that potential problem? Software developers have lots of different priorities to juggle, but security should underpin them all. It’s in the best interests of users, and also the software publisher’s legal budget.
I’m generally an optimist, but when it comes to planning or developing anything involving the public, I always assume the worst outcome. It probably won’t happen, but at least you’ll be prepared if it does.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2uuMGd9
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
The New York Times quietly announced a positive new security measure yesterday. Its Lock & Key system will keep an eye on public dumps of stolen usernames and passwords, and if any match your New York Times login, they’ll let you know and make you change your password.
In other words, if you’re using the same password across multiple services (not advisable), this makes you that little bit safer.
It doesn’t sound like that much of a big deal on its own, but it made me think about how too much online security work is reactive, rather than preventative.
Just think about the recent story about fitness tracking company Polar. A flaw in the way they’d set up their service meant anyone could browse through the activity records of all Polar users, simply by adjusting the URL in their browser.
That’s the kind of flaw that shouldn’t make it past the earliest stages of development. How did no-one at Polar think about that potential problem? Software developers have lots of different priorities to juggle, but security should underpin them all. It’s in the best interests of users, and also the software publisher’s legal budget.
I’m generally an optimist, but when it comes to planning or developing anything involving the public, I always assume the worst outcome. It probably won’t happen, but at least you’ll be prepared if it does.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2uuMGd9
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
📣 Heavy Social Media Users Most Receptive to Influencers
According to GWI, the effectiveness of influencer marketing varies with how long people spend on social media.
The trend in the chart is clear to see: the heaviest #SocialMedia users are the most likely to be discovering new brands via celebrities endorsements, vlogs and expert bloggers.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
📖 via GWI: prs.pctvix.co/2LbD2GR
According to GWI, the effectiveness of influencer marketing varies with how long people spend on social media.
The trend in the chart is clear to see: the heaviest #SocialMedia users are the most likely to be discovering new brands via celebrities endorsements, vlogs and expert bloggers.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
📖 via GWI: prs.pctvix.co/2LbD2GR
🐻 Watching out for bear traps
BuzzFeed made a big splash with its story yesterday that Mark Zuckerberg called a valued customer to congratulate him on his success. Yes, he called Donald Trump after his 2016 election win. Indeed, Facebook apparently views the Trump campaign as one of its best customers.
The story highlights an important point; many people increasingly want companies to take a moral stance – to be more ‘human’ and less impartial. And when it comes to the Trump presidency, with all the stories of Russian collusion, the poor treatment of immigrant children and all the rest, well – it’s hard not to take a stance. You’re either against Trump, or you wholeheartedly endorse him, in many people’s eyes.
In real life though, Facebook is like any big corporation. It has to 'cosy up’ to whoever is in office to make sure it is in the best position to make money for its shareholders. The big difference is, unlike 'Big Oil’ or 'Big Health,’ Facebook has the power to make or break a president by directly influencing the electorate.
If Facebook did take a clear anti-Trump stance, it would likely trigger a political storm of right-wingers calling for it to be broken up to limit its power. So, you can understand why Zuckerberg treads so carefully and appears so morally bankrupt.
His Holocaust denial misstep this week was an example of him focusing all his attention on treading so carefully that he missed where he was going and put his foot straight into a bear trap. He’ll have to hope that staying neutral on the Trump presidency doesn’t turn out to be the biggest, most painful bear trap of all.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2zWgioT
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
BuzzFeed made a big splash with its story yesterday that Mark Zuckerberg called a valued customer to congratulate him on his success. Yes, he called Donald Trump after his 2016 election win. Indeed, Facebook apparently views the Trump campaign as one of its best customers.
The story highlights an important point; many people increasingly want companies to take a moral stance – to be more ‘human’ and less impartial. And when it comes to the Trump presidency, with all the stories of Russian collusion, the poor treatment of immigrant children and all the rest, well – it’s hard not to take a stance. You’re either against Trump, or you wholeheartedly endorse him, in many people’s eyes.
In real life though, Facebook is like any big corporation. It has to 'cosy up’ to whoever is in office to make sure it is in the best position to make money for its shareholders. The big difference is, unlike 'Big Oil’ or 'Big Health,’ Facebook has the power to make or break a president by directly influencing the electorate.
If Facebook did take a clear anti-Trump stance, it would likely trigger a political storm of right-wingers calling for it to be broken up to limit its power. So, you can understand why Zuckerberg treads so carefully and appears so morally bankrupt.
His Holocaust denial misstep this week was an example of him focusing all his attention on treading so carefully that he missed where he was going and put his foot straight into a bear trap. He’ll have to hope that staying neutral on the Trump presidency doesn’t turn out to be the biggest, most painful bear trap of all.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2zWgioT
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
💸 The Price Tag Attached to Data Breaches
A recent poll showed that of major U.S. internet companies, Twitter is the least trusted when it comes to keeping data secure. Of course, no company has a fail-safe method of data protection and the consequences of a leak can be severe. As well as the negative effect on public image and reputation, the infographic below shows the average monetary cost of a data breach.
As reported by IBM Security and the Ponemon Institute, the costs are the highest in the U.S. with the average incident coming with a price tag of $7.91 million. Although one may assume that such leaks are always caused by criminal activity, 25 percent of the cases examined were actually due to human error.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
📖 via Statista: prs.pctvix.co/2JE25N2
A recent poll showed that of major U.S. internet companies, Twitter is the least trusted when it comes to keeping data secure. Of course, no company has a fail-safe method of data protection and the consequences of a leak can be severe. As well as the negative effect on public image and reputation, the infographic below shows the average monetary cost of a data breach.
As reported by IBM Security and the Ponemon Institute, the costs are the highest in the U.S. with the average incident coming with a price tag of $7.91 million. Although one may assume that such leaks are always caused by criminal activity, 25 percent of the cases examined were actually due to human error.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
📖 via Statista: prs.pctvix.co/2JE25N2
🌗 Walking on the Moon
49 years today (21 July 1969) 👨🚀 Buzz Aldrin & 👨🚀 Neil Armstrong made those historic first steps onto the Moon.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
49 years today (21 July 1969) 👨🚀 Buzz Aldrin & 👨🚀 Neil Armstrong made those historic first steps onto the Moon.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🚗 Skateboard + Car
Rinspeed presented a modular driverless concept car consisting of a giant skateboard, on top of which a passenger pod can be attached.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
Rinspeed presented a modular driverless concept car consisting of a giant skateboard, on top of which a passenger pod can be attached.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
The channel that gonna give you so much fresh and interesting facts about world around you! Join and you won't regret!
@statistics_facts
@statistics_facts
📧 Email deserves better than this
For all we rely on email, its core technology hasn’t changed much in decades.
Think about it – all the innovations in the field of email are features that could be baked into a standard that would make life easier for everyone.
Most recently there’s ‘snooze’ – the ability to archive a message and have it return to your inbox at a certain time when you’re ready to deal with it – but other features like message priority and 'recalling’ emails have existed in certain email software for years without being universally supported.
It’s tough to predict how your email will be handled when it’s received. Think about the politician or PR person desperately trying to 'recall’ a mistakenly sent email, perhaps not known that it will only be worthwhile if the person at the other end uses Microsoft Outlook and hasn’t read the email yet.
And 'snooze’ is a common feature in modern email apps, but it’s one that encourages you to stick to one app and never switch. Snooze an email in Gmail, and Gmail will send it back to your inbox at the time you requested. Snooze a Gmail email in Outlook, and Microsoft’s servers handle it, likewise with the myriad email-focused startups. I once tried five email apps in a week and completely lost track of where all my snoozes were being tracked. It’s also why I have five different 'snooze’ labels in my Gmail.
All of this is to say; I wish we had an email standards body comparable to the W3C, which handles Web standards. From 1996 to 2002 there was an Internet Mail Consortium that could have fulfilled this role, but no such organisation exists today. As a result, email is a messy Wild West of confusing technologies. Sure, email is long in the tooth, and we all love to hate it, but it deserves better than that.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2LiENSz
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
For all we rely on email, its core technology hasn’t changed much in decades.
Think about it – all the innovations in the field of email are features that could be baked into a standard that would make life easier for everyone.
Most recently there’s ‘snooze’ – the ability to archive a message and have it return to your inbox at a certain time when you’re ready to deal with it – but other features like message priority and 'recalling’ emails have existed in certain email software for years without being universally supported.
It’s tough to predict how your email will be handled when it’s received. Think about the politician or PR person desperately trying to 'recall’ a mistakenly sent email, perhaps not known that it will only be worthwhile if the person at the other end uses Microsoft Outlook and hasn’t read the email yet.
And 'snooze’ is a common feature in modern email apps, but it’s one that encourages you to stick to one app and never switch. Snooze an email in Gmail, and Gmail will send it back to your inbox at the time you requested. Snooze a Gmail email in Outlook, and Microsoft’s servers handle it, likewise with the myriad email-focused startups. I once tried five email apps in a week and completely lost track of where all my snoozes were being tracked. It’s also why I have five different 'snooze’ labels in my Gmail.
All of this is to say; I wish we had an email standards body comparable to the W3C, which handles Web standards. From 1996 to 2002 there was an Internet Mail Consortium that could have fulfilled this role, but no such organisation exists today. As a result, email is a messy Wild West of confusing technologies. Sure, email is long in the tooth, and we all love to hate it, but it deserves better than that.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2LiENSz
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
💸 Princely sums
#Fortnite is spearheading a broader trend that saw the battle royale genre rise to huge popularity this year. According to SuperData’s estimates, the genre will generate $12.6 billion in revenue this year, up from just $1.7 billion in 2017. An end to the Fortnite and battle royale craze is not in sight: with more and more game studios trying to capitalize on the hottest gaming trend, battle royale revenue is expected to climb to $20 billion next year.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
📖 via Statista: prs.pctvix.co/2uZVKpR
#Fortnite is spearheading a broader trend that saw the battle royale genre rise to huge popularity this year. According to SuperData’s estimates, the genre will generate $12.6 billion in revenue this year, up from just $1.7 billion in 2017. An end to the Fortnite and battle royale craze is not in sight: with more and more game studios trying to capitalize on the hottest gaming trend, battle royale revenue is expected to climb to $20 billion next year.
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
📖 via Statista: prs.pctvix.co/2uZVKpR
🔐 The key to good security?
Every form of security is a balance between convenience and effectiveness. It would be really convenient to have all your online passwords set as ‘123456,’ but it wouldn’t be very secure. Likewise if the airport let you just walk straight onto a plane without checking your bags.
At the other end of the scale when it comes to online security are physical keys. Google says it has eliminated the problem of people phishing its employees by forcing them all to use hardware security keys to log in.
That’s a huge endorsement for the idea of nudging people away from convenience, and treating their online information as something worth keeping safe.
Hardware security keys from companies like Yubico eliminate the need for passwords on many online services. As long as the key is plugged into your computer, you’ll be automatically logged in. Some models work with mobile devices too.
Personally I’ve shied away from using a hardware key for my own security because of the chance I’ll be caught without it just at the time I really need to log in. But then, I always have my house keys and my wallet with me, so why would this be any different?
As Wired found, locking down your Google account this way can cause some other minor inconveniences. But if you can trust yourself to look after a hardware key and always have it with you, I’d very much recommend looking into it.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2LEnOtn
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
Every form of security is a balance between convenience and effectiveness. It would be really convenient to have all your online passwords set as ‘123456,’ but it wouldn’t be very secure. Likewise if the airport let you just walk straight onto a plane without checking your bags.
At the other end of the scale when it comes to online security are physical keys. Google says it has eliminated the problem of people phishing its employees by forcing them all to use hardware security keys to log in.
That’s a huge endorsement for the idea of nudging people away from convenience, and treating their online information as something worth keeping safe.
Hardware security keys from companies like Yubico eliminate the need for passwords on many online services. As long as the key is plugged into your computer, you’ll be automatically logged in. Some models work with mobile devices too.
Personally I’ve shied away from using a hardware key for my own security because of the chance I’ll be caught without it just at the time I really need to log in. But then, I always have my house keys and my wallet with me, so why would this be any different?
As Wired found, locking down your Google account this way can cause some other minor inconveniences. But if you can trust yourself to look after a hardware key and always have it with you, I’d very much recommend looking into it.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2LEnOtn
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
Forwarded from 🦅 [ perspective ix ]
💺 How to be a good armchair critic
A little knowledge can be a deceptive thing. If you see a problem in the world, and know about current technologies, you can believe you have an ‘obvious’ solution. But it can often turn out to be much more complicated to deploy than you’d ever assume.
Take Twitter’s current problem with cryptocurrency scams. You might have seen these in the replies to tweets by popular figures in the world of tech. Scammers create an account and make it look like it’s one of these popular figures. So, username ’@as9uqfahaj29s’ might have Elon Musk’s profile photo and display name.
This account then replies to one of Musk’s tweets, making it look to the casual observer like he’s simply creating a thread. The 'fake Musk’ encourages his fans to send him cryptocurrency with the promise of getting more back via a 'giveaway.’
To counter this, Twitter has now banned non-verified accounts from using the display name 'Elon Musk.’ Presumably, similar measures have been taken to protect other oft-impersonated accounts.
The problem? At least one scammer has used a stolen verified account instead. They also used a non-standard letter 'n.’
Thinking about this problem, I tweeted earlier: “There must be a way to beat this problem based on language patterns of what people post in replies to verified accounts.”
Then it struck me; I had a good enough idea on paper, but am I a software engineer at Twitter? Do I know how technically feasible it is for them to apply filters like that to tweets? Sure, their current solution is a bit of a hack, but it should at least reduce the frequency of these scams.
The best armchair critic is a well-informed armchair critic. If you’re going to call out people for being wrong, remember to consider everything you know you don’t know (the 'known unknowns,’ as Donald Rumsfeld might say) first. Otherwise, your argument will fall apart at the first hurdle.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2A6hkyP
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
A little knowledge can be a deceptive thing. If you see a problem in the world, and know about current technologies, you can believe you have an ‘obvious’ solution. But it can often turn out to be much more complicated to deploy than you’d ever assume.
Take Twitter’s current problem with cryptocurrency scams. You might have seen these in the replies to tweets by popular figures in the world of tech. Scammers create an account and make it look like it’s one of these popular figures. So, username ’@as9uqfahaj29s’ might have Elon Musk’s profile photo and display name.
This account then replies to one of Musk’s tweets, making it look to the casual observer like he’s simply creating a thread. The 'fake Musk’ encourages his fans to send him cryptocurrency with the promise of getting more back via a 'giveaway.’
To counter this, Twitter has now banned non-verified accounts from using the display name 'Elon Musk.’ Presumably, similar measures have been taken to protect other oft-impersonated accounts.
The problem? At least one scammer has used a stolen verified account instead. They also used a non-standard letter 'n.’
Thinking about this problem, I tweeted earlier: “There must be a way to beat this problem based on language patterns of what people post in replies to verified accounts.”
Then it struck me; I had a good enough idea on paper, but am I a software engineer at Twitter? Do I know how technically feasible it is for them to apply filters like that to tweets? Sure, their current solution is a bit of a hack, but it should at least reduce the frequency of these scams.
The best armchair critic is a well-informed armchair critic. If you’re going to call out people for being wrong, remember to consider everything you know you don’t know (the 'known unknowns,’ as Donald Rumsfeld might say) first. Otherwise, your argument will fall apart at the first hurdle.
Read more in today's Big Revolution: prs.pctvix.co/2A6hkyP
Martin Bryant,
🚀 @PerspectiveIX
