Authors:
(1) Filipo Sharevski, Dipol University;
(2) Benjamin Kisel, Debol University.
Links table
Abstract
2 Internet activity and social media
2.1 Retail activity
2.2 Hacktivism
3 Internet activity and misleading
3.1 Popular Information Operations
3.2 The prevailing wrong information operations
4 penetration and misleading
4.1 Search questions and 4.2 samples
4.3 Roads and devices
4.4 Hacktivists
5 The concept of misconception and 5.1 precedents for the information of information
5.2 Mental models for misinformation
6 Active confrontation with wrong information and 6.1 leakage, adherence, and distortion
6.2 Information Control “OPS”
7 Evolution of wrong information and 7.1 counter -crack tactics
7.2 Wrong literacy
7.3 Displacement penetration
8 discussion
8.1 Antiquities
8.2 moral considerations
8.3 restrictions and 8.4 future work
9 conclusion and references
7 Evolution of wrong information
Due to the lack of cost to spread wrong information [85]The discourse is unlikely to get rid of alternative novels soon. If this dark prediction will be achieved in the end [78] Or the Internet will improve because new technologies will upgrade the audience’s ability to judge the quality and health of the content [4]It is still an open problem. Since the infiltrators are stakeholders in solving this issue, our third research question aims to achieve their prediction of how to remove online spaces with hunting, meanings and lies in the near future.
7.1 Anti -Information Tactics
The infiltrators in our sample assume this unanimously “It is difficult for social media platforms to keep pace with their removal, so people who intervene for help will be of decisive importance.” [P13] To keep a healthy speech. Packing for “Justice and truth as a cause” [P15] It is important not only to curb the wrong information but “Recovering information again from political reservation” [P1]. To help “Expressing wrong information Charlatans” [P4]He calls for infiltrators to preserve a code of behavior where “No leakage, dismantling, or procedure should cause any other person (physical, reputation or mental)”. [P3].
To start, P3 We must be recommended “Stop dealing with misinformation as freedom of expression.” Since two misleading affairs usually use this cloak to work vigorously on social media, the next step is “Determine what their weakness is and what raises them – inhalation or provocation?” [P14]. If the lighters are not responding, then then “Exposing, avoiding, and putting their real faces through Osint” [P15] In the place not only on the prevailing social media but also the platforms of alternatives and forums and everywhere on the Internet. If they are itching for provocation, then “Organized saturation” [P5] It may work better with “SHITPOSTS, ridiculous hunting, and mockery of memes” [P18]. Here, the hackers notice, it is very important for a prior distance from A. “What Political” [P14] And avoid “Exposure to control and dispute, and canceling this can cause controversy or separation” only “ [P5].
Some of the infiltrators were opinion “Overcoming the penetration itself is no longer because you can get things with a credit card and documents can be fake at the present time” at the present time “ [P1]. One possible tactic, suggested it P1It was “Look for exploits, and weaknesses on their platforms, and reveal step by step by step for the misleading amateur method in doing, using robots, and feeding thought tanks to obtain credibility behind their advertising.” Another tactic, suggested it P2He was “Overcoming the purpose of making advertisers withdraw from the support of well -known influencers, such as for example in the case of Andy Ngo.” A proposal to the hybrid penetration tactics, suggested P4 “An inherent psychological war, but it is coordinated where psychologists dismantle these people, and they make a serious OSINT to find experimental leaks on it, and even pay in exchange for advertising paintings and radio advertisements to shame publicly.” Along these lines, P11 Until I suggest throwing the book on them, Targeting with a social engineering attack and trying to waive a piece of their basic infrastructure is that their servers, Internet access or robot adoption data. “
7.2 Wrong literacy
The echo of the infiltrators in a sample we have feelings regarding the ability of social media users to the wrong information in scientific literature: laziness to verify the facts [P2] [89]Resistance to reliable suggestions [P7] [57]loyalty [P13] [120]And a simple ignorance [P16] [17]. As people resort to work, infiltrators feel committed to proposing ways to treat this allergy. In P5 show, “The wrong information should be seen as something that is seen for it, not just a group of people on the left or right,” A “The social contract for misleading” [136] It requires interventions like “Critical thinking curricula in schools” [P18]and “Teaching OPSEC piracy skills as a social responsibility and rose to work” [P5]And “Forced professional communication rules on platforms” [P16].
Since infiltrators have little control over these interventions, they were happy to help develop “Robots’ facts for” confrontation “with robots spreading wrong information” As something, it can be attached to leaks, avoiding and exposure [P13]. They have realized that “the spread of the spread of truth” should help ordinary users find the facts and locate them better, because the erasure of information illiteracy is the most effective in dispelling lies [55]. The infiltrators eat to eat that the platforms should allow them to allow “The wrong information to float on social media and make robots visible, so that real information is overwhelmed by” To show ordinary users how to help themselves [P14].
Regardless of whether or not these situations are realistic, the hackers believe in our sample that the current approach to raising the wrong literacy is ineffective because it does not indicate “Not biased” [P7] For social media users in error. Instead of an educational and respectful tone, Instead, the “cancellation of culture” is full or “your opinion” is a “wrong” tone [P3] Any attempt to help people move and determine the location of real information. The refusal of wrong information, as a result of wrong literacy, must be an agreement “The scientific facts do not have political characteristics, even if the social media platforms are nature.” [P5].
7.3 Displacement penetration
Participants in our sample acknowledge our format Dispinse penetrationIt is absent from the individual OPS cases against misleading clamps, to a large extent from social media. In order for infiltrators the wrong information as a reason worthy of work, the conflict between the “piracy of the political reasons” and [58] The future “penetration of the use of lies in promoting political causes” [22] It must be resolved. Although this conflict is complicated and developed, many infiltrators are concerned that it may create a “The division between infiltrators on political lines” [P2].
As a relative threat to wrong information activity, one of the participants mentioned the kidnapping of the Hacktivists image of self -promotion, for example “Some love to portray themselves as gods on the Internet with zero curse.” [P12]. Another threat is the temptation to use wrong information against wrong information, as in the #OPJANE campaign [P10]. While this strategy is correct for “Faire-Fire-Lit-Fire” Approach, may bring in reverse results in the circumstances in which the commitment to secondary penetration ethics comes to express social and political anxiety on social media [79]. Moreover, one can argue that this conflict in itself may be difficult to solve in the form of wrong information as external propaganda, because even if it is infiltrators “Hate of the homeland,” However, they do this in political terms [26].
