PSA: People who are smart at one thing mistakenly believe that they’re smart at everything.
Dave’s bio says “Prof of Organic Chemistry @Cornell. Libertarian.” His feed’s full of anti-vax rhetoric but it’s clear he doesn’t understand social media or propaganda. A thread 🧵
Dave’s sharing without verifying. @EM_RESUS's post is real, but when I searched for the copycats… I only saw people talking about this screenshot. Two possible explanations:
1) Twitter’s doing good moderating and taking them down 2) this screenshot is fake
Either way, Dave’s implication of conspiracy is disproven. So why might bots copy this?
Sam’s post is credible, concise, timely, emotional. Importantly, “I just left the ER” suggests credibility without vettable credentials. Is the speaker a nurse? Doctor? Patient?
Easy likes.
Bots copy posts to farm likes and followers. Your @ username AND your display name are changeable… so you can sell accounts with lots of followers.
Or bad actors can use them to run malware-spreading scams. Or run chaos agents that disrupt America’s well-being and enterprise.
Actually, bots ARE rampant in Covid-19 discourse: they demand the country reopen (and the virus spread).
Carnegie Mellon researchers believe it’s tied to Russian and Chinese destabilization efforts. The Department of Defense finds it noteworthy. basicresearch.defense.gov/COVID-19/Basic…
Dave sees a cabal trying to restrict American life, but the boring reality is that bot farms are profitable and valuable, even to individual actors with zero stake in Covid-19 disinformation.
But Dave believes his existing knowledge can explain a field he knows little about.
Based on Dave’s feed full of anti-vax retweets, I’m sure he sees a conspiracy: “'THEY' use bots to manufacture Covid-19 panic and trigger totalitarian takeover of the US.”
I don’t want to pick on just Dave here, because many of the highly educated show vaccine skepticism. 11,000 PhDs surveyed, representative of the US population.
Discussion in the replies here: PhDs chiming in, proving it.
This PhD of FINANCE is relying on “neurophysics (pharma orientation)” sounding medical enough that you don’t question it. Neurophysics is about MRIs and electricity in the brain. It is not about viruses.
He's an "empiricist." You're not.
These folks especially fall prey to this “illusory superiority,” believing they’ve freed themselves of bias.
“In a survey of faculty at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln, 68% rated themselves in the top 25% for teaching ability, and 94% rated themselves as above average.”
Steve Jobs is a textbook case. His work was brilliant and uncompromising. A coworker of mine had Steve tear apart his designs once, and he brags about that tongue-lashing.
Steve still thought he knew better than his oncologists and surgeons, and apples could cure cancer.
At some point, you’ve been told you're a genius so much that if anyone challenges your intellect, the only way you can fit them into your worldview is to find how they are wrong and dumb.
Dave believes he is too smart to be a “useful idiot,” a pawn in a game of misinformation.
A useful idiot (sometimes “useful innocent”) is someone who champions propaganda without understanding the deeper goals. The term is mistakenly attributed to Lenin, but it didn’t appear until the Cold War. It referred to liberals who sympathized with communist talking points.
I would hope a Cornell professor maintains healthy skepticism, even of information that aligns with his bias.
(No one’s perfect here. I have mistakenly shared misleadingly edited footage before because it confirmed my biases. Being a skeptic requires healthy doubt.)
Meanwhile a @cornell chemistry professor says whatever he wants about epidemiology, climatology, and finance.
"I spent 100s of hours reading about climate change...the climate crisis story, I think is baloney. I'm a denier, I'm a complete denier."
2nd century Christian writer Tertullian claimed that when Roman generals had victory parades called triumphs (it’s where the modern word comes from), their charioteer would whisper to them: Respice post te. Hominem te moment.
“Look before you and remember you are only a man.”
That story’s apocryphal. Tertullian’s tale isn’t confirmed by other any classical authors.
But to you true geniuses out there who say, “actually, I DO know enough to not vaccinate; I don’t trust immunologists and epidemiologists.”
I say, memento mori. “Remember that you die.”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I am losing my mind over a @Cornell chemistry professor and former department chair with 69k followers advocating for a livestock de-worming drug as a Covid-19 treatment. The FDA released a statement saying don’t take this
A thread full of anti-science quotes of his 🧵
Do not take ivermectin. It is not an antiviral. Animal ivermectin is not the same as human ivermectin. fda.gov/consumers/cons…
Pharmacies have restricted sales of ivermectin because they don’t want to be held legally liable for off-label use of a medicine.
David’s out here retweeting Steve Bannon’s conspiracy that restricting treatments is a way for Big Pharma to sell more vaccines.
If you were celebrating @StormyDaniels for clowning on Trump, I hope you’re as supportive of the content creators that OnlyFans are kicking out.
They’re the OnlyReason CEO Tim Stokely can claim a $1B valuation as it goes looking for new sugar dadd—er, investors.
Thread. 🧵
At least OnlyFans turns a profit! They took a 20% cut of $2 billion in sales last year. That’s more than Uber can say. Uber has to use a dodgy accounting to pretend to be profitable. bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
Sequel time! So you want to clean up your privacy online. Here's how.
Each choice is a tradeoff between privacy and convenience, and the tarnish of capitalism is everywhere. (Speaking of, still waiting on my @Sensodyne_US sponsorship.)
P.S. this is my mom. She's a nurse. 💖🧵
I am a “content designer” (a gag-me industry term that just means writer). I read voraciously on others’ data privacy reporting and I write to make things easy to understand. So I won’t be getting too technical.
First, backstory: cookies. When your device talks to any website, it downloads a tiny file, like the saved file in a video game so it can remember where you left off. Some are useful—”remember I’m logged in”—others just track you for ads.
I got doxxed last week, and it wasn’t over my privacy tweets. Someone posted my address on Twitter to harass my girlfriend @ohadelaide, who is defending herself against a libel suit for speaking up during #MeToo. Let’s talk the politics of why I’m a target now too. 🧵
In 2019, Adelaide tweeted about her sexual assault, naming her assaulter, amidst a gaming #MeToo moment. It became a new story covered in several outlets, which you can find easily.
Adelaide is American. Her assaulter is a UK citizen. The statute of limitations on libel in the UK is one year. One year to the day after Adelaide’s tweets, he filed a libel suit against her in a UK court.
I'm back from a week at my mom's house and now I'm getting ads for her toothpaste brand, the brand I've been putting in my mouth for a week. We never talked about this brand or googled it or anything like that.
As a privacy tech worker, let me explain why this is happening. 🧵
First of all, your social media apps are not listening to you. This is a conspiracy theory. It's been debunked over and over again.
But frankly they don't need to because everything else you give them unthinkingly is way cheaper and way more powerful.
Your apps collect a ton of data from your phone. Your unique device ID. Your location. Your demographics. Weknowdis.
Data aggregators pay to pull in data from EVERYWHERE. When I use my discount card at the grocery store? Every purchase? That's a dataset for sale.