Looks exceedingly good to be Ai-generated. Also, it appears to be slightly pro-Trump, which doesn't sound like in Iran's interest.
> Some of the X accounts posed as progressives, and others as conservatives.
My impression is that these influence campaigns know that they need to produce a LOT of content that appears to reflect different opinions and perspectives if they're going to appear to be "real" - that way they can build trust with an audience before attempting to influence them in one direction or another.
You're missing China & Israel: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/may/30/o... / https://archive.is/y0V3A
And, according to OpenAI, they're interfering not just in the US: https://www.thehindu.com/elections/lok-sabha/openai-says-sta... / https://archive.is/RWn8X
Israel certainly derives benefits from a powerful United States. They may want to influence US politics, but they have a strong collaborative interest.
China is more mixed, but our economies are still intertwined. The CCP might wish to shift balance and reduce the power of the United States, but we still have mutual interests.
On the other hand, if the leaders of Russia or Iran or North Korea could push a button that immediately and completely depopulates the United States without attribution, I'm pretty sure they would push it without hesitation.
"Israel accused of planting mysterious spy devices near the White House" (2019), https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20954298
> I'm pretty sure they would push it without hesitation
This "let's kill 'em all before they kill us" line of reasoning is... eerily similar to post-WW1 propaganda in Germany about the Bolsheviks: https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/13/israel... / https://archive.is/f0jkN
> This "let's kill 'em all before they kill us" line of reasoning
You made this up, nobody proposed that. On the other hand, failing to acknowledge and address the fact that other people do in fact want to kill you is just plain stupid.
This comes to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Mahatma_Gandh...
Ghandi's assassin killed him on his third attempt. The prior two attempts failed; the guy was arrested and "released due to Gandhi's own policy of declining to press criminal charges".
There are probably people who think this is some sort of noble act. I am not one of them. The results speak for themselves.
Well, you made broad stroke generalizations and prophesied an imminent apocalypse. The German propaganda was all about this back in the 1940s (as mentioned in the article), drumming up mass hysteria to justify the atrocities against the Soviets.
Even if you're biased and seem to have a binary view of the world (black v white, good v evil etc), may be you mean well, and I'm placing too much weight in your words.
> collaborators spy on each other
I think you read past the part where their spies sold secrets to the Chinese.
(Personally, for all his failings, I like Gandhi: His pacifying politics was net good for the stability of a vast, nascent country as diverse & poor as India, keeping it from plunging into chaos from artificially drawn up borders post 300 years of ruthless colonial repression).
In my opinion the West is already doing a good enough job at polarising itself, doesn't need much help from the enemy.
Domestic enemies came to the same conclusion.
Well empirically it's actually pretty cheap and easy. What's expensive and hard are the countermeasures against it.
To manipulate politics you mainly need to generate fake social proof. To do it effectively you mainly need to target a relatively small number of counties in battleground states.
Have you ever heard of AIPAC? Rupert Murdoch? The UAE?
Chainsaw dismembering princes getting a free pass with their weapons purchases?
If you're only into corporate news, there's Russia in 2016 scapegoating for terrible decisions from the DNC.
But assuming you're asking in good faith the obvious one is Russian interference in the 2016 election, which the former head of the NSA considers
> the most successful covert influence operation in history
Another former director of the NSA said
> it stretches credulity to think the Russians didn't turn the election
The Wikipedia article is a good entry point if you're not familiar with the details [0].
After the election, the Russian government had scandal-making influence in many positions including the National Security Advisor.
The US seems to believe these tactics work because we use similar ones to influence foreign governments. For example you can read about US involvement in the Arab spring [1]. A lot of the techniques are the same, but things weren't quite as online then.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20...
Very strange perspective when talking about the only US president of our times that didn't start a war, made historical diplomatic advances with North Korea, made a deal with talibans to end war in Afghanistan. I'm probably forgetting a few but his track record is impressive.
Last i checked he was killed in Baghdad Airport which is in Baghdad, Iraq. Iraq which is a completely different country than Iran.
I guess your training dataset is of low quality mate.
He's basically an admirer of Putin at this point.
“A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still” - Dale Carnegie
The crux or the deal was a lifting of sanctions on Iran in exchange for an enforced freeze on nuclear programs. The general philosophy was that a non-Nuclear Iran engaged in the international economy was more likely to drive towards normal and peaceful relations than an isolated nuclear power. According to IAEA accounts the nuclear program freezes were effective.
As part of the lifting of sanctions, Iran did get access to frozen Iranian overseas assets on the order of $100 billion, sure. But characterizing a diplomatic agreement to lift sanctions in exchange for cooperation on nuclear proliferation as a 'bribe' seems unnecessarily pejorative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Ac...