The Houthis created a fake audio of a major Yemeni commander telling his troops to retreat which was subsequently amplified on Twitter/X, telegram, etc.
Apparently, this helped the Houthis advance quickly as the opposition forces were in disarray.
Apparently, this helped the Houthis advance quickly as the opposition forces were in disarray.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/12/truth-social...
it's actually amazing to type that out and notice it's not a joke
You’d lose a lot of money always waiting for news through officials channels.
Who knows how slow Yemini military channels are.
You’d bet your life on it?
Yes, our current President also does stupid things, and our military forces shouldn't be using his incoherent ramblings on Twitter to make snap judgements on the battlefield without checking with their chain of command either.
You mean the chain of command that has been purged of experienced professionals?
You don't even need to try because it's not happening.
Most European countries know this feeling. :)
This is why it succeeded: lizard brain decisions overcame training in the armed forces.
The military units are not very well organized, they don't have clear and stringent command, control and communications.
They understood a regional commander to be fleeing, units fell back.
This is kind of stuff is absolutely as old as time, and it's #1 rule in conflict aka deception.
The parallel would be reproducing a General's order to withdraw - meaning the command would have legitimacy among troops and junior officers, believing their own commanders were just out of the loop.
And yes - their command structure will be de facto organized along social lines, but it's more descriptive.
I've only very recently become interested in ancient history, so I'm still very ignorant about this.
Are there any particular examples of this tactic you'd suggest studying?
I'm case it's helpful to anyone, here's one review of it: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2vxts5/comme...
Seems like a tough area of history to be certain about.
"18. All warfare is based on deception. "
AoW is one of the most important historical treatises, it's not just 'something that was written in history', maybe the oldest true 'textbooks' of objective knowledge, and also realpolitik. Also there's hints of metaphysics in there, in a way. It absolutely stands up today.
The very first work of the Western Cannon: Trojan Horse.
Information / espionage and deception has made most of history; Hannibal, Caesar, Alexander etc.
A fun exercise would be to look at battles of history from the lens of information warfare and deception, and contemplate the outcome without it.
Where in the battlefield decision making process are they listening to social media recordings to make combat decisions?
Even in the Russia/Ukraine conflict they use Telegram for basic operations. All chat applications are dual-use.
I have no idea, but Im certain that twitter recordings do not put frontline forces in disarray.
> use Telegram for basic operations
an encrypted private communication channel is very different than public social media
I dont know that its a matter of professionalism. Everyone in the world has known that AI can generate video and audio that is imperceptibly fake, for years. And thats to say nothing of man-made forgeries in the years prior.
I have a hard time seeing people on the front line throwing down arms and running away because of an unsourced twitter clip.
Fortunately I'm from Wobegon and I'm above average: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Wobegon#The_Lake_Wobegon_...
And then recognize that the normies you talk to are VASTLY MORE internet-savvy than the illiterate child soldiers on the front lines in Yemen. You have no concept of the info environment they live in. It is all magic electronic soup.
> I have no idea, but Im certain that twitter recordings do not put frontline forces in disarray.
And yet as a counterexample: reality.
But leaks of those messages onto twitter are probably the most valuable info source for what the enemy is doing.
Sauds, on the other hand . . .
I don't want to live in interesting times anymore.
https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/e50be2e51e7695dc4b1366a37a245a...
Obviously, it's happening with all decent models.
The point of regulation is to kill competitors and prevent private individuals from having unfettered access.
This is the most "I get both sides" issue in my mind these days. I am still not sure where I fall, or if there is even a correct position with which to agree. It really seems like there are no good options.
On the one hand, if all knowledge work ended up in two dude's hands, that is really bad. On the other hand, if every surviving child victim of war (US, RU, IL, CN, whatever) has access to the knowledge to make custom viruses for a few grand, that is also really bad.
"But I don't see it helping us, it's just helping our enemies get closer to parity ."
"Precisely. How else are we going to justify the budget?"
with the press of a USB key or other device into/onto what you’re using.
This can be used to verify consistent identities for the cost of an AirTag or less - but without mandating it as a government-involved thing, which is most of the holdup.
We should stop everybody else from developing AI, except for both of them which are the most appropriate stewards for this technology.
Do they have a chain of command? Are people in charge?