Skip navigation

Tag Archives: Social media

Rik Ferguson, Director Security Research at Trend Micro, had a great tweet early last Tueday morning calling out potential FUD in an article over at The Metro:

Given the plethora of FUD-dropping in the article, I could only think of one way to do it justice, and that was a paragraph-by-paragraph check-in via:


Every FUD-check counts!

(it may help to have the article open in another window)

OK! we’ve got you at The Metro. You’ve been here 1 time.
  • +1 for heartstring tug (“Children”)
  • +1 for immediate FUD in headline
  • +1 for Facebook reference in headline
Nice check-in! You earned +3 points!
  • +1 for mention of Pentagon in sub-head
  • +3 for context switch from personal to national scariness
  • +1 for Facebook reference in sub-head
  • +1 for first use of “cyber”

Great mixing of FUD domains!
  • +3 for context switch to “child pornography” in main article picture caption
  • +1 for Facebook reference in caption

You’ve been to Facebook FUD 3 times! You’re the Mayor!
  • +3 for context switch back to national scariness
  • +1 for use of “cyber”
Every cyber-FUD check-in counts!
  • +2 for global scariness
  • +1 for social-media scariness
  • +3 for Facebook (you’re the Mayor!)
  • +1 for mentioning Sony attack
  • +1 for national scariness
  • +1 for mentioning Lockheed attack
  • +1 for mobile scariness
  • +1 for use of ‘bot’
Whoa! +10 points! Awesome check-in!
  • +3 for context switch back to personal scariness
  • +1 for re-mention of child pornography
  • +2 for added scariness of kidnappers

You know “they” know where they live and aren’t afraid to spread the FUD!
  • +1 for geolocation scariness

Headed in the right direction with this check in!
  • +1 for more geolocation scariness
  • +3 for Facebook (you’re the Mayor!)
  • +2 for “bedroom”

With that last check-in, you’re well on your way to becoming the Mayor of FUDville!
  • +1 for social-media scariness

Social-FUD FTW
  • +3 for Facebook (You’re the Mayor!)
  • +3 for coining ‘lifejacking’
  • +1 for mobile scariness

The Mayor is in the house!
  • +2 for Android scariness
  • +1 for “Wild West”

Artifical life-form FUD meets historic gunslinger FUD!
  • +1 for mobile/acrobatics tie-in
You’re a FUD gymnast!
  • +1 for SMS scariness
Every check-in counts!
  • +3 for Anonymous reference
  • +3 for LulzSec reference
  • +3 for context switch back to national scariness
Good use of “cyber-vigilante” FUD!
  • +1 for Lockheed reference

Defense FUD FTW!
  • +1 for “cyber”
  • +1 for “cyber”
  • +1 for “cyber” (You’re the Mayor!)
  • +3 for “cyber”

You’ve earned the Cyber-FUD Badge!
  • +3 for “cyber” (You’re the Mayor!)
  • +10 for nuclear scariness
  • +10 for “scary”
FUD is scary
  • +10 for context switch to global “Olympic” scariness

Congratulations! You scored over 100 points! You’re the mayor of FUD-ville!
(Done with homage to @shpantzer‘s SCSOVLF.)

Laura Brandimarte
Alessandro Acquisti
Joachin Vosgerau

Twitter transcript

#weis2011 How does information related to past events and retrieved today get discounted? Why does neg valence receive more weight?

#weis2011 how do we improve trustworthyness?

#weis2011 "designers of modern tech do not understand human fallibility and design systems w/o taking them into account" < true #weis2011 the reason why bad sticks better than good is that they way it gets discounted may be different. #weis2011 experiments were survey based & randomized. all were students < not sure that's random enough or broad enough selection #weis2011 (me) I hope they make the slides avail. ton of good info I just can't capture (and I don't have an e-copy) #weis2011 "good" information only matters if it's _recent_. "bad" information is not discounted at all. it "sticks" < huge e-implications

Catherine Tucker

Presentation [PDF]

Catherine’s talk was really good. She handled questions well and is a very dynamic speaker. I’m looking forward to the paper.

Twitter transcript

#weis2011 Premise of the study was to see what impact privacy controls enablement/usage have on advertising. It's an empirical study #data!

#weis2011 click through rates DOUBLED for personalized ads after the fb privacy controls policy change

#weis2011 it's been a "slightly augment the slides with humor" for the remaining slides. Good data. View the slides & paper (when avail)