I think his comment his written to imply that it is possible for this to happen. In which case, it does not require supporting evidence beyond the logical consistency of itself, which is sound, I believe.
They are real people, aren't they?
to who?
The entrenched who already have a mass information platform available to them (news).
I shouldn't have to google for someone as politically active... ...you're literally working to elect someone president.
Both Hirschfeld and Osborne first logged in to their accounts in February 2011, well before the first known IRA activity in 2013. WIRED’s analysis found at least 63 accounts created between 2009 and 2013 included in the list provided to Congress.
It's reasonably well known to anyone who's used the site that old accounts are fairly frequently hijacked by others, so this doesn't invalidate Twitter's claim.
[0] https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-9268-social_bots_fake_news_und_f...
He controls it all
I imagine the following scenario: I'm the CEO of a social network trying to raise a new round of funding. I go to investors and say that we have 100M users on the platform and growing by 10M users per month. The investors like these numbers and decide to invest. A few years later, the investors find out that when I said 100M users, I actually meant 50M real human users and 50M bot users. When I said growing by 10M users per month, I actually meant by 5M real human users and 5M bot users per month.
At what point does this become criminal fraud?
It’s not hard to ask.
He’s blocking that too