Resolves YES based on a credible news story of any covert attempt to influence the electorate, sow derision, or obtain and disseminate embarrassing or scandalous non-public information that emerges before the end of 2025.
Recent hacking attempt Iran is implicated in doesn’t count, including new evidence or facets of the attempt that match the original timeline. Only articles published after market creation date about new attempts will be considered.
Here’s Wikipedia’s list of historical election interference, including lots of examples of interference by the US:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_electoral_interventions
Starting this as a Mini to give folks a chance to add answers for cheap!
Will upgrade to basic once there are 15 or more traders on an answer besides Other.
1,000People are also trading
See a news stories about a report by the research firm Graphika, eg:
https://www.npr.org/2024/09/03/nx-s1-5096151/china-tiktok-x-fake-voters-influence-campaign
See news stories published 9/4, eg https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/09/04/russia-election-interference/75072436007/
Iran Emerges as a Top Disinformation Threat in U.S. Presidential Race
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/04/business/media/iran-disinformation-us-presidential-race.html
@mqudsi Great article that quite plausibly argues Iran will (is?) trying again. But no specific mention of new attempts since the hack in mid-August.
@BlueDragon my read of “new” in the resolution policy is “hitherto unknown” or “different” and but necessarily “more recent” but that said, I’m presenting the specific “Savannah Time” effort as a resolution. The article doesn’t say this was an old effort that was just recently detailed and some of the screenshots as how Kamala Harris and are presumably post-hack and thus fit both your (newly specified?) definition of new and my/the more general take on it, no?
@mqudsi I had to think about this but I think you are right, creating fake news and targeting groups on social media is different than trying to hack the candidates, and therefore should count as a new effort. Resolved YES.
This should resolve Iran?
This market though seem to be created a few days ago, and this news is new on 8/23 after market creation. Are you sure this is the same news? There are a few couple other news before then
I am guessing the one prompted you to open this market is https://www.axios.com/2024/08/16/openai-iran-disinformation-chatgpt, which is before your market creation date.
It linked the group's activity to efforts to breach U.S. presidential campaigns reported by Microsoft and Google earlier this month, ahead of the U.S. presidential election in November.
The company's blog post did not name the individuals targeted, saying only that the hackers "appeared to have focused on political and diplomatic officials, business and other public figures, including some associated with administrations of President Biden and former President Trump."
This, plus the fact that they targeted Biden not Harris, suggests to me that this is just Meta catching up and adding additional context to the earlier hack.
1. It’s actually on both Biden and Trump.
The attack for this is on WhatsApp specifically.
"Aug 23 - Meta (META.O), opens new tab said on Friday it had identified possible hacking attempts on the WhatsApp accounts of U.S. officials from the administrations of both President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump"
2.It is actually just linking to the same group, not the same incident
https://about.fb.com/news/2024/08/taking-action-against-malicious-accounts-in-iran/
"Those reported messages enabled us to investigate this latest campaign and link it to the same hacking group responsible for similar attempts aimed at political, military, diplomatic and other officials, as reported by our industry peers at Microsoft and Google."
I am not sure if this could count as the same hack. If that’s your intention your description is not very clear, and you should clarify and add individual incidents related events/news (in your original description it says "incident"). This article is a new report after your market start date, with many dates apart from the Microsoft one (8/8), and targeting a different app/company.
Updated the description by adding: “including new evidence or facets of the incident that match the original timeline.”
Again because Biden is the target, I don’t think this is a new attempt by the same group, rather the same attempt by the same group. Find evidence that this was a new attempt, e.g. after this market was created on Aug 20, and I will resolve yes.
It’s both Biden and Trump to be clear again; also I think you should define incident
no that is just what your perspective is because you believe different things.
They are not just targeting Biden, but both Biden and Trump, and the news reported as targeting the election specifically. If it is targeting Biden alone, then it may or may not be related.
you need to specify incident meaning a series of attack, or a single attack; meaning attacking 1 company as one incident, or something else (a series)
Yeah you make a good point, I’d go further and say it could take years, but I think the most I could do with this market is to extend the close date by a month or two, say to the end of the year and clarify in the question that we’re betting on evidence to emerge this year. @traders, other thoughts?
