The Optimisation of Commercial Intelligence through the employment of multiple philosophical dispositions.

What causes conspiracy theorists to question consensus reality and to hypothesise that the world is just one big revolving door, with the majority of the human race being caught inside?

Whatever it is, we believe that conspiracist psychology has a real part to play in developing alternative competitive intelligence perspectives for industry.

Paranoiac disposition can play a significant role in the acquisition, interpretation, processing and assessment of effective intelligence.

The CIA and MI6 have had a policy for years which ensures intelligence is derived from assets comprising multiple philosophical dispositions. Many of these dispositions are hostile to the US and UK, but their perspectives are a welcome input to the numerous intelligence thinktanks, operating around the world.

It goes without saying that in order for global brands to fully secure their investments that they must embrace the opportunity to develop resource acquisition policies that lead to the introduction of multiple philosophical dispositions into the process.

Never has this been more important, given the rise of China and India as economic powerhouses.

Choose your analysts carefully. If you hire analysts with the same background as you - don't be surprised when they don't churn out anything new!

Looking to hire multiple philosophical dispositions? 

Torture, Learned Helplessness, Psyhological Trauma and the CIA

I have been researching the self-inflicted affects of torture on the human soul and i came across this article by David Dobbs who was writing about Dr Vaughn Bell's comments relating to the psychological impact of torture and the results of "learned helplessness". My interest in his article was particularly acute when he introduced the notion that depression is really the result of a process of "learned helplessness". Having suffered years of "self-torture" where my mind constantly remined me I was just about to die, which finally ended in a complete emotional and intellectual breakdown, i really can see the similarities between a largely self-imposed torture by the ego and the torture administered by the CIA.

Here is the article.
Amid my flu frenzy I missed Vaughn Bell's excellent consideration of CIA psychology through the declassified memos:

I've been reading the recently released CIA memos on the interrogation of 'war on terror' detainees. The memos make clear that the psychological impact of the process is the most important aim of interrogation, from the moment the detainee is captured through the various phases of interrogation.
Although disturbing, they're interesting for what they reveal about the CIA's psychologists and their approach to interrogation.

As Vaughn notes,

A couple of the memos note that the whole interrogation procedure and environment is designed "to create a state of 'learned helplessness'.. This is a concept originally developed by psychologist Martin Seligman who found that dogs given inescapable electric shocks would eventually just give up trying to avoid them and remain passive while electrocuted. The theory was related to depression where people with no control over their unpleasant lives supposedly just learnt to be withdrawn and passive.

Vaughn points out that while the concept is not particularly well validated, "if it was and you were an interrogator, you'd want to avoid learned helplessness at all costs, because the detainee would see no point in co-operating."
I'd add another point: Some studies have shown "learned helplessness" to be an apt model for major depression from both a behavioural and even a neurological perspective. In a sense, then, to intentionally produce it in someone by causing them pain and distress in a situation they are powerless to change is to inflict on them a mental illness.

You can argue that depression is not a mental illness (i'd argue back). But the point here is that the prevailing medical view is that depression is a mental illness, and that it may be defined (among other ways) as a state of learned helplessness, despondency, and hopelessness. It follows that intentionally producing that state through torture is to intentionally make someone quite ill. And regardless of the ridiculous arguments over whether waterboarding and beating and hanging by the arms for days is torture, the act of making intentionally making someone sick -- indeed, seeking to give them an illness known to carry a risk of death (by suicide) -- would seem rather not okay.

Competitive Intelligence Agency (cia) vs. Central Intelligence Agency (The CIA)?

Brand Killer Robots reveal::

So what is the difference between commerical intelligence people and their counterparts working for the CIA?

Is it that the CIA have more knowhow, more tradecraft, different targets etc?

Is it that CIA analysts work on behalf of the citizens of the country, as directed by the government of the day - and not for shareholders?

Is it that the CIA have more money, more resources, a higher mission in life, even? What distinguishes CIA operatives from their counterparts in the commercial world?

Well, all the above are correct distinguishing points, but there is one differentiator that brings the most significant distinguising point of all - RAGE.

Rage is what really distinguishes the CIA from their lowly counterparts in the commercial arena.

When you've seen the ugly face of injustice, of inhumanity of immorality.....

Somehow you find an edge that no others have.

Somehow you find that little something extra.

More focus, more drive, more love for your fellow man.

More rage!!!!

If you operate an upstanding and ethical brand - the best way to motivate commercial intelligence analysts is to ensure they know that the enemy is a frightening, corrupt and subversive monster - and that their real job is to kill them dead - before they themselves are eaten alive.

That's the difference between competitive intelligence agency and the CIA?

CIA operatives can be eaten alive if they fail. Commercial analysts rarely are.

Corporate Intelligence Spies:: Should we be looking Beyond the Obvious?

Brand Killer Robots reveal::

If you came across an Al kaeda cell, would you think of calling your local policemen to deal with it - or would you call MI5, MI6 or CIA? So why do managers think that corporate spies can be repelled using IT security policies or Human Resources Personnel? After all, Corporate spies have a very different motive and capability than a 16 year old hanging off an ADSL modem out of a basement in Belarus or a stupid incompetent employee pressing all the wrong buttons.

Corporate Spies are only interested in three things:

1. Gaining 'just enough' access to the target organisation

2. Perpertrating a specific attack, such as sabotage, theft and/or installing a trojan horse.

3. Exiting out - or better still, being exited out - under a cover.

Corporate spies have absolutely no interest in the organisation other than gaining sufficient access to target areas, then maintaining and leveraging their position in the organisation until such a time as they have infilitrated their tradecraft to achieve the desired result.

A spy will not play the same games as security personnel expect them too. They will not attempt to gain access to a system, whilst sitting at a desk with a fixed ip address, so system logs can be later scanned and reveal their attempts at locating data inside the managing directors PC folder. They will not make any specific requests themselves for access to any resource, so they build up a record of attempted breakins. They will not allow themelves to be seen to see or do anything that can be classified as 'out of the ordinary'.

What they will do is take more documents to the photo copier than they needed to (maybe pocket the ones they weren't supposed to be copying). Perhaps print 2 copies of the same document (under the guise of being a mistake if detected -"only meant to print one guv!") and then fold the second copy into a paper airplane and slip it in to the top pocket.

What they will do is elicit certain types of information from staff by offering stories of past experiences designed to provoke the right kinds of response and to develop trust.

What they will do is to alter the AT settings on a modem to enable them to dial in to the network at midnight and lift one or two interesting company files.

What they will do is look technically inept, to enable them to engender pity and support from their peers, which usually leads to access to further information.

What they will do is test the strength of executive accumen and corporate strategy by demonstrating potentially viable business solutions or scope the security officers level of knowledge and confidence, by mentioning they have recently read an article on a new security threat, that they know you won't have implemented measures for.

No, the activities of the corporate spy will not be halted by conventional approaches to information security or personnel management.

They can only be halted by trained counter intelligence operatives. People who look beyond the obvious.

Virgil hands the power of the Wiki over to the CIA

When I heard on the grapevine what Virgil Griffith had achieved with the Wiki Scanner my first thought was - what a cool idea. I even went to the trouble of telling him so.
But then i got to thinking. Was it really a great feat of engineering? Did he really expose organisational intent, or was it just some over zealous corporate ladder climbing types - or even a bunch of hackers who broke into a network and edited some carefully selected Wiki pages?In fact i began to realise that the whole revelation was as bad as alerting the world about other kinds of threat, like blowing up planes using toothpaste. There are two real outcomes of what Virgil did. Firstly, he created the conditions where every unethical computer hacker and its cat can now get back at the big brother monster by digging up dirt, which may or may not be true - yet hard to refute. Secondly and more importantly. Virgil has single-handedly alerted unethical organisations that they can be traced, making the likelihood of covert Wiki edits much more likely in the future. What he did is to say to organisations - here is a much better and safer route for you to edit Wiki pages (or any other site pages). Do it, but do it from outside your network.
Shame on you Virgil. Sometimes things are better left unsaid.

Howard row over Wikipedia edits

BBC - 24th Aug 07
Staff in the Australian prime minister's department have been accused of editing potentially damaging entries in online encyclopaedia Wikipedia.
According to the Sydney Morning Herald, workers made 126 edits on subjects which included government immigration policy and Treasurer Peter Costello.
The details came from a new website which can track those who make edits.
Wikipedia Scanner has shown that staff at the CIA, the Vatican and the BBC among others have also made changes.
For more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6961575.stm

Wikipedia 'shows CIA page edits'

By Jonathan Fildes Science and technology reporter, BBC News
An online tool that claims to reveal the identity of organisations that edit Wikipedia pages has revealed that the CIA was involved in editing entries.
Wikipedia Scanner allegedly shows that workers on the agency's computers made edits to the page of Iran's president.
It also purportedly shows that the Vatican has edited entries about Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams. The tool, developed by US researchers, trawls a list of 5.3m edits and matches them to the net address of the editor. Meet the designer at http://www.virgil.gr/