#Profiling

[studies-in-the-art-of-deduction]

Deduction Tips #16

The size of a bag is indicative of how much a person needs to carry, and usually we prefer to carry less things. When you see someone with a bag (be it a backpack, a purse, or anything else) think about why this person needs a bigger one rather than a smaller one, and what that says about the contents of the bag and the situation of the person carrying it

[skepticalcartographer]

[critical-skeptic]

The Illusion of Complexity: Binary Exploitation in Engagement-Driven Algorithms

Abstract:

This paper examines how modern engagement algorithms employed by major tech platforms (e.g., Google, Meta, TikTok, and formerly Twitter/X) exploit predictable human cognitive patterns through simplified binary interactions. The prevailing perception that these systems rely on sophisticated personalization models is challenged; instead, it is proposed that such algorithms rely on statistical generalizations, perceptual manipulation, and engineered emotional reactions to maintain continuous user engagement. The illusion of depth is a byproduct of probabilistic brute force, not advanced understanding.

1. Introduction

Contemporary discourse often attributes high levels of sophistication and intelligence to the recommendation and engagement algorithms employed by dominant tech companies. Users report instances of eerie accuracy or emotionally resonant suggestions, fueling the belief that these systems understand them deeply. However, closer inspection reveals a more efficient and cynical design principle: engagement maximization through binary funneling.

2. Binary Funneling and Predictive Exploitation

At the core of these algorithms lies a reductive model: categorize user reactions as either positive (approval, enjoyment, validation) or negative (disgust, anger, outrage). This binary schema simplifies personalization into a feedback loop in which any user response serves to reinforce algorithmic certainty. There is no need for genuine nuance or contextual understanding; rather, content is optimized to provoke any reaction that sustains user attention.

Once a user engages with content —whether through liking, commenting, pausing, or rage-watching— the system deploys a cluster of categorically similar material. This recurrence fosters two dominant psychological outcomes:

If the user enjoys the content, they may perceive the algorithm as insightful or “smart,” attributing agency or personalization where none exists.

If the user dislikes the content, they may continue engaging in a doomscroll or outrage spiral, reinforcing the same cycle through negative affect.

In both scenarios, engagement is preserved; thus, profit is ensured.

3. The Illusion of Uniqueness

A critical mechanism in this system is the exploitation of the human tendency to overestimate personal uniqueness. Drawing on techniques long employed by illusionists, scammers, and cold readers, platforms capitalize on common patterns of thought and behavior that are statistically widespread but perceived as rare by individuals.

Examples include:

Posing prompts or content cues that seem personalized but are statistically predictable (e.g., "think of a number between 1 and 50 with two odd digits” → most select 37).

Triggering cognitive biases such as the availability heuristic and frequency illusion, which make repeated or familiar concepts appear newly significant.

This creates a reinforcing illusion: the user feels “understood” because the system has merely guessed correctly within a narrow set of likely options. The emotional resonance of the result further conceals the crude probabilistic engine behind it.

4. Emotional Engagement as Systemic Currency

The underlying goal is not understanding, but reaction. These systems optimize for time-on-platform, not user well-being or cognitive autonomy. Anger, sadness, tribal validation, fear, and parasocial attachment are all equally useful inputs. Through this lens, the algorithm is less an intelligent system and more an industrialized Skinner box: an operant conditioning engine powered by data extraction.

By removing the need for interpretive complexity and relying instead on scalable, binary psychological manipulation, companies minimize operational costs while maximizing monetizable engagement.

5. Black-Box Mythology and Cognitive Deference

Compounding this problem is the opacity of these systems. The “black-box” nature of proprietary algorithms fosters a mythos of sophistication. Users, unaware of the relatively simple statistical methods in use, ascribe higher-order reasoning or consciousness to systems that function through brute-force pattern amplification.

This deference becomes part of the trap: once convinced the algorithm “knows them,” users are less likely to question its manipulations and more likely to conform to its outputs, completing the feedback circuit.

6. Conclusion

The supposed sophistication of engagement algorithms is a carefully sustained illusion. By funneling user behavior into binary categories and exploiting universally predictable psychological responses, platforms maintain the appearance of intelligent personalization while operating through reductive, low-cost mechanisms. Human cognition —biased toward pattern recognition and overestimation of self-uniqueness— completes the illusion without external effort. The result is a scalable system of emotional manipulation that masquerades as individualized insight.

In essence, the algorithm does not understand the user; it understands that the user wants to be understood, and it weaponizes that desire for profit.

[brother-u-stink]

Broooo incoming rant alert with caps ⬇️

Trying to sit in my local Whole Foods cafeteria, I buy a coffee and do some work on my computer and chill in the morning yk nothing wrong with that right? This SECURITY GAURD keeps HARASSING ME and being like “you only have 90 mins up here I see you here every day you CANNOT just stay up here” mind you the cafeteria is completely empty and I’m doing work and I’ve bought something. What is up with that comment btw “I’ve seen you here everyday…” can I not come here everyday? Are your profiling me bc I don’t have super fancy clothes on and you think I’m homeless? What tf is wrong with this world?? I’ve also been chilling for longer than 90 mins up here for weeks now and of course when it’s 35°f outside they are kicking people out 🤔🧐🤨 JUST SAY YOU HATE HOMELESS PEOPLE AND YOU WANT THEM TO FREEZE TO DEATH OUTSIDE. Fuck you dumbass mall cop GET A REAL FUCKING JOB and let me work in a PUBLIC SPACE in PEACE. Fuck.

I ain’t homeless btw I’m just trying to use a PUBLIC AREA AS A PAYING CUSTOMER. But it should fucking infuriate you that they put time limits and make public spaces hostile just for the sole purpose of threatening and making homeless peoples lives harder. This shit doesn’t just affect the homeless anymore it’s a war on all human beings.

Edit: I also live in a metropolitan city that has a high amount of homeless and black people so that’s why they are being like this.

[loveologistic]

this series was better than i expected. i didn't think i would've enjoyed it so much that i'd finish it all in two days (excluding the three days i took to get through the first chapter). cassie wasn't a bad leading character, in my opinion, and the other characters were likeable too -- especially michael. the ending was unexpected, that was for sure. it's not that i hate it, but i was expecting cassie to find who had murdered her mother.

[amateur-deductions]

When it comes to the observation weeks in the training program. Could you elaborate on why we shouldn’t deduce then? Is it only about the time when we are doing the exercises?

Hello! great question, i gotta say i didn't write that program, but i did follow it, so i can only give you an answer based on my experience with it and with deduction as a whole. Unfortunately L isn't available to give you the original reason, but if i get in contact with them i'll make a post with their answer.

So, there's this quote from Sherlock which sums up the reasoning behind this very clearly:

"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."

During this stage of the program it is assumed you're coming into deduction as a complete beginner, and therefore that you haven't honed your observation skills yet. This means you'll inevitably be at a point where if you try to deduce you'll be doing so while missing a large amount of information, and fall into the trap of not knowing you're missing information and trying to work with what you have, which leads to often taking big leaps in reasoning to reach conclusions, because you don't have enough data to work with.

This is also why when i teach people i make sure they're at an acceptable level in their observation skills before i move onto other stuff. Later on in the process you learn how to make the most out of a situation where you have little to no information to deduce from. But that's a bit too complicated for a beginner, so it's important that they don't try to deduce until they have a solid grasp on what information they can gather

Aditionally, the training program, as incomplete as it may be, attempts to separate the process of learning deduction into manageable chunks. That program was written during a time where the community was much bigger and everyone attempting to find some way of learning this skill. Everyone was coming up with solutions to their problems and sharing them in the community, and that program is an attempt to solve the overwhelming feeling that comes with trying to learn a massive skill with multiple possible points of entry. It segments it into manageable, organized chunks for people to have a neat way of getting started with deduction, and one of those chunks is just observation, since it's complex enough of a base skill to have its own section

[moriobserves]

Hey, I'm Mori. I've always been interested in learning new stuff, and lately I've taken a bigger interest in learning more about criminology, psychology, profiling and a bunch of other similar topics. This is because I've always found detective stories (like Sherlock Holmes) and human behavior interesting. Therefore I'm on this journey to learn more about these things, all by myself.

I've decided to post about my journey on various social media platforms, like tumblr, because I want to keep it as a digital diary and because I want to connect with others with similar interests. So if you're also interested in stuff like criminology or profiling, feel free to say hi!

I'm always open for tips, recommendations and corrections. If i write something completely wrong, I'd appreciate it if you corrected me!

I'm looking forward to this journey together, and I hope you do too!

//Mori

[ssoupernova]

Spencer has been made a victim of tv magic profiling!! In s7 ep11 at the start Spencer decides the unsub isn't the original zodiac killer and when questioned says (approximate quote, I'm not positive but the general message is there) "I just have this feeling, I don't know.. I can't explain it."

MASSIVE PROFILING NO NO

My professional boy would never! That is bad profiling! Not even just generalising which is bad enough in profiling just straight up mystical vision

Spencer Reid would never- but he was so cute in this episode if almost made up for it

Look at this adorable boy:

[beauspot]

i am taking a ton of credits but i do also get to watch and critique criminal minds for one course!

[allthecanadianpolitics]

The national spy watchdog says Canada's border agency needs to do a better job of documenting how and why it singles out certain air passengers for possible additional scrutiny. The Canada Border Services Agency's targeting program uses pre-arrival risk assessments to identify inbound air travellers more likely to be ineligible to enter Canada.

Continue Reading

Tagging @politicsofcanada

[bugbearsandbookends]

Criminally Profiling the Modern Werewolf

This was a thought experiment in applied folklore. Hope you enjoy it!

[studies-in-the-art-of-deduction]

Hi!!! How can deductions be used in day to day life, or like, usefully? And how have you made useful deductions? Sorry if that made little sense

Hi! I see you sent this question in the past two days, i'll gladly answer it, but in case you send any other questions in the future and i don't answer them as quickly i'll inform you that usually all the questions of the week are collected in my inbox and you'd get your answer on a Monday (this week i had some scheduling problems so i pushed it to Wednesday), so if you don't get as quick an answer next time just wait for Monday!

Now, regarding your question! There's many ways deduction can be used in daily life, sometimes it even depends on what you do for a living. For example i know psychologists and other healthcare profesionals have to rely on non verbal communication and information they gather from observation, along with what they're told, since patients can't be relied upon to be transparent and honest all the time, or even know what information is releant to share. In this case deduction can be massively useful.

On a more general note, it depends a lot on the type of relationships you have, i know people who use deduction to interact with their friends, it allows them to know when they're feeling upset or worried, and about what, and act accordingly, all without needing to do more than just glance at them. I know people who use deduction to navigate social situations because they're not good at interacting with people and having the extra information deduction provides helps. Personally i'm someone that introduces deduction into everything i do, from acquiring helpful knowledge when talking to superiors, to knowing what waiter is best to call over at my table cause they've gotten more hours of sleep.

I recommend you watch Sherlock, House M.D., The Mentalist, and all of these deduction heavy shows that sometimes showcase how these characters use their skills casually, it's really not much different than what you see there. If you want a blog that really goes into casual uses of dedduction i'd check out @froogboi 's blog, it's full of everyday life uses of deduction

[freyatarotreadings8]

Even his fucking tattoos can give you all needed information about him. /// i’m intrigued about this part!!! Freya please spill the tea

Anything you choose/prefer gives tones of information about you as a person. I have some basic skills in profiling.

Just take a look at his 🦅 tattoo and let’s have a discussion.

What does a bird symbolize? The freedom and free spirit. He needs lots of freedom, space and spending time alone. It’s so hard for him to be in committed relationships. A very questionable husband material. Eagle/hawk is a predator. So, Chris wanna have a dominating position all the time, be in charge. He may think that only he can do it better than someone else, so it shows that he loves control and may have some trust issues. He's selfish, observant and prefer to be private / hide lots of things (potentially a talented lier). Sharp minded and a good strategist. Also he may be a great provider (including a bull/taurus tattoo) and lavish loved ones with goods.

[hathorneheiress]

I have started watching Criminal Minds and I can't say I love it, but it is entertaining to say the least.

I have watched almost every season and every episode of NCIS and I love it! It's my favorite show. But criminal Minds is much more intense and gorier then NCIS so that is probably why I don't care for it as much.

My favorite characters are Hotchner and Reid. (No surprise on Reid since he seems to be everybody's favorite!)

One of my favorite scenes so far is in season 2 when they are all at a bar. Emily Prentiss has joined the team and they are all enjoying doing different things.

Morgan dancing, The girls drinking with other guys. Gideon and Hotch sitting in a corner. And the one that I thought was hilarious: Reid having people quiz him on certain stuff! All the others are having a relaxing good time, and we see that Reid's version of a good time is having people quiz him! 🤣

I do love the profiling aspect of the show. That is very interesting to watch, but it's the dark cases they take on that gets to me sometimes.

A solemn reminder of what really goes on in the real world.

[amateur-deductions]

Greetings @amateur-deductions

What are your Go-to advice for for those who start becoming a deductionist and just finished learning body language?

Appreciate Your reply

Bless you all and have a good day.

Hello! Sorry for the delay, i've been on a hiatus since Christmas.

So if you're coming from having learned body language already you have a bit of a head start compared to people that are starting fresh, since you probably have already learned to be more observant, to be constantly aware of things like body movements and facial expressions, and to intepret these things and process them as you take them in. I would say this means you can put a bit less time into the observation practices beginners usually have to go through, and you can dedicate more time to practicing reasoning and logical thinking

I would also say you have the option to approach deduction using your body language background. Something you start to realize as you get better at deduction is that everyone has cultivated different skills they use to extract information, some people use raw logic reasoning, some use extensive psychology knowledge, and some use extensive knowledge in body language and facial expressions, and there's nothing wrong with any of these methods, they're simply what you could understand as different "specialties".

So i would advice that you don't try to learn deduction as a separate discipline than body language, but rather use your body language knowledge, coupled with anything you learn in the field of deduction, to enhance your conclusions

This does come with a disclaimer though. Make sure that you're not leaning into your body language knowledge so much that you're avoiding doing the exercises and learning the methods that are core to deduction simply because body language provides an easier path, since you're well versed in that already