Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial • Hacker News Board

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#71

Post by ThomPete » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 4:12 PM UTC

solipsism wrote: post #51

ThomPete wrote: post #11

I don't believe he is in denial at all. In fact the article strikes me as more of the same reason why so many voted for Trump. The people who write these articles just can't accept the idea that people didn't vote for Trump unless they were tricked into it, or were fed lies. The idea that because they have a different reality they based their votes on never occurred to them. What fake news do is reinoforce what peopl…

Is this the new meme now? Things we don't agree with are "more of the same thing that got Trump elected"? What fake news do is reinoforce what people already believe to be true Sure. And it also reinforces things people don't yet know (because it's fake) but which fits into one's preexisting worldview. It's a multiplicative factor. An amplification. The claim by the article is actually very measured -- that fake news…

I disagree that it's enough to explain the election result even remotely or that it's something the facebook should do something about right now.

Fake news are easy to debunk and the same lie which takes advantage of network spread can also be debunked by the same measures.

Again if people really want to believe in something no amount of rebuttals are going to change that.

What's far more concerning is the kind of exaggerations that the traditional media use to blow everything out of proportion.

We all live in filter bubbles some in very tightly controlled bubbles others in more open bubbles but they are all bubbles.

I have yet to see any proof that fake news are effecting how people vote on any serious scale. Maybe some people here and there. But to claim that it's a problem for the election is simply another attempt at trying find a reason other than the obvious one, that many people who voted for Trump did so because they live in another bubble than those who votes for Hillary. That they have different perspectives and different problems, different dreams and fears.

Thats the reason we votes different and fake news aren't going to change the overall world view we have there.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#72

Post by splawn » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 4:12 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #30

splawn wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take a look at his comment history, that is Thom's MO. Trump being elected due to misinformation triggers the crap out of him for some reason.

What about making the case that it did happen because of misinformation instead of focusing on my comment history? I have said a lot of things on both sides and is hardly just some troll. We all have our triggers, this is one for me so whats wrong with that?

I know this is bleeding over from our previous conversation, but the only case I have made wrt this topic is my opinion that it would be nice if critical thinking was more of a cultural force than it currently is. I would play your game and try to make the case that you want me to make, but I am not sure what data I would be able to source for that even if I suspect it to be true. Nothing wrong with having triggers, I was just using "alt-right" rhetoric to tease you a little bit.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#73

Post by talmand » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 4:12 PM UTC

eggie wrote: post #56

a_humean wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except to be fair to the Dems and the Clinton campaign, they did have proposals and white papers addressing exactly these communities. For example, a proposal to invest $30 billion into coal mining communities within the Appalachia regions with promises for infrastructure investment and private business investment, and retraining former and current miners into new skilled occupations. Of course all of this pales in c…

I find it incredible that even living in the liberal echo chamber I never heard news about this proposal! I am even from Appalachia! Part of the problem is that those in the media forgot about people who are different from them--- for whom those $30 billion could have meant the difference between permanent regional decline and a new start.

Because all we've heard about Hillary and Obama is how they'll put coal out of business. I'd be curious how a supportive news media didn't pick up the second part of that story.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#74

Post by ThomPete » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 4:12 PM UTC

solipsism wrote: post #57

solipsism wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this the new meme now? Things we don't agree with are "more of the same thing that got Trump elected"? What fake news do is reinoforce what people already believe to be true Sure. And it also reinforces things people don't yet know (because it's fake) but which fits into one's preexisting worldview. It's a multiplicative factor. An amplification. The claim by the article is actually very measured -- that fake news…

Oops, didn't read the other comments. Apparently it's already established you didn't even read the article.

ehh yes I did read it and no it's not established.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#75

Post by randomgyatwork » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 4:13 PM UTC

heurist wrote: post #42

6stringmerc wrote: post #7

At the root principle of the article, I agree that a platform which spreads erroneous information should be held accountable in some fashion - but it's the following kind of set up that is troublesome: > In addition to doing more to weed out lies and false propaganda, Facebook could tweak its algorithm so that it does less to reinforce users’ existing beliefs, and more to present factual information. This may seem di…

Facebook can do whatever it wants. Personally, if facebook does not stop the spread of false information I will stop using their services and will do my best to convince my friends to stop using their services. If they want to create harmful social bubbles for profit that's their prerogative, but I won't be part of it.

If you use facebook, you've been in a harmful social bubble since the beginning.... you are only realizing it now

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#76

Post by Veen » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 4:13 PM UTC

MK999 wrote: post #31

RankingMember wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NYT? Really? I would agree if you were describing Huffington Post or various other left-wing rags, but the NYT is pretty far from a Democratic Propaganda paper.

12 Trump hit pieces in one day alone. More like establishment propaganda paper, I don't think they would have given Jeb Bush or Rubio such a hard time.

Would you have liked them balanced with 12 pro-Trump pieces or 12 anti-Hillary pieces? Sometimes things are true. Saying they're true isn't bias. It makes no sense to have "balance" when what that means is publishing a non-true thing in order to balance out the true thing you just said.

It's true that Donald Trump is lying, feckless fool. That doesn't need balancing. We can argue all day about why people voted for him, why they rejected the incumbent elite, why they wanted a change, and so on. But that doesn't really change the facts.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#77

Post by jondubois » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 4:13 PM UTC

This is not so bad. I think that lies in the media are good if they help to balance public opinion.

The world that I'm really scared of is one where everyone agrees about everything and people who disagree are locked up; that's where I saw things going before the election (when I thought that Hillary was going to win).

Chaos and disagreement is one of the most important things in our society. We always need at least two sides to every story (even if one side is a complete fabrication) - Balance of public opinions is the most important thing for freedom.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#78

Post by talmand » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 4:14 PM UTC

bluejekyll wrote: post #68

ThomPete wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont' believe he can bring them back either but it wasn't based on a lie and I am pretty sure he means it which is why he wants to dig into the resources and rebuild infrastructure. That does not make it a lie anymore than "yes we can" does.

Trump relied on one of the worst aspects of the Human existence, that someone else will fix your problems for you. Giving people optimism about the future, bettering yours and everyone's existence is motivating for everyone. I believe this for anyone I've ever managed, and for any project I've ever worked on. People work better when they are optimistic. "Yes, we can" is a motivational statement encouraging people to…

>> Trump relied on one of the worst aspects of the Human existence, that someone else will fix your problems for you.

All politicians rely on this. Some of them deliver, most do not.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#79

Post by ThomPete » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 4:14 PM UTC

bluejekyll wrote: post #68

ThomPete wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont' believe he can bring them back either but it wasn't based on a lie and I am pretty sure he means it which is why he wants to dig into the resources and rebuild infrastructure. That does not make it a lie anymore than "yes we can" does.

Trump relied on one of the worst aspects of the Human existence, that someone else will fix your problems for you. Giving people optimism about the future, bettering yours and everyone's existence is motivating for everyone. I believe this for anyone I've ever managed, and for any project I've ever worked on. People work better when they are optimistic. "Yes, we can" is a motivational statement encouraging people to…

The people who voted for Trump disagree with you. It gave the exactly the hope that Obama gave in 2008.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#80

Post by Veen » Tue, Nov 15, 2016, 4:16 PM UTC

randomgyatwork wrote: post #75

heurist wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook can do whatever it wants. Personally, if facebook does not stop the spread of false information I will stop using their services and will do my best to convince my friends to stop using their services. If they want to create harmful social bubbles for profit that's their prerogative, but I won't be part of it.

If you use facebook, you've been in a harmful social bubble since the beginning.... you are only realizing it now

Hardly anyone does this, but it's certainly possible to follow a varied set of people on Facebook. Left, right, non-political, religious, irreligious, American, European, Trump-loving, Hillary-venerating, and so on.

Nothing stops a person from creating a set of signals that Facebook will use to generate a mixed content feed that's representative of a broad range of views.

The problem is that almost no one uses Facebook like that.