Authoritarians Distract Rather Than Debate • Hacker News Board

Re: Authoritarians Distract Rather Than Debate

#121

Post by enraged_camel » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 9:12 PM UTC

basch wrote: post #113

maxxxxx wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right. Unfortunately the american electorate is easy to manipulate so they will blame their problems on other groups that are suffering the same problems. Instead of asking why salaries don't go up anymore while the company makes record profits people start attacking each other. The last election was a classical example of distraction. there was almost no discussion of things that would make people's lifes be…

>the american electorate is easy to manipulate that is a feature of democracy not unique to America

It may not be unique to America (for example, the Brits seem equally easy to manipulate, based on the recent Brexit vote), but the populace being easy to manipulate is definitely not a "feature of democracy."

The fact of the matter is that there are many democracies in the world where the level of discourse is much more advanced. There are many reasons for this, but the primary factor seems to be that the average level of education in those countries tends to be higher.

Re: Authoritarians Distract Rather Than Debate

#122

Post by DenisM » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 9:13 PM UTC

metaphorm wrote: post #95

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the irony of the term "fake news" is that it creates the false notion that there was once such a thing as "real news". I'm friends with a journalist. He has opinions, slants, lenses, and even biases. However, he lives around here, and the stuff he publishes is based on events he has actually witnessed, live, in real-time. There is no equivalence between my friend the journalist (real news), and some teenager in Mace…

there is such a thing as reporting and investigation. very little of that survives the editorial process. if I want to read some reporting, I'll have to go to a source that values it. i.e. not the NYTimes (or equivalent). The entire apparatus of the mass media has become thinly veiled editorial positioning, even in stories that are claimed as "news". a recent example of this effect: http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/01/…

Did you mean to equate fake news with editorial bias? Because that's what I read from your comments, and I can't agree to that, even remotely.

Re: Authoritarians Distract Rather Than Debate

#123

Post by alasdair_ » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 9:14 PM UTC

clairity wrote: post #72

i'd say our political machine in the US has done a great job for the last 35 years at distracting us from the biggest social threat of our times: wealth disparity. instead, the public conversations revolve around terrorism, who uses which bathroom, twitter, celebrities, and even health insurance. if recent political movements (tea party, the 99%) and national elections have taught us anything, it's that this is incre…

>biggest social threat of our times: wealth disparity

Serious question, not trolling: why does wealth disparity matter?

Let's say you start the year barely having enough to eat and are living in a cardboard box and you end the year with plenty of food and a small house, why would it matter if your neighbor gets to eat steak once a week and has a slightly nicer house? Surely the absolute fact that your are better off than you were previously is more important than the relative distribution of goods?

A quick way to reduce wealth disparity is to burn down every home that costs more than the median house price. That doesn't mean it's a good idea.

So why is relative wealth more important than absolute wealth again?

Re: Authoritarians Distract Rather Than Debate

#124

Post by DenisM » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 9:31 PM UTC

There is something new going on in the social network realm that can undermine trolling efforts as they exist today.

Social networks started appearing when tech adoption was relatively scarce. They predate the smartphone revolution. As such they had to bend out of shape to produce as much public or semi-public content in order to attract and engage enough users to sustain the network effects. The direct side effect of this approach is transparency of the discussion. People who disagree would butt heads because the feel the need to defend "their side" in "public". A manipulation agent can assess the current state of discussion as well as the immediate outcome of his actions, so that he can fine-tune his campaigns.

Now that the smartphone adoption is basically 100%, it becomes possible to build private social networks without making everything public or semi-public. The ones where content is only posted/shared in a close group and is not observable by trolls. No shares, no reposts, no likes, no "people are talking". Nothing. How would you use Snapchat to assess and manipulate the public opinion? The best you can do is check the hits on your web site. What if you lost even that to some sort of caching? Now you're flying completely blind.

Pretty much every popular messenger app has the potential to mutate into an opaque social network. Perhaps many already did.

Re: Authoritarians Distract Rather Than Debate

#125

Post by throw2016 » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 9:34 PM UTC

lacampbell wrote: post #62

This makes me wonder more at the pro-Chinese position of a lot of western media, particularly the New York Times. Its fairly telling that Taiwan is most often described as a "renegade province" as opposed to a "peaceful high-income democracy", for example. Having talked to a lot of English speaking, wealthy, educated, overseas Chinese people I am always disturbed at how many of them take communist party positions, de…

I don't know. There are many here who continue to take a pro-government pro-surveillance position inspite of the Snowden revelations. Many in the country and the mainstream media seem to think of him as a 'traitor'. That would seem to be equally disturbing, if not more?

Re: Authoritarians Distract Rather Than Debate

#126

Post by metaphorm » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 9:34 PM UTC

DenisM wrote: post #122

metaphorm wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there is such a thing as reporting and investigation. very little of that survives the editorial process. if I want to read some reporting, I'll have to go to a source that values it. i.e. not the NYTimes (or equivalent). The entire apparatus of the mass media has become thinly veiled editorial positioning, even in stories that are claimed as "news". a recent example of this effect: http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/01/…

Did you mean to equate fake news with editorial bias? Because that's what I read from your comments, and I can't agree to that, even remotely.

what is currently being called "fake news" is not the same thing as editorial bias nor do I equate them in the sense that I don't distinguish between the two. I do distinguish between them.

however, fake news and editorial bias are used to accomplish the same thing: disinformation. that is the level which I equate them.

Re: Authoritarians Distract Rather Than Debate

#127

Post by enraged_camel » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 9:34 PM UTC

throwawaywd4252 wrote: post #110

clairity wrote: post #72

i'd say our political machine in the US has done a great job for the last 35 years at distracting us from the biggest social threat of our times: wealth disparity. instead, the public conversations revolve around terrorism, who uses which bathroom, twitter, celebrities, and even health insurance. if recent political movements (tea party, the 99%) and national elections have taught us anything, it's that this is incre…

This comment contains a couple of strong and unsubstantiated assertions. 1. Wealth disparity is an issue -- this needs to be justified beyond an appeal to fairness. Why is this an issue at all? Is the real issue the decline of the middle class? Is that necessarily connected to increasing wealth in the upper class? 2. The election of Donald Trump is a 'lose-lose' scenario. How? What, specifically, about his proposed p…

1. Wealth disparity is an issue because wealth in America correlates very strongly with political power, which wealthy people in turn use to amass even more wealth and political power.

2. Oh man, where to even begin?

a. Repeal of ACA is the most obvious one. According to the recently released report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office[1], 18 million Americans will lose their health insurance in the first year when ACA is repealed. Over ten years, this number will increase to 32 million. In other words, by 2026, one in ten Americans will be without health insurance.

b. Trump wants to strip FCC of consumer protection laws[2]. It's pretty obvious why this will be horrendous for the average American.

c. He proposed pulling out of NATO. This one should also be pretty obvious: NATO is the major force that is keeping Russia in check. Without America there would be a NATO, and without NATO, Russian geopolitical influence would expand massively, reducing America's influence as a result.

d. His cabinet picks are a major disaster. Department of Labor headed by a guy who has fought against labor protection laws all his life. Department of Education headed by a woman who wants to abolish it. Department of Energy headed by a guy who has a degree in animal science. Department of Housing and Urban development headed by a guy whose only "qualification" for the job is having grown up in a poor neighborhood. Environmental Protection Agency headed by a guy who is a close ally of the fossil fuel industry. It gets worse and worse.

[1]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/01/17/...

[2]http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/01/trump-team-report...

Re: Authoritarians Distract Rather Than Debate

#128

Post by MaysonL » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 9:36 PM UTC

AngrySkillzz wrote: post #56

analyst74 wrote: post #7

This is really scary, because I do read comments critically, and have seen those sections being flooded with nonsense, or convincing arguments being pushed without evidence. Heck, this even happens on HackerNews, which users are thoughtful hackers and which are secretly trying to push an agenda? Or is there even a line between those? Now some food for thought, does online anonymity ultimately help the powerful more t…

Pushing an agenda is one thing if the person is doing it in good faith, even if I think their ideas are bad or not supported by evidence. In all likelihood there are large scale information operations going on with world powers trying to subvert each other's populations. The really sinister thing is that we have paid, bad faith actors whose full time jobs are to spread misinformation and shape narratives online. Ther…

The really sinister thing is that we have paid, bad faith actors whose full time jobs are to spread misinformation and shape narratives online. There is just no way you and I, amateurs commenting sporadically in our free time, have the resources to combat armies of paid trolls.

What's the difference between this and a lot of PR?

Re: Authoritarians Distract Rather Than Debate

#129

Post by sametmax » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 9:37 PM UTC

clairity wrote: post #72

i'd say our political machine in the US has done a great job for the last 35 years at distracting us from the biggest social threat of our times: wealth disparity. instead, the public conversations revolve around terrorism, who uses which bathroom, twitter, celebrities, and even health insurance. if recent political movements (tea party, the 99%) and national elections have taught us anything, it's that this is incre…

They didn't manage to do anything. We did that for ourself.

Often I'm told "I know about issue x, but I can't do anything". To which I reply "well, yes you can. First dump your TV. Use the spare time to read books and choose a hobby than make you gather with others. Start trying to spend your money like every note is a voting buletin. Then get involved in any social/political activity at your local level".

Of course this has no impact. Most people do want TV. They want drama. They don't want to spend time and energy learning, thinking or taking responsibilities of their life.

If you let a cookie jar open in your garden and ants come to eat it, it's not the ants fault. ants are just ants. They see sugar, they try to get it. It's sucks, but you are the giant and they are the ants. You are responsible to understand the situation and make proper choices.

Re: Authoritarians Distract Rather Than Debate

#130

Post by enraged_camel » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 9:40 PM UTC

pdeuchler wrote: post #103

AngrySkillzz wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are trying to gaslight us. Foreign powers want to misinform and distract the public in democracies; a misinformed populace puts pressure on elected governments to govern poorly. If democratic governments flounder because of this, that gives authoritarians an opportunity to get more power and influence over world politics. Not to say that western nations aren't engaged in their own information operations. Just th…

Statistically over the past 100 years democratic institutions have affected (or is it effected in this case?) the politics of authoritarian regimes dramatically more, as in orders of magnitude more, than the other way around

Historically that is true, but times are changing. Specifically, the Internet makes the flow of information (and therefore propaganda) a lot more symmetric. We saw this with the most recent election. It will only get worse.