Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can just ask a human brain what it's optimizing for.
"Senator, is the safety and prosperity of the American people your highest priority?"
"Senator, why did you vote for that bill?"
Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
161–170 of 178 posts
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#162When making up one one's mind about whether Zuck is sincere in his passionate pleas for free speech, consider that: 1) he took no questions from reporters, only pre-moderated questions from students, and 2) Facebook Live chat was scrubbed of any critical comments by algorithmic filters. https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/ma...
> about whether Zuck is sincere
No need, Zuck isn't sincere about anything except making more money.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#163Don't people know how to use Facebook? There's no outrage on my newsfeed because I've eliminated/unfollowed/hidden it. My cool friends and family are left, I'm reading some pretty interesting groups I like, and I try not to argue/provoke anyone when I make comments. This doesn't inhibit my speech, it only makes me pay attention to tone. I wish the people who hate Facebook would get off it and then talk about somethin…
I spent 2 years trying to “fix” my feed before leaving Facebook altogether. There was no way at the time - the alg would always surface the absolute worst things that anyone I knew would post because the algorithm knew it would get the most responses.
Check your settings. You can change what the algorithm thinks about you.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
But on the other hand human brains are basically just black box neural networks as well.
You can just ask a human brain what it's optimizing for.
But the answer you get isn't necessarily the truth, because humans don't make decisions based on reason. 90% of the time, decision-making is based on emotion, and the reasoning comes afterwards to try and justify why the decision was made. Thus, when you ask the person for justification, you're getting post-hoc reasons.
There's a great book written on this - "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion"
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#165When making up one one's mind about whether Zuck is sincere in his passionate pleas for free speech, consider that: 1) he took no questions from reporters, only pre-moderated questions from students, and 2) Facebook Live chat was scrubbed of any critical comments by algorithmic filters. https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/ma...
[flagged]
Supercilious tone of this post aside (it's straight out of /r/iamverysmart), isn't it pretty contemptuous to lump in Facebook's social media and chat offerings with MIT-licensed React?
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#166Any form of media that earns its profit from viewership and selling advertising, including broadcast and cable news and news radio, is optimized for outrage. That's what attracts the eyeballs. The "algorithmic" part is irrelevant.
Except it isn't the same at all.
Seeing a story that outrages me probably rubs you up the wrong way as you think it is a silly, manipulative and idiotic story and this lowers your estimation of the mass media source - eg tv news or New York Times. On facebrick they hide it from you. On the tv news we all see the same thing. There's blowback for lies. There's blowback for naked manipulation.
That pressure release valve of pissing everybody else of when the media manipuates you, or a particular section of society found with clustering analysis and other statistical techniques is absent when we don't all see the same thing. Facebook wouldn't even bother showing you the lies that others find convincing because they don't know something you do. TV news can't segragate us like that. The new york times can't segregate us. Both have to stand by what they publish and broadcast. Facebook? "Not us, we didn't say it, we just monetised the lies - no we're not even telling you what lies they were, you don't even get to know what vile propaganda is out there!" That's the facebook position.
They can troll you that X is going to happen, me that X is not going to happen and Jill that everybody is talking about an irrelevant X all at the same time without blowback claiming they have nothing to do with it while getting paid for it in full.
Facebook is a vile company.
Facebook as a service also sucks. Hard.
Delete your account, it's amazing how much better you'll feel about it. You won't miss out on anything worthwhile either. Send an email to 2 or 3 of your contacts a month just chatting. Ring someone among your friends occasionally to ask how they're going - you'll get all the gossip that matters to you. Just do it.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#167Meh, I don't really see that much outrage on my feed, just family pics, vacation pics, some memes, news from a few news outlets that I follow. People are way overreacting.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#168If it is speech, it is free.
That's how free speech works. It even applies to asshats.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#169There was a period where feeds were just wall to wall outrage. Literally, at trump, at obama, at random other friends on facebook. It was crazy. Reality - life's much better getting off social media and hanging out with friends in real life - and instagram has a bit less outrage machine stuff - easier / quieter place to share pix of the kids playing and catchup with what folks are up to.
About a third of friends on Facebook appear in my feed. It was the only way to get rid of the outrage. Now it's mostly friends and family members posting about their kids, concerts, and some travel. It's sad that so many people whose lives I'd like to keep up with have to be excluded but many people actually think reposting outrage all day actually changes the world in the way they wish it to be changed.
yeah I just have a few lists "family" "friends" "bffs" "other" and my feed is pretty clean. People just need to learn how to filter using lists.
Re: Facebook isn’t free speech, it’s algorithmic amplification optimized for outrage
#170I think that is misdirection. There are two parts that I don't think are contradicted by this article: 1) Facebook, twitter, and other social networks give people a voice and a community. 2) If these platforms are censored in a country, it has a great effect on free speech in the country. Now, there are some good questions related to the article to ask here: a) Are these platforms actually a problem because of the am…
The problem is that people lack critical thinking and prefer echo chambers to real debate. I'm a bit guilty of it myself but I do not filter my closer friends just because I don't agree with them on social platforms, but I refuse to argue with them online either. I always invite them to a beer if they want to do that.