Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Social Dilemma

thesocialdilemma.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 421 posts

Re: The Social Dilemma

#101

Post by dominotw »

mattgreenrocks wrote: post #99
ppod wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also there is an underlying class thing going on with "you are the product". Choosing to pay for a service is not just an equal alternative to a free service for most people. Most people have to work hard to afford paid services, many of them at low wages. Sneering at people who choose to use a free service rather than sell their time for $15 an hour is not a great look.

Can’t they just not use the thing? Usually this critique is applied to social media, which is not an essential human need. Ubiquitous and handy, yes. But not essential.

social contact is a need. I don't think i can actually survive without watsapp.

Re: The Social Dilemma

#102

Post by rapind »

foxfired wrote: post #82
vasilipupkin wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me that the hypothesis that somehow social media is generating more misinformation than before is an exercise in ignoring all human history before 2004 ish. People were always misinformed, how do you explain the whole 20th century otherwise.

You are right, people were misinformed from the dawn of history. But never before in history has the real information been so available. If you believed that pharaoh was a God, well there was no way to know otherwise. Not only you didn't know how to read, but if you did, all the writing did confirm he was, in fact, a God. Today, information about counter arguments is available for any claim. If it sounds suspicious,…

If the truth sounds suspicious, you can look that up to, and find plenty of counter arguments with pseudo or self proclaimed authorities.

Flat earthers don't just read one article and suddenly they believe it. They spend a lot of time going down rabbit holes reading and watching all sorts of stuff.

There's good information out there, but there's also a swamp of bullshit pretending not to be that you have to wade through.

Re: The Social Dilemma

#103

Post by swyx »

elliotec wrote: post #100
un_montagnard wrote: post #97

I watched it last night. It's pretty good for non HN crowd that might not know this already. But I personally felt that they forgot the most important question: what pushed algorithm to recommend what they are recommending? Why are Youtube's rabbit holes more likely to be conspiracy theory related and/or inflammatory content? In the beginning, the algorithm was probably equally pushing for this type of content and mo…

Money.

i think the more accurate answer is Engagement. we made it maximize paperclips, it maximized paperclips. sadly the most engaging is the most extreme.

Re: The Social Dilemma

#104

Post by barbs »

ffggvv wrote: post #39

i tried to watch the movie and i honestly don’t get the hype. It really seems to be confirmation bias where those who already hate social media just rave about the movie. and i actually think it did a very poor job at explaining things to people completely unfamiliar with the issues. i wonder if it will change a single mind or just preach to the choir

Speaking from personal experience - I watched the film with my girlfriend and a lot of it was news to her. It's changed her relationship with social media and technology.

I also suggested it to a friend who was pretty addicted to Facebook and believed a lot of conspiracy theories. It's made him realise how FB has given him (and others) a distorted picture of reality. He's now disconnected from Facebook and only keeping in contact via messages.

Re: The Social Dilemma

#105

Post by [deleted] »

un_montagnard wrote: post #97

I watched it last night. It's pretty good for non HN crowd that might not know this already. But I personally felt that they forgot the most important question: what pushed algorithm to recommend what they are recommending? Why are Youtube's rabbit holes more likely to be conspiracy theory related and/or inflammatory content? In the beginning, the algorithm was probably equally pushing for this type of content and mo…

[deleted]

Re: The Social Dilemma

#106

Post by soneca »

gundmc wrote: post #17
codysc wrote: post #3

I just watched this last night. A lot of the content will already be well known to the HN audience. There was one big light-bulb moment for me. One of the speakers was clarifying the "If you're not paying then you are the product" idea. He refined it to, (rough quote), "Changes to your behavior and actions are the product" That distinction made the insidiousness much more clear than the former statement.

> "Changes to your behavior and actions..." Isn't this the definition (or goal) of all advertising? I don't see the connection to the first half of the statement tying it to free products and services. There are plenty of paid services that are riddled with ads as well. Movies, Cable TV, airline flights, etc. The fact is that people and organizations are _constantly_ trying to influence your behavior. It's not obviou…

I believe the extra step of social media is that they are not satisfied by changing your behavior from not buying a product to buying a product. They also change your behavior in somewhat indirect ways with the goal that you continue to engage with their platform more and more and be subject to more advertising on the future. So they make you more fanatic or more extremist or more polarized, because it will lead you to stay more time on their site.

They want you perpetually in the state of looking into a rabbit hole rather than feeling that you are satisfied with your knowledge of something and ready to move on with your life.

The fact that we bring our phone everywhere, that there are push notifications, and that we interact with other people (often friends) makes it fundamentally different from a TV or a magazine.

Re: The Social Dilemma

#107

Post by YarickR2 »

disown wrote: post #47
codysc wrote: post #3

I just watched this last night. A lot of the content will already be well known to the HN audience. There was one big light-bulb moment for me. One of the speakers was clarifying the "If you're not paying then you are the product" idea. He refined it to, (rough quote), "Changes to your behavior and actions are the product" That distinction made the insidiousness much more clear than the former statement.

> He refined it to, (rough quote), "Changes to your behavior and actions are the product" That's true of all media. Doesn't matter if you pay for it or not. Even netflix. Even this post. What is the "documentary" trying to achieve? Change behavior. Who is behind the social media campaign? "Ask HN: What do you think about “The Social Dilemma”?" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24468533 > That distinction made the…

Exactly. Exactly. So many of those are thinly veiled lies in disguise ; and when creators are being pointed to inaccuracies, their response is "we shot this not to accurately convey the sequence of events, but to raise awareness and to start public debate". Obviously, no debate is started, because general public likes to consume, not to analyze what is being consumed. Sorry for the rant, I'm fed up with documentaries being mocumentaries

Re: The Social Dilemma

#108

Post by tagami »

BF Skinner. Variable reward loops. Your programmed brain. It’s how Vegas works, it’s how adverts work, it’s how how study for tests in school

Re: The Social Dilemma

#109

Post by tqi »

codysc wrote: post #3

I just watched this last night. A lot of the content will already be well known to the HN audience. There was one big light-bulb moment for me. One of the speakers was clarifying the "If you're not paying then you are the product" idea. He refined it to, (rough quote), "Changes to your behavior and actions are the product" That distinction made the insidiousness much more clear than the former statement.

"Changes to your behavior and actions"

Is there an industry anywhere that is not in the business of influencing behavior or actions? Why do you think that doesn't apply to news, education, healthcare, whatever?

Re: The Social Dilemma

#110

Post by asta_2223 »

gundmc wrote: post #17
codysc wrote: post #3

I just watched this last night. A lot of the content will already be well known to the HN audience. There was one big light-bulb moment for me. One of the speakers was clarifying the "If you're not paying then you are the product" idea. He refined it to, (rough quote), "Changes to your behavior and actions are the product" That distinction made the insidiousness much more clear than the former statement.

> "Changes to your behavior and actions..." Isn't this the definition (or goal) of all advertising? I don't see the connection to the first half of the statement tying it to free products and services. There are plenty of paid services that are riddled with ads as well. Movies, Cable TV, airline flights, etc. The fact is that people and organizations are _constantly_ trying to influence your behavior. It's not obviou…

I am sure there would be regulation and consequences that would apply to Movies, Cable TV, airline flights if misinformation being pushed about Earth being flat to commercially engage them.
Post reply on HN