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

211–220 of 421 posts

Re: The Social Dilemma

#211

Post by closeparen »

sriram_malhar wrote: post #202
closeparen wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s no longer socially acceptable to make unprompted PSTN voice calls, unless you and the recipient are on very familiar terms. Even with my parents, we always arrange a time via messaging first.

That would mean your parents and you are not on very familiar terms. Perhaps that is the situation for you, but it is by no means generalisable. I live pretty well without any personal social media. I call friends and family often, while being mindful of their time. Voice calls are wonderful.

I no longer use anything with posts and likes and a feed, but direct and small-group messaging are pretty important among my peers. May I ask what generation are these people with whom you use only voice (and maybe snail mail)?

Re: The Social Dilemma

#212

Post by surround »

jwilber wrote: post #158

I really like this documentary/film, but if I’m being honest, it does leave a taste of typical SV virtue signaling in my mouth. The website explicitly states that their site allows cookies "set through our site by our advertising partners and may be used to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant ads on other sites." Since visiting I received two ads for “Moment” in instagram, and one for Asana on You…

Not to mention the film is funded and owned by Netflix itself.

Re: The Social Dilemma

#213

Post by reducesuffering »

bayareabronco wrote: post #27

I'm launching an open source initiative supporting several social media platforms, starting with Matrix/Element, a messaging app similar to WhatsApp; and then Mastodon, a microblogging platform similar to Twitter. The overall effort is being called the "Resiliency Network" in reference to creating a social media platform that will foster resilience in relation to the significant social, environmental, and political c…

I'd recommend supporting Signal as a WhatsApp alternative. It's open source and has the best crypto.

Re: The Social Dilemma

#214

Post by rapind »

the_af wrote: post #122
Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And not only do flat earthers not read reputable sources to soberly reflect on the matter, but often the truth or falsehood of their preferred conspiracy theory is not really the point. A lot of people are getting into Flat Earth, QAnon, or 5G-causes-whatever because those forums offer them a sense of community that satisfies their emotional needs. Perpetuating the conspiracy theory is just the ritual they must perfo…

I agree with much of your post, except this: > I think the challenge for defeating those theories is providing the poor, undereducated and marginalized a more wholesome way to spend their time among other people. Why do you think it's the poor who buy into these theories? I live in a relatively well to do neighborhood (not in the US) and I've seen plenty of anti-5G banners hanging from balconies, there are plenty of…

This is an important point. It reminds me of pyramid schemes (essential oils etc.) which can be found among the affluent.

These conspiracies don’t start with much, but if one gains a bit of traction there’s suddenly a bunch of “influencers” peddling it for more influence (fuck society, I need those subs and likes!... right?). More influence, more ad dollars. Next thing you know a 4chan meme is political propaganda on the national stage.

I really don’t think this is hard to follow. Anyone who’s been in tech or marketing for a while either knows this, or they’re incentivized to pretend they don’t.

Re: The Social Dilemma

#215

Post by hexxiiiz »

On one hand, I think there is certainly a perspective in this doc that shows where critical views are needed around the consequences of certain business models coming from big tech. On the other hand, it seems to attribute a lot of the recent political divide to the rise of social networks without considering that a lot of these changes happened alongside the wake of the 2008 economic collapse, which almost certainly has contributed a lot to this political division. The suggestion that things were good before these social networks permeated people's lives overlooks a much longer narrative of wealth inequality in the West, and particularly in the US issues with housing, jobs, and the education ssystem. In some ways, the social dilemma is the ultimate #firstworldproblem of our time.

Re: The Social Dilemma

#216

Post by godelski »

FooHentai wrote: post #187
soneca wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other platforms never leveraged opinions, pictures, life facts from people I know, like friends, family, acquaintances, coworkers, etc to induce behavior change. And things change a lot with scale. Even if the intent or the principle is the same, dynamics are different if it is in a scale orders of magnitude larger. I don’t think we should be dismissing new understandings of how social media affect our lives on the g…

Putting aside for a moment the much tighter feedback loop and way more in-depth metrics that allow much greater tuning and targeting... With broadcast media, you can turn off the TV, radio, or put down the magazine. The social punishment cost of this is limited - If someone asked you about current affairs or the latest show etc, you might have to deal with being out of the loop. But with smartphones and social media,…

Simply, your TV doesn't turn back on and tell you that all your friends are watching a certain show. When you turn your TV off, it is off.

Re: The Social Dilemma

#217

Post by _underfl0w_ »

olive247 wrote: post #208
_wp3r wrote: post #185

Social Media platforms are like being famous without any of the good parts. You just get all the shitty parts of living your life with 1000 fake friends(I mean fans) like a hero complex, or an influence complex, or hyper sensitivity to judgement, or addiction to others opinions, or addiction, or suicide, or an inability to communicate with people different than you, or an inability to determine fact from scam, or a p…

Humans absolutely are not built for large social networks. There is a theory called Dunbar's number that suggests that humans have a cognitive limit of ~150 social relationships. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number

"A friend to all is a friend to none." -Aristotle

Re: The Social Dilemma

#218

Post by bernardlunn »

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…

There is a world of difference - not just one word - between between contextual & tracking advertising; contextual only knows that somebody reading/watching this content is interested in this subject. Social media tracks everything about YOU. It is totally different

Re: The Social Dilemma

#219

Post by wdr1 »

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.

Isn't that true of all advertising, be it TV, billboards, magazines, or digital?

Re: The Social Dilemma

#220

Post by 01100011 »

bagacrap wrote: post #191
01100011 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Netflix make more money when I spend more time on their platform? I'm sure there will be a day when they do, but right now I think they make a flat subscription fee from me. Maybe they can sell more of my viewing habits the longer I watch? Maybe they have content which they're paid to serve? I don't know. I think that, right now, Netflix really isn't in the same category as the big social media companies.

I'm positive there's a strong correlation between hours spent on the app and likelihood of renewing next month.

Is that a linear relationship though? The revenue of other social media sites scales with my usage time. Netflix just has to provide me with an amount of value exceeding the subscription price and I will continue to be a customer. It actually costs them more if I overindulge on their service. They should be maximizing a certain level of viewing and no more.
Post reply on HN