31–40 of 433 posts
Is it possible this is some galaxy brain plan by those promoting amazon unions to undermine amazon's credibility?
This is a problem the Voice.com social platform is attempting to tackle, read more about it here: https://about.voice.com/learn-more/ . I'm not affiliated with Voice in anyway, just someone who is eagerly awaiting open registration.
Why is "fake" in scare quotes? The accounts are fake.
Why is "fake" in scare quotes? The accounts are fake.
It is not really clear which type of "fake" they are - if it is non-Amazon-employees making a parody, or someone at Amazon making a not-really-existing persona: > It is unclear whether the accounts are real employees, bots or trolls pretending to be Amazon Ambassadors.
Which obviously a real box packer isn't going to have a sprinklr acct so you know at the very best someone is getting a 15 minute break while a pr rep looks over their shoulder and more likely they all work at the same desk in a corporate office.
Why is "fake" in scare quotes? The accounts are fake.
Is it possible this is some galaxy brain plan by those promoting amazon unions to undermine amazon's credibility?
Who do you think has more time and money to contribute to this kind of thing? Union organizers who are already overwhelmed just trying to reach the people they're trying to help, or the company which delivers almost everything to almost everyone and made more money than most countries' GDPs?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, and if you are somewhat tech savvy OR "grew up" on the internet (say 40 and younger) you understand this. The problem is previous generations who don't really understand this. Perhaps one angle to tackle the problem is to educate the group(s) of people who continue to believe whatever they read on Twitter, Facebook, etc.
Might be partially true but young people with no critical thinking skills fall for it just the same.
I feel like authenticity of online communication is an unsolved problem. The web was supposed to be a democratizing platform: all you need to communicate with the world is an ISP and a keyboard. But if there's no way to control for authenticity, online sentiment will just be an arms race for who can pay for the best astroturfing.
Yes, and if you are somewhat tech savvy OR "grew up" on the internet (say 40 and younger) you understand this. The problem is previous generations who don't really understand this. Perhaps one angle to tackle the problem is to educate the group(s) of people who continue to believe whatever they read on Twitter, Facebook, etc.
I feel like authenticity of online communication is an unsolved problem. The web was supposed to be a democratizing platform: all you need to communicate with the world is an ISP and a keyboard. But if there's no way to control for authenticity, online sentiment will just be an arms race for who can pay for the best astroturfing.
Yes, and if you are somewhat tech savvy OR "grew up" on the internet (say 40 and younger) you understand this. The problem is previous generations who don't really understand this. Perhaps one angle to tackle the problem is to educate the group(s) of people who continue to believe whatever they read on Twitter, Facebook, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, and if you are somewhat tech savvy OR "grew up" on the internet (say 40 and younger) you understand this. The problem is previous generations who don't really understand this. Perhaps one angle to tackle the problem is to educate the group(s) of people who continue to believe whatever they read on Twitter, Facebook, etc.
> Perhaps one angle to tackle the problem is to educate the group(s) of people who continue to believe whatever they read on Twitter, Facebook, etc. Unfortunately this isn’t just limited to the over 40 crowd. People are willing to believe whatever affirms their beliefs. Growing up on the Internet does not change this.