What is particularly stupid is thinking that people don’t change. And that’s especially true with things posted when you are a teenager. People judging someone through a post made when they were 14-16 year old (or even 25 years ago) should be the one fired.
Our digital pasts weren’t supposed to be weaponized like this
11–20 of 177 posts
Re: Our digital pasts weren’t supposed to be weaponized like this
#12I realized this back in 1997 when dejanews started up. From then on I never posted with my real name, and never will. I only have a very limited internet presence with my real name and never post any of my opinions on it.
Caution is still advised. ML identity-matching using your writing patterns/idiosyncracies will likely be a thing in the near future.
Re: Our digital pasts weren’t supposed to be weaponized like this
#13The big problem now seems to be thought policing by employers. Sometimes because they fear mobs, online or offine, coming after them. The secondary problem is being forced off social media for more or less random reasons.
Is the fear really justified though?
My first thought is to ignore them because they’re usually microscopic in terms of scale but I’d love to hear from someone who has had their business targeted by a mob and what effect it had on the bottom line and morale
Re: Our digital pasts weren’t supposed to be weaponized like this
#14This is a difficult problem to solve unless you can remove stuff about yourself from Google and other platforms. Which won't happen as that would be expensive manual work for the platforms. I cannot imagine what happens to the gigs of info young people post online (about eachother and themselves) that will be mined in 10-20 years by companies and used for evil.
Since I said something in an interview to push a particular business agenda and had that used against me since then in all kinds of contexts, I make sure nothing more appears about me online. I cannot really understand how something I said or did (in this example: I was cto of a services company and in the interview I mention I like services more than products, which, at the time I did; this is no longer true) in a business setting 10 years ago is relevant to something I do now but clients and investors bring it up.
Makes it kind of weird how straight up criminals get positions and investments time and time again even when they have 100s or 1000s of news articles from actual reputable press against them...
Re: Our digital pasts weren’t supposed to be weaponized like this
#15The word that doesn't exist in Silicon Valley; consent.
Re: Our digital pasts weren’t supposed to be weaponized like this
#16I realized this back in 1997 when dejanews started up. From then on I never posted with my real name, and never will. I only have a very limited internet presence with my real name and never post any of my opinions on it.
Caution is still advised. ML identity-matching using your writing patterns/idiosyncracies will likely be a thing in the near future.
[deleted]
Re: Our digital pasts weren’t supposed to be weaponized like this
#17Wow, this is a bit rich coming from the NYT. They are among the worst offenders.
Re: Our digital pasts weren’t supposed to be weaponized like this
#18The NYT is extremely sectarian. They have been doing exactly what they now critizice for people in their right for a long time.
And it is impressive what we are seeing today with corona and Wuhan lab, all those media were basically calling lunatics to those that believed in the Wuhan lab hypothesis,licking the boots of their Chinese masters, now suddenly it is ok to believe that.
It is a huge problem for them, when looking back you can see clearly how much they were lying:
https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1396769717805780994
Since facebook and google bankrupted press media taking their Ads money, you basically can't trust them anymore, they sell themselves to the biggest bidder.
Re: Our digital pasts weren’t supposed to be weaponized like this
#19Wow, this is a bit rich coming from the NYT. They are among the worst offenders.
Don't weaponize their digital past! /s
Re: Our digital pasts weren’t supposed to be weaponized like this
#20TROLOLOL!! The NYT has been one of the primary weaponizers of people's digital pasts for years and only now is beside itself because it happened to a fellow journalist on the "Blue Check correct" side of a hotbutton issue? Give me a break.