Stamos says the US must ‘come together to protect’ democracy from misinformation
1–10 of 150 posts
Re: Stamos says the US must ‘come together to protect’ democracy from misinformation
#2> the ultimate ‘last line of defense’ will be users who are willing to question ‘what they see and hear’
Nobody cares because they're more interested in their team winning, by whatever means necessary, than being charitable.
> who recently stepped down from his role as Chief Security Officer
... But couldn't make that argument or be effective in that capacity while employed. That is why we need something like codetermination - so that, completely internally, workers can have influence on what to produce, how to produce, and where to produce it.
Re: Stamos says the US must ‘come together to protect’ democracy from misinformation
#3It's hard to come up with good policy around this outside of educating people.
Re: Stamos says the US must ‘come together to protect’ democracy from misinformation
#4> the ultimate ‘last line of defense’ will be users who are willing to question ‘what they see and hear’ Nobody cares because they're more interested in their team winning, by whatever means necessary, than being charitable. > who recently stepped down from his role as Chief Security Officer ... But couldn't make that argument or be effective in that capacity while employed. That is why we need something like codeter…
[deleted]
Re: Stamos says the US must ‘come together to protect’ democracy from misinformation
#5> the ultimate ‘last line of defense’ will be users who are willing to question ‘what they see and hear’ Nobody cares because they're more interested in their team winning, by whatever means necessary, than being charitable. > who recently stepped down from his role as Chief Security Officer ... But couldn't make that argument or be effective in that capacity while employed. That is why we need something like codeter…
The real problem is the part of the quote you left out, "even when it means questioning our own beliefs.” I don't meet many people these days who are willing to do that, and I suspect that a scary percentage of them aren't capable of questioning their own beliefs.
Re: Stamos says the US must ‘come together to protect’ democracy from misinformation
#6Re: Stamos says the US must ‘come together to protect’ democracy from misinformation
#7https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWLjYJ4BzvI /thread
This is true for most topics the legacy media (print and broadcast) produces.
Re: Stamos says the US must ‘come together to protect’ democracy from misinformation
#8It's hard to come up with good policy around this outside of educating people.
Being educated does not shield you from misinformation, unfortunately. I fact I wouldn't be surprised that the well educated is part of the problem when they get into politics because they abstract things and start to think too much in statistics and lose a feeling for what it means to be most people in this world. The end up creating their own misinformation filter.
The current political climate has no shortage of well-educated people on both sides who have been doing more damage than good the last 40 years.
Re: Stamos says the US must ‘come together to protect’ democracy from misinformation
#9If we assume that voters are unable to deal with misinformation then we have already given up on democracy. The next logical step is to decide how to blunt the will of the misinformed voter.
Re: Stamos says the US must ‘come together to protect’ democracy from misinformation
#10> the ultimate ‘last line of defense’ will be users who are willing to question ‘what they see and hear’ Nobody cares because they're more interested in their team winning, by whatever means necessary, than being charitable. > who recently stepped down from his role as Chief Security Officer ... But couldn't make that argument or be effective in that capacity while employed. That is why we need something like codeter…
The real problem is the part of the quote you left out, "even when it means questioning our own beliefs.” I don't meet many people these days who are willing to do that, and I suspect that a scary percentage of them aren't capable of questioning their own beliefs.
Fundamental attribution error. It is not good to assume a mental defect on vast swaths of the population. That itself is attributing an irrational motive for their actions before considering if there may be a rational one. That is itself is the definition of uncharity. (But in a different capacity that what I outlined above)
Again, consider that many of these folks are doing so from a rational choice, which is to defeat the other side - they understand it to be a zero-sum contest. You can either win or lose, your choice.