Now what? The collateral damage of a tech backlash
blog.nillium.com
Now what? The collateral damage of a tech backlash
1–10 of 31 posts
Re: Now what? The collateral damage of a tech backlash
#2So the latest fake news is that everyone is being told to shut off operating system updates permanently on their devices to "block apple and google". ::slams head into desk::
We're already seen that censoring fake news on vaccine safety only has fanned the flames because the perpetrators point out "they wouldn't censor us if it wasn't true!". So yeah, while these platforms have the right to do so, when you have a monopoly, it's probably the worst option for society.
Not only that, but as the conversations disappear from public view, they move underground... and I have no doubts this will be used to justify the next surveillance bill.
Re: Now what? The collateral damage of a tech backlash
#3I’d be OK if twitter and Facebook just died out and nothing replaces them. I left FB in 2012 because of its toxicity. Twitter was working great until they started pushing stuff that my connections like. The whole tower needs to come down and we really need to consider what a healthy information network looks like - because this ain’t it.
Re: Now what? The collateral damage of a tech backlash
#4So the latest fake news is that everyone is being told to shut off operating system updates permanently on their devices to "block apple and google". ::slams head into desk:: We're already seen that censoring fake news on vaccine safety only has fanned the flames because the perpetrators point out "they wouldn't censor us if it wasn't true!". So yeah, while these platforms have the right to do so, when you have a mon…
Parler was already infested with links to malware, now they're even trying to turn that into a political movement.
Infect your machine for freedom!
Re: Now what? The collateral damage of a tech backlash
#5So the latest fake news is that everyone is being told to shut off operating system updates permanently on their devices to "block apple and google". ::slams head into desk:: We're already seen that censoring fake news on vaccine safety only has fanned the flames because the perpetrators point out "they wouldn't censor us if it wasn't true!". So yeah, while these platforms have the right to do so, when you have a mon…
> because the perpetrators point out "they wouldn't censor us if it wasn't true!"
Where did they point that out, if they were censored? Seems like (and this is not nearly as ironic as it sounds) we need better/smarter censorship, not less.
The fundamental disease here isn't the propagation of incorrect facts, it's the evolution of communities where alternative facts become accepted canon. Once you have everyone's eyeballs on the same stories that they share again and again, then it doesn't really matter whether they're true or not.
So the same people that believe that covid-19 started in a lab believe that masks don't work, and climate science is bunk, and the election was stolen, and that Mueller is secretly working with Q, etc...
And that really does strike me as a cycle that can be broken. But yes, it requires control way up at the platform level to decide what can be shared. Real truth is real. Experts exist. And those experts should, yes, decide what gets published on mass forums. And in the world of just a few decades back that wasn't a controversial idea.
But ultimately it's all about norms. Because if there are entities (like a lot of folks here, sadly) who for cynical reasons really want some of that garbage to be shared, they'll always be able to break this by screaming "censorship". Which is what's happening now.
At the end of the day we have a group of people who came to power based on lies, trying to retain that power by suppressing all attempts to control those lies.
Re: Now what? The collateral damage of a tech backlash
#6I’d be OK if twitter and Facebook just died out and nothing replaces them. I left FB in 2012 because of its toxicity. Twitter was working great until they started pushing stuff that my connections like. The whole tower needs to come down and we really need to consider what a healthy information network looks like - because this ain’t it.
You have to wonder why what it shows you is toxic. My FB feed is mostly animals and math jokes, a few updates on my friends' kids plus some landscapes from my home country. This is what I want from it and nothing more.
Am I using it wrong? Are you?
Re: Now what? The collateral damage of a tech backlash
#7I’d be OK if twitter and Facebook just died out and nothing replaces them. I left FB in 2012 because of its toxicity. Twitter was working great until they started pushing stuff that my connections like. The whole tower needs to come down and we really need to consider what a healthy information network looks like - because this ain’t it.
You have to wonder why what it shows you is toxic. My FB feed is mostly animals and math jokes, a few updates on my friends' kids plus some landscapes from my home country. This is what I want from it and nothing more. Am I using it wrong? Are you?
Your post is probably why we should regulate the algorithms they use. It's bullshit that they can influence what shows up on your feed, and then they blame you for it. "Oh, you must be the toxic one if all you see is toxicity..."
Re: Now what? The collateral damage of a tech backlash
#8I am thinking that social media is inherently bad.
Let's say I subscribe to RSS feeds. Maybe I subscribe to a few dozen sites. With multiple writers, I might exposed to the stupidity of maybe a few hundred people.
With social media, I am in a sense subscribed to the stupidest, or most outrageous posts of tens or millions of people. Stupidity sells. Outrage sells.
Re: Now what? The collateral damage of a tech backlash
#9I am thinking that social media is inherently bad. Let's say I subscribe to RSS feeds. Maybe I subscribe to a few dozen sites. With multiple writers, I might exposed to the stupidity of maybe a few hundred people. With social media, I am in a sense subscribed to the stupidest, or most outrageous posts of tens or millions of people. Stupidity sells. Outrage sells.
I've recently been thinking that the current version of social media is our generation's version of smoking. I think it's going to take another 25 years but eventually I think it will be seen as something detrimental to everyone's (mental) health that people have to work to remove themselves from.
Re: Now what? The collateral damage of a tech backlash
#10I’d be OK if twitter and Facebook just died out and nothing replaces them. I left FB in 2012 because of its toxicity. Twitter was working great until they started pushing stuff that my connections like. The whole tower needs to come down and we really need to consider what a healthy information network looks like - because this ain’t it.
You have to wonder why what it shows you is toxic. My FB feed is mostly animals and math jokes, a few updates on my friends' kids plus some landscapes from my home country. This is what I want from it and nothing more. Am I using it wrong? Are you?
if your Facebook feed is dominated by math jokes and landscapes then I think it's fair to point out that your connections on the site are not exactly representative of the average citizen, going by Facebook's most popular sites.
So OP isn't using Facebook wrong, they are probably just less socio-economically insulated.