Former Google CEO Calls Social Networks ‘Amplifiers for Idiots’ • Hacker News Board

Re: Former Google CEO Calls Social Networks ‘Amplifiers for Idiots’

#11

Post by Tainnor » Thu, Oct 22, 2020, 2:35 PM UTC

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #7

I disagree with Schmidt. Misinformation is spreading because trust in institutions is eroding. This eroding trust is because of transparency and improved information dissemination. Most people don't trust the news anymore because it can easily be seen how biased they are. They don't trust institutions because they see how partisan most are. You can't just ban or regulate social media and expect the toothpaste to just…

Of course, institutions are biased and partisan. The problem is that some random YouTube channel, Facebook page or a lone idiot screaming on social media is not going to be less biased and partisan.

Trust is not an all-or-nothing proposition. I know that institutions and established media have systematic blind spots and an agenda, and I think everyone with some critical thinking skills should know that, too. But that doesn't mean that there is no value to news, it means that maybe you should read from multiple sources, try to correct for known biases, ask critical questions etc.

Amplifying vox populi isn't the solution here.

(Also, empirically, while trust in media and institutions has eroded, I don't believe that "most" people don't trust institutions. Maybe that's the case in the US, but certainly not everywhere.)

Re: Former Google CEO Calls Social Networks ‘Amplifiers for Idiots’

#12

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Oct 22, 2020, 2:43 PM UTC

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #7

I disagree with Schmidt. Misinformation is spreading because trust in institutions is eroding. This eroding trust is because of transparency and improved information dissemination. Most people don't trust the news anymore because it can easily be seen how biased they are. They don't trust institutions because they see how partisan most are. You can't just ban or regulate social media and expect the toothpaste to just…

[deleted]

Re: Former Google CEO Calls Social Networks ‘Amplifiers for Idiots’

#13

Post by TheAdamAndChe » Thu, Oct 22, 2020, 2:44 PM UTC

Tainnor wrote: post #11

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #7

I disagree with Schmidt. Misinformation is spreading because trust in institutions is eroding. This eroding trust is because of transparency and improved information dissemination. Most people don't trust the news anymore because it can easily be seen how biased they are. They don't trust institutions because they see how partisan most are. You can't just ban or regulate social media and expect the toothpaste to just…

Of course, institutions are biased and partisan. The problem is that some random YouTube channel, Facebook page or a lone idiot screaming on social media is not going to be less biased and partisan. Trust is not an all-or-nothing proposition. I know that institutions and established media have systematic blind spots and an agenda, and I think everyone with some critical thinking skills should know that, too. But that…

Amplifying vox populi isn't the solution here

What makes you say that? Isn't the purpose of a democracy so that the government can change with a changing population? (For those who don't know, vox populi means voice of the people.)

As to your statement on the trust of institutions, there may be regional variations in this. In the Midwest, nobody I talk to trusts the government or media.

Re: Former Google CEO Calls Social Networks ‘Amplifiers for Idiots’

#14

Post by PrinceKropotkin » Thu, Oct 22, 2020, 2:54 PM UTC

Arnt wrote: post #5

strikelaserclaw wrote: post #2

Doesn't google filter search results for you based on your what it thinks you want to see? That should also be included in the list of "amplifier for idiots"

Obviously the search term you type is what you want to see, so in a sense you're right. But that wasn't what you meant, right? Google selects a large set of search results based on what it thinks your query means, then weighs each result according to many, many criteria, I've heard there are about 140 but that's a long time ago, and finally orders them by aggregate weight. You may assume that all of those criteria ar…

You're forgetting they're an ad company: they've virtually all their money connecting amplified idiot to amplified idiot.

Re: Former Google CEO Calls Social Networks ‘Amplifiers for Idiots’

#15

Post by PrinceKropotkin » Thu, Oct 22, 2020, 2:59 PM UTC

Tainnor wrote: post #11

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #7

I disagree with Schmidt. Misinformation is spreading because trust in institutions is eroding. This eroding trust is because of transparency and improved information dissemination. Most people don't trust the news anymore because it can easily be seen how biased they are. They don't trust institutions because they see how partisan most are. You can't just ban or regulate social media and expect the toothpaste to just…

Of course, institutions are biased and partisan. The problem is that some random YouTube channel, Facebook page or a lone idiot screaming on social media is not going to be less biased and partisan. Trust is not an all-or-nothing proposition. I know that institutions and established media have systematic blind spots and an agenda, and I think everyone with some critical thinking skills should know that, too. But that…

Regardless of whether or not "amplifying vox populi" is your preferred answer, it's the future of media. Why would I ever trust Wolf Blitzer over my favorite professor, or my favorite historian? Why would I look to the NyTimes when they don't cover the stories I consider important? Why would I trust the editorial staff at all given what I find in the opinion section?

This is not to say that popular media outlets are lying or have an explicit agenda, it's just virtually impossible to find one that seems to reflect a world coherent with the one you live in.

Re: Former Google CEO Calls Social Networks ‘Amplifiers for Idiots’

#16

Post by uniqueid » Thu, Oct 22, 2020, 2:59 PM UTC

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #7

I disagree with Schmidt. Misinformation is spreading because trust in institutions is eroding. This eroding trust is because of transparency and improved information dissemination. Most people don't trust the news anymore because it can easily be seen how biased they are. They don't trust institutions because they see how partisan most are. You can't just ban or regulate social media and expect the toothpaste to just…

The theories that social media popularizes have elements like galactic lizard people, vast conspiracies of baby-blood-drinking liberals, the earth being flat... If the people who argue for these theories aren't "idiots" they're at best "grifters" or "lunatics."

Re: Former Google CEO Calls Social Networks ‘Amplifiers for Idiots’

#17

Post by Tainnor » Thu, Oct 22, 2020, 3:04 PM UTC

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #13

Tainnor wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, institutions are biased and partisan. The problem is that some random YouTube channel, Facebook page or a lone idiot screaming on social media is not going to be less biased and partisan. Trust is not an all-or-nothing proposition. I know that institutions and established media have systematic blind spots and an agenda, and I think everyone with some critical thinking skills should know that, too. But that…

Amplifying vox populi isn't the solution here What makes you say that? Isn't the purpose of a democracy so that the government can change with a changing population? (For those who don't know, vox populi means voice of the people.) As to your statement on the trust of institutions, there may be regional variations in this. In the Midwest, nobody I talk to trusts the government or media.

Democracy to me means giving the people participation in government. It doesn't mean that everyone's opinion is equally valid, that's why we have representative government and not (except in Switzerland) a system that works purely by plebiscites.

Switzerland is a special case because the country is small and wealthy with a mostly well educated population and their democratic tradition is a very old one, but in many other cases, moving to a more direct form of democracy can have significant downsides, see e.g. the Brexit vote.

And I'm not talking about suppressing anyone's opinion here, that would certainly not be right. It's more about how we as a society shouldn't overemphasise loud people on social media.

Re: Former Google CEO Calls Social Networks ‘Amplifiers for Idiots’

#18

Post by troughway » Thu, Oct 22, 2020, 3:14 PM UTC

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #7

I disagree with Schmidt. Misinformation is spreading because trust in institutions is eroding. This eroding trust is because of transparency and improved information dissemination. Most people don't trust the news anymore because it can easily be seen how biased they are. They don't trust institutions because they see how partisan most are. You can't just ban or regulate social media and expect the toothpaste to just…

To the op:

People here (and, I wouldn't be surprised, elsewhere) are missing the point that I think you are trying to make. And partly as a result you're getting downvoted by the idiot brigade.

To the rest of you:

It's not so much to do with disinformation, which is a separate conversation entirely. It's specifically to do with institutions that we rely on reporting to us more or less "fair and balanced" factual information distorting things by not reporting on everything that is happening within that subject, choosing to only focus on a part of the whole picture that promotes their agenda[1] in a positive light, completely ignoring the other pieces that intertwine that bring about a more "Well, it isn't so black and white" perspective. They are using weak and pathetic framing devices that I'll get into later.

When you start to pick up on this to the degree where you can predict and see how things will unfold, there is little reason for you to actually believe any of the published information. So this isn't just about lizards, it's also about far more basic things that occur day in day out.

And this isn't even the tip of the iceberg. The language that is used is carefully chosen to force you to agree with certain assumptions so that the rest of the piece makes sense, when really, it's nothing more than shitposting by some Opinion section columnist. These assumptions once again come from a place so blatantly obvious to have an agenda[1] that when you start to pick up on it, there is no reason for you to take anything they say anymore as having basis in reality.

That's how trust in media and reporting institutions erodes from people who know how to tell apart what's fact and what's propaganda. And once those people are off your platform, things just go downhill from there.

So, it's much more sinister than the lizards. And focusing on the lizards is just you being naive.

[1] If you have a problem with the word "agenda" here, you haven't been paying attention.

Re: Former Google CEO Calls Social Networks ‘Amplifiers for Idiots’

#19

Post by ebruchez » Thu, Oct 22, 2020, 3:22 PM UTC

Tainnor wrote: post #17

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amplifying vox populi isn't the solution here What makes you say that? Isn't the purpose of a democracy so that the government can change with a changing population? (For those who don't know, vox populi means voice of the people.) As to your statement on the trust of institutions, there may be regional variations in this. In the Midwest, nobody I talk to trusts the government or media.

Democracy to me means giving the people participation in government. It doesn't mean that everyone's opinion is equally valid, that's why we have representative government and not (except in Switzerland) a system that works purely by plebiscites. Switzerland is a special case because the country is small and wealthy with a mostly well educated population and their democratic tradition is a very old one, but in many o…

Switzerland doesn't "work purely by plebiscites". It's also a representative government. But it is true that there is more direct democracy, through so-called "initiatives" and "referendums". Those involve the population a few times a year.

Note that California does something very similar, although the votes are less frequent.

Re: Former Google CEO Calls Social Networks ‘Amplifiers for Idiots’

#20

Post by grawprog » Thu, Oct 22, 2020, 3:32 PM UTC

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #7

I disagree with Schmidt. Misinformation is spreading because trust in institutions is eroding. This eroding trust is because of transparency and improved information dissemination. Most people don't trust the news anymore because it can easily be seen how biased they are. They don't trust institutions because they see how partisan most are. You can't just ban or regulate social media and expect the toothpaste to just…

>Address the issue of trust, and you can fix the real issues here.

How can the issue of trust be fixed when most of these institution's goals are not really aligned with the general public?

A company with the goal of profitting as much as possible from consumers and a government with the goal of helping those companies line their pockets as much as possible isn't really inline with what the average person wants. Because typically it's the average person's pockets they're draining to line their pockets.

There's no trust because there is nothing to trust.

Actually, that's not true, there is trust, we can trust that whatever they're doing or saying, it's for their benefit and not the general good of most people.

It's blatant and obvious and if people are losing faith in these institutions, it's not distrust, it's the coming to the obvious awareness that these institutions are not and have never worked for anything other than themselves.