Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The case against social media is stronger than you think

arachnemag.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 304 posts

Re: The case against social media is stronger than you think

#131

Post by lumost »

freshtake wrote: post #125

The problem is that our thoughts, opinions, and ultimately actions are the product of our exposure. Social media gives a small number of companies (and their algorithms) unparalleled and unchecked control over our exposure. We should be educating children at a young age about the benefits and risks of social media. We haven't adapted the way we educate society in light of massive tech changes. This will likely be a t…

Is the media even “social” anymore? How much of Reddit is simply bots generating catchy takes and then generating commentary on these takes. You can easily be deceived into thinking that a vast number of people believe something, or think the way you do, or think the way you do but were swayed by some thought process.

Repeat the process long enough and with enough variation and tuning and anyone can be made to believe anything.

Re: The case against social media is stronger than you think

#132

Post by moduspol »

adrr wrote: post #129
freshtake wrote: post #125

The problem is that our thoughts, opinions, and ultimately actions are the product of our exposure. Social media gives a small number of companies (and their algorithms) unparalleled and unchecked control over our exposure. We should be educating children at a young age about the benefits and risks of social media. We haven't adapted the way we educate society in light of massive tech changes. This will likely be a t…

People have stopped reading the news and rely on social media as their main news source. Thats the scariest thing.

At the same time, "reading the news" has become less and less valuable. And social media has an overwhelming impact on the tone and content of "the news," too.

Re: The case against social media is stronger than you think

#133

Post by moduspol »

sporkxrocket wrote: post #108
blitz_skull wrote: post #24

The last week has taken me from “I believe in the freedom of online anonymity” to “Online anonymity possess a weight that a moral, civil society cannot bear.” I do not believe humans are capable of responsibly wielding the power to anonymously connect with millions of people without the real weight of social consequence.

Are you talking about the Charlie Kirk thing? What does that have to do with online anonymity? They caught the shooter.

Also there is no shortage of people saying abhorrent things with their real names attached.

Re: The case against social media is stronger than you think

#135

Post by SapporoChris »

lumost wrote: post #131
freshtake wrote: post #125

The problem is that our thoughts, opinions, and ultimately actions are the product of our exposure. Social media gives a small number of companies (and their algorithms) unparalleled and unchecked control over our exposure. We should be educating children at a young age about the benefits and risks of social media. We haven't adapted the way we educate society in light of massive tech changes. This will likely be a t…

Is the media even “social” anymore? How much of Reddit is simply bots generating catchy takes and then generating commentary on these takes. You can easily be deceived into thinking that a vast number of people believe something, or think the way you do, or think the way you do but were swayed by some thought process. Repeat the process long enough and with enough variation and tuning and anyone can be made to believ…

I do not believe it.

Re: The case against social media is stronger than you think

#136

Post by averageRoyalty »

The social media problem is very simple to solve. Ban advertising on social media (from platform or users) and ban usage of user data external to the platform.

When you remove the incentive to engage users, the companies will engage in less abusive practices to push engagement.

I've never seen this proposed, and I'm confused why.

Re: The case against social media is stronger than you think

#137

Post by SapporoChris »

homeonthemtn wrote: post #67

Social media is a cancer on our society. It is both the asbestos and cigarettes of our generation.

Asbestos was used in cigarette filters, notably in Kent Micronite cigarettes from 1952 to 1956.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_(cigarette)

Re: The case against social media is stronger than you think

#138

Post by mythrwy »

blitz_skull wrote: post #24

The last week has taken me from “I believe in the freedom of online anonymity” to “Online anonymity possess a weight that a moral, civil society cannot bear.” I do not believe humans are capable of responsibly wielding the power to anonymously connect with millions of people without the real weight of social consequence.

Would you require identification to copy and tape up a bunch of fliers around town?

Anonymity is necessary sometimes in my opinion.

Re: The case against social media is stronger than you think

#139

Post by positron26 »

averageRoyalty wrote: post #136

The social media problem is very simple to solve. Ban advertising on social media (from platform or users) and ban usage of user data external to the platform. When you remove the incentive to engage users, the companies will engage in less abusive practices to push engagement. I've never seen this proposed, and I'm confused why.

- information silos still exist

- social incoherence because silos cannot communicate laterally is still there

- the ads will likely go native to become "content" and more revenue will shift to influencers

Just saying it's not quite that easy, but yes, ad monetization is a great force of evil.

Re: The case against social media is stronger than you think

#140

Post by pitched »

averageRoyalty wrote: post #136

The social media problem is very simple to solve. Ban advertising on social media (from platform or users) and ban usage of user data external to the platform. When you remove the incentive to engage users, the companies will engage in less abusive practices to push engagement. I've never seen this proposed, and I'm confused why.

I think the way you define ads and social media would be important. We would end up getting something like the cookie banners again instead of real change.
Post reply on HN