Facebook could stop 10B impressions from “repeat misinformers”, but doesn't • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook could stop 10B impressions from “repeat misinformers”, but doesn't

#21

Post by decebalus1 » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 4:21 PM UTC

daze42 wrote: post #18

Uberphallus wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too, but most people can't be trusted to decide for themselves and are lead to believe crazy shit only because it brings ad revenue in the best case, because of interests of bad actors in the worst. Where to draw the line is the point of the discussion, because the democracy of the viral nonsense is causing more damage than a straight up dictatorship, IMO.

This view, though probably correct, is incompatible with democracy. We can't have rule by the people if the people aren't capable of ruling themselves. I still believe democracy is the best way forward, but it depends on critical thinking and there seems to be a decline in that area recently.

> This view, though probably correct, is incompatible with democracy.

Which is fine, because (at least in the US) we don't live in a democracy. These views are very compatible with a plutocracy, which is what we currently have.

Re: Facebook could stop 10B impressions from “repeat misinformers”, but doesn't

#22

Post by ben_w » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 4:25 PM UTC

EricE wrote: post #3

lol - "repeat misinformers" Ministry of Truth indeed. Orwell wrote 1984 as a warning, not as a flipping implementation guide.

Orwell wrote a dark mirror of the world he already lived in — a world where the literal Soviet Union switched from the role of “ally which helped us defeat the literal Nazis” to “evil bastards we’ve always hated”.

Likewise, 1984’s Ministry of Truth was based on the real UK Ministry of Information, which did actual propaganda and censorship and only dissolved in 1946, shortly before he wrote the novel.

Re: Facebook could stop 10B impressions from “repeat misinformers”, but doesn't

#23

Post by DistressedDrone » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 4:27 PM UTC

daze42 wrote: post #18

Uberphallus wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too, but most people can't be trusted to decide for themselves and are lead to believe crazy shit only because it brings ad revenue in the best case, because of interests of bad actors in the worst. Where to draw the line is the point of the discussion, because the democracy of the viral nonsense is causing more damage than a straight up dictatorship, IMO.

This view, though probably correct, is incompatible with democracy. We can't have rule by the people if the people aren't capable of ruling themselves. I still believe democracy is the best way forward, but it depends on critical thinking and there seems to be a decline in that area recently.

> it depends on critical thinking and there seems to be a decline in that area recently.

Respectfully, I call bullshit. There has always been a lack of critical thinking, we just didn't have the internet to bear witness. I think people are complaining about a lack of critical thinking more now because there are more educated people around to think critically.

So I agree that we need critical thinking, but let's not be alarmists about it just because some people are dumb or voted dumb people in.

Re: Facebook could stop 10B impressions from “repeat misinformers”, but doesn't

#24

Post by mrfusion » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 4:30 PM UTC

Name one time in history when the group burning books and censoring people were the good guys.

Re: Facebook could stop 10B impressions from “repeat misinformers”, but doesn't

#25

Post by mrfusion » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 4:32 PM UTC

Uberphallus wrote: post #14

mrfusion wrote: post #6

Thanks but I’d rather decide what’s misinformation for myself.

Me too, but most people can't be trusted to decide for themselves and are lead to believe crazy shit only because it brings ad revenue in the best case, because of interests of bad actors in the worst. Where to draw the line is the point of the discussion, because the democracy of the viral nonsense is causing more damage than a straight up dictatorship, IMO.

This is how they steal free speech from you. Make you believe that adults aren’t capable of managing their lives or beliefs.

Re: Facebook could stop 10B impressions from “repeat misinformers”, but doesn't

#26

Post by ben_w » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 4:34 PM UTC

sneak wrote: post #17

Uberphallus wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too, but most people can't be trusted to decide for themselves and are lead to believe crazy shit only because it brings ad revenue in the best case, because of interests of bad actors in the worst. Where to draw the line is the point of the discussion, because the democracy of the viral nonsense is causing more damage than a straight up dictatorship, IMO.

It's supremely arrogant to believe that you can decide for yourself, but "most people can't be trusted to decide for themselves". Let people make their own decisions.

Sure, but they didn’t say they were any better.

I mean, it’s not like I know much about civil engineering, or trade policy, or diplomacy, or law, or policing, or military and defence issues, or agriculture and food stability, or economics, or education policy, other than that most of these are things you can get degrees (or equivalent) in, and if I spend three years studying each of them I’d still be a much of a noob in those topics as someone who thinks “lines of code is a good measure of productivity” is in the world of software.

I still believe democracy is better than any known alternative; it just isn’t, y’know, flawless.

Re: Facebook could stop 10B impressions from “repeat misinformers”, but doesn't

#27

Post by bashinator » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

mrfusion wrote: post #25

Uberphallus wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too, but most people can't be trusted to decide for themselves and are lead to believe crazy shit only because it brings ad revenue in the best case, because of interests of bad actors in the worst. Where to draw the line is the point of the discussion, because the democracy of the viral nonsense is causing more damage than a straight up dictatorship, IMO.

This is how they steal free speech from you. Make you believe that adults aren’t capable of managing their lives or beliefs.

How do you explain QAnon, then?

Re: Facebook could stop 10B impressions from “repeat misinformers”, but doesn't

#28

Post by bashinator » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 4:38 PM UTC

mrfusion wrote: post #24

Name one time in history when the group burning books and censoring people were the good guys.

Name one other time in history when memes could be spread and amplified at the same rate and level as through social media.

Re: Facebook could stop 10B impressions from “repeat misinformers”, but doesn't

#29

Post by bashinator » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 4:43 PM UTC

dokem wrote: post #20

What happened to the wisdom of "don't believe what you read on the internet"? There used to be a general skepticism that existed alongside the internet when I was a kid. I think people still remember this for the most part and the war on 'misinformation' is essentially a battle of opinions and ideas, no facts.

> I think people still remember this for the most part.

I don't. I think that memory is from small subset of the general public who were early adopters and developers of the Internet.

Re: Facebook could stop 10B impressions from “repeat misinformers”, but doesn't

#30

Post by Uberphallus » Tue, Apr 13, 2021, 4:45 PM UTC

sneak wrote: post #17

Uberphallus wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too, but most people can't be trusted to decide for themselves and are lead to believe crazy shit only because it brings ad revenue in the best case, because of interests of bad actors in the worst. Where to draw the line is the point of the discussion, because the democracy of the viral nonsense is causing more damage than a straight up dictatorship, IMO.

It's supremely arrogant to believe that you can decide for yourself, but "most people can't be trusted to decide for themselves". Let people make their own decisions.

It might be arrogant, but not supremely. Maybe the line leaves me out of deciding the content I can consume. I'm pretty stupid out of my fields of interest anyway.

Joking aside, it's taken me lots of effort, but if anything is important to me, my life, or my loved ones, I double check it, even if I agree with it or I'm naturally inclined to believe it. I've also learnt to love to stand corrected, and to say that I'm wrong.

But that's unfortunately above what most people I deal with on a daily basis are able or willing to do, supremely so when you bring religion or politics in the mix. And that's normal, and thoroughly studied[0]. That also means that, in many subjects, people already made up their minds and aren't actually taking decisions, as you suggest they are, but having psychological knee-jerk reactions.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_perseverance