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

The “Majority Illusion” in Social Networks (2016)

journals.plos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–89 of 89 posts

Re: The “Majority Illusion” in Social Networks (2016)

#81

Post by pwdisswordfish2 »

sukilot wrote: post #77
pwdisswordfish2 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, "democratic" basically means "majority rule". By that definition, a website offering "social media" is the antithesis of democratric. The website owner is always the deciding vote.

That's a huge mistake. Democracy means "people rule", not "majority vote". The minority are part of the people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority

I used the word "basically" for a reason. Nor did I use the word "vote". I said "majority rule". FWIW, I used that term to refer to an outcome not necessarily a process. I should have been more careful.

The Tyranny of the Majority Wikipedia page presents a criticism of majority rule. This criticism does not contradict the idea that democracy is likely to result in majority rule; it supports it. One can say "democracy bascially means majority rule" because, for those of us in the West, that is, by and large, what we get. According to Wikipedia, the legistlatures of all democratic nations use majority rule (the process) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majority_rule

However, I only presented a personal and basic definition of democracy, not necessarily a comprehensive or correct one. That is why I used the words "To me" and "basically".

When majority rule is not the outcome of democracy, would you agree that "the people", at least some of them, will contest the notion that what they have is a "democracy"?

How can anyone see the popular social newtorks as democractic?

Re: The “Majority Illusion” in Social Networks (2016)

#82

Post by mistermann »

themovieinwins wrote: post #69
grawprog wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmmm, no i was responding to the actual content of the article which is pointing out social media is causing people to overreact to issues outside their area of influence because of what they see online. My point is, I watched a large majority of a community go out and protest over things in another country, ignoring the issues not only caused by the recent lockdowns that seem to matter nothing any more to these peop…

Not really sure what protest would aim to achieve against job losses caused by pandemic. Killing of people based on race by police on the other hand has been shown to be an systemic issue and something which could be reformed.

> Killing of people based on race by police on the other hand has been shown to be an systemic issue and something which could be reformed.

Could you unpack "has been shown"? Are you speaking statistically here?

Re: The “Majority Illusion” in Social Networks (2016)

#83

Post by grawprog »

askafriend wrote: post #79
crowdglass wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you fail to understand just how prevalent these issues are for people of color every single day. Beaten in public for not "taking a knee"? White supremacist. Fucking nazi scum. Latino killed by police? White person? Asian? Black cop killing a black person? CNN's silence is deafening. Only Black Lives Matter. > Justifying one's existence and identity every single day is exhausting on a level that all other p…

There's a Black family that's been living in a nearby neighborhood for over a decade. Their kid gets the cops called on him regularly because he's Black and walks to school through neighborhoods where people don't recognize him and their first response it to call the cops. Obviously he's not the only one that walks to school, and the other kids have never had the cops called on them. His father's father was lynched b…

>It's the same reason why when organizations or people highlight Cancer patients and survivors, no one is going around screaming "All diseases matter

To be fair, and to play devil's advocate a bit here, nobody's going around blaming all the AIDS patients saying the cancer patients are dying because of them.

Then of course there are lots of actual diseases where research and treatment go underfunded because things like cancer takes the spotlight.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1326440/

https://wtop.com/health-fitness/2016/05/underfunded-deadly-d...

It's actually kind of a big problem medical science.

Re: The “Majority Illusion” in Social Networks (2016)

#84

Post by reroute1 »

mistermann wrote: post #80
askafriend wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is this observable mistreatment that people are receiving every day Yes. There is a daily burden that comes with being Black in America that is very distinct and systemic. You can educate yourself on this topic, there's great material out there; I'm still learning too. It has very much to do with the default attitudes in a society where interracial marriage wasn't even legal until 1967. That's not that long ago.

I've been doing a fair amount of reading on the subject from many different angles. It's interesting how much we (and here I mean everyone , of all cultures and skin tones) kind of take for granted that we "know". For example, everyone kind of thinks they "know" about MLK and Malcolm X, but how much do they "know", really? And how much (what percentage of the entirety of the big picture) did these two legendary men t…

Why does it need to be observable? What if it's there and unobservable? Then what?

Do people who break the rules normally do so in a highly observable way?

Re: The “Majority Illusion” in Social Networks (2016)

#85

Post by mistermann »

reroute1 wrote: post #84
mistermann wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been doing a fair amount of reading on the subject from many different angles. It's interesting how much we (and here I mean everyone , of all cultures and skin tones) kind of take for granted that we "know". For example, everyone kind of thinks they "know" about MLK and Malcolm X, but how much do they "know", really? And how much (what percentage of the entirety of the big picture) did these two legendary men t…

Why does it need to be observable? What if it's there and unobservable? Then what? Do people who break the rules normally do so in a highly observable way?

Please reread what I wrote, and interpret it more literally (do not inject novel ideas of your own).

Re: The “Majority Illusion” in Social Networks (2016)

#86

Post by reroute1 »

mistermann wrote: post #85
reroute1 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it need to be observable? What if it's there and unobservable? Then what? Do people who break the rules normally do so in a highly observable way?

Please reread what I wrote, and interpret it more literally (do not inject novel ideas of your own).

I'm responding because you and gp are talking about precise measurements.

I'm asking basic questions about if and how you can measure it and you respond like it's "injecting ideas"... What lol? Can you not be a baby or not handle a question? There's nothing to reread which alters this.

Re: The “Majority Illusion” in Social Networks (2016)

#87

Post by mistermann »

reroute1 wrote: post #86
mistermann wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please reread what I wrote, and interpret it more literally (do not inject novel ideas of your own).

I'm responding because you and gp are talking about precise measurements. I'm asking basic questions about if and how you can measure it and you respond like it's "injecting ideas"... What lol? Can you not be a baby or not handle a question? There's nothing to reread which alters this.

> you and gp are talking about precise measurements.

Measurements of things that have actually occurred in shared reality. Absolute precision is not necessary, but a reasonable amount of consistency with observable reality doesn't seem too much to ask about, is it?

> What if it's there and unobservable?

I would be interested in learning more about the nature of this sort of thing, in great detail. I actually think this relatively unexplored territory may be where society should be spending more time mutually exploring. I think we should be exploring all territory, including not only statistics, but literally everything than anyone considers important. I doubt every perspective is of equal importance, but that doesn't mean no importance.

> I'm asking basic questions about if and how you can measure it and you respond like it's "injecting ideas"

For injecting ideas, I refer to this:

> Why does it need to be observable?

Where did I say it needs to be observable? It sounds like (it is my perception that) you are characterizing my comment to be something along the lines of ~"if it can't be measured, it doesn't count". Have I misinterpreted you, or is that what you're actually suggesting I've said?

Re: The “Majority Illusion” in Social Networks (2016)

#88

Post by weitzj »

NortySpock wrote: post #63
weitzj wrote: post #45

About 2 years ago there was an online game/simulator where one could add “information blocks” onto network nodes and see if they become true. It nicely demonstrated how things became a “fact”. Does anybody have the link to it?

Nicky Case "The Wisdom or Madness of the Crowds" https://ncase.me/crowds/

Great! This was it!

Re: The “Majority Illusion” in Social Networks (2016)

#89

Post by crowdglass »

askafriend wrote: post #79
crowdglass wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you fail to understand just how prevalent these issues are for people of color every single day. Beaten in public for not "taking a knee"? White supremacist. Fucking nazi scum. Latino killed by police? White person? Asian? Black cop killing a black person? CNN's silence is deafening. Only Black Lives Matter. > Justifying one's existence and identity every single day is exhausting on a level that all other p…

There's a Black family that's been living in a nearby neighborhood for over a decade. Their kid gets the cops called on him regularly because he's Black and walks to school through neighborhoods where people don't recognize him and their first response it to call the cops. Obviously he's not the only one that walks to school, and the other kids have never had the cops called on them. His father's father was lynched b…

> Too often people approach these topics as personal attacks

Because they are personal attacks.

> I don't believe anyone thinks the BLM movement is saying "Only Black Lives Matter".

Then act like it.

White people die at the hands of cops, too. Fight for them and you get every Republican in the country on your side.

Post reply on HN