5 ms·

I'm just amazed at this entire series of threads. "Gosh, who knew violating social network ToS by proxy and creating massive false consensus networks was so eas

I'm just amazed at this entire series of threads. "Gosh, who knew violating social network ToS by proxy and creating massive false consensus networks was so easy?" Everyone. Everyone should know. We're watching this terrible trend rip apart the entire social proposition of the internet after spending 2 decades trying and finally achieving buy in. And here y'all are, hopefulls for a digital economy cheerfully defrauding the very networks that will probably bet the monetization strategy for many startups that pass through HN's doors. The total lack of any personal responsibility here, or notion of consequence... It stuns me.

LightskinKanye 10y ago
The Tragedy of the Commons states that I am free to exploit this flaw. But we as a society should probably do something about it
- KirinDave 10y ago
  You are what I am talking about. You are part of society. Your obligation is not only to find better ways to stop it but to NOT DO IT. We are all free to make terrible choices that hurt others. That doesn't mean we're compelled to do so because, "Welp, I guess that's just how it goes."
  - LightskinKanye 10y ago
    Easy for you to say when you've had a company of yours acquired for millions. What about those that are struggling to find a place to sleep, not give our lives up to commuting, and pay our student debts? What about the Rights Approach to ethics? Don't I have a right to be able to eat? What I am saying is that we as a society (but mostly the leadership of Twitter) should act to make their service not a Common ground to be exploited.
- inimino 10y ago
  No, idiot, the tragedy of the commons is a tragedy, not an ethical license.
inimino 10y ago
I can't parse your third paragraph. Who do you think is responsible for this? I say it is Twitter. Any public service must plan for its ToS to be broken by bad actors.
- KirinDave 10y ago
  There is blame enough for both twitter and the asinine people here who engage in the deliberately misleading communication, fraud and harassment. Capability is not a moral license to hurt others. If it were, you'd be morally responsible to kill as many people as possible. My third paragraph is saying this: The US elections were decided by and large by social media plays. There are hints of illegal use by campaign actors, but even beyond that it was the first election we had where widespread bots on facebook and twitter were engaging the electorate. That and the repeal of the VRA are definitely factors in why the democrats lost while still keeping the popular vote. I've been in this industry since a time when I was a teenager being laughed at for texting ("It'll never catch on."), using social networks ("Why not just call them?"), and reading online news ("WIRED doesn't put real journalism on their website, and slashdot isn't news"). Many people who are on the internet today take for granted that society has accepted this state of affairs, but it's the work of decades of amassing respectability and providing value. And now in the public eye: dismantling the ability to associate and speak freely because the majority of even first world rich actors cannot use it responsibly. Sure, there is blame for Twitter and Facebook for not ignoring the problem. But the people here relating in a chipper tone how they're undermining the system because, "Tragedy of the commons?" They're so stupid they're literally biting the hand that feeds them because it's a rush to commit minor fraud. (Aside: It's very sad that Twitter fired blake so long ago, because he predicted exactly this would happen. Twitter's management didn't want to think about it, so they made him leave. Typical execs.)
  - inimino 10y ago
    Ever since email spam, we have learned that systems have to be made resistant to abuse. There is enough blame to go around, but it is reasonable to blame Twitter. It is not reasonable to expect bad actors to go away. Systems designed on this assumption will always fail. Yes, we can rightly rail against the people abusing the system, but ultimately there are 7 billion people and expecting all of them to be ethical is foolish. However, we should expect Twitter to behave ethically and hold it to account when it so clearly fails. By all means, keep fighting the good fight, but the only thing that can realistically improve the situation is Twitter.
tritosomal 10y ago
What stuns me is that we all know these junk accounts are easy to make, purely by how easy it is to make our own accounts. We know they cost nothing to us, and so, any time we find a website and approach it as a total stranger and create a cheap account quickly, we know other strangers are capable of the same. So, clearly no substantial population is buying into fake news. Those that do, are likely also paying hundreds of dollars on craigslist for viagra, using escrow accounts.
- KirinDave 10y ago
  I don't think the general population realizes how easy or effective automation is in these contexts. But also those ads are more about delivering exploits than actual product sales.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

LightskinKanye 10y ago

The Tragedy of the Commons states that I am free to exploit this flaw. But we as a society should probably do something about it

KirinDave 10y ago
You are what I am talking about. You are part of society. Your obligation is not only to find better ways to stop it but to NOT DO IT. We are all free to make terrible choices that hurt others. That doesn't mean we're compelled to do so because, "Welp, I guess that's just how it goes."
- LightskinKanye 10y ago
  Easy for you to say when you've had a company of yours acquired for millions. What about those that are struggling to find a place to sleep, not give our lives up to commuting, and pay our student debts? What about the Rights Approach to ethics? Don't I have a right to be able to eat? What I am saying is that we as a society (but mostly the leadership of Twitter) should act to make their service not a Common ground to be exploited.
inimino 10y ago
No, idiot, the tragedy of the commons is a tragedy, not an ethical license.

inimino 10y ago

I can't parse your third paragraph. Who do you think is responsible for this? I say it is Twitter. Any public service must plan for its ToS to be broken by bad actors.

KirinDave 10y ago
There is blame enough for both twitter and the asinine people here who engage in the deliberately misleading communication, fraud and harassment. Capability is not a moral license to hurt others. If it were, you'd be morally responsible to kill as many people as possible. My third paragraph is saying this: The US elections were decided by and large by social media plays. There are hints of illegal use by campaign actors, but even beyond that it was the first election we had where widespread bots on facebook and twitter were engaging the electorate. That and the repeal of the VRA are definitely factors in why the democrats lost while still keeping the popular vote. I've been in this industry since a time when I was a teenager being laughed at for texting ("It'll never catch on."), using social networks ("Why not just call them?"), and reading online news ("WIRED doesn't put real journalism on their website, and slashdot isn't news"). Many people who are on the internet today take for granted that society has accepted this state of affairs, but it's the work of decades of amassing respectability and providing value. And now in the public eye: dismantling the ability to associate and speak freely because the majority of even first world rich actors cannot use it responsibly. Sure, there is blame for Twitter and Facebook for not ignoring the problem. But the people here relating in a chipper tone how they're undermining the system because, "Tragedy of the commons?" They're so stupid they're literally biting the hand that feeds them because it's a rush to commit minor fraud. (Aside: It's very sad that Twitter fired blake so long ago, because he predicted exactly this would happen. Twitter's management didn't want to think about it, so they made him leave. Typical execs.)
- inimino 10y ago
  Ever since email spam, we have learned that systems have to be made resistant to abuse. There is enough blame to go around, but it is reasonable to blame Twitter. It is not reasonable to expect bad actors to go away. Systems designed on this assumption will always fail. Yes, we can rightly rail against the people abusing the system, but ultimately there are 7 billion people and expecting all of them to be ethical is foolish. However, we should expect Twitter to behave ethically and hold it to account when it so clearly fails. By all means, keep fighting the good fight, but the only thing that can realistically improve the situation is Twitter.

tritosomal 10y ago

What stuns me is that we all know these junk accounts are easy to make, purely by how easy it is to make our own accounts. We know they cost nothing to us, and so, any time we find a website and approach it as a total stranger and create a cheap account quickly, we know other strangers are capable of the same. So, clearly no substantial population is buying into fake news. Those that do, are likely also paying hundreds of dollars on craigslist for viagra, using escrow accounts.

KirinDave 10y ago
I don't think the general population realizes how easy or effective automation is in these contexts. But also those ads are more about delivering exploits than actual product sales.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]