9 ms·

Of course, this also means you likely have much less in common with the person next to you.

by dgfgfdagasdfgfa 9y ago

CaptSpify 9y ago
Is that a problem? Legit question, because I'm not sure why you bring it up
- toomuchtodo 9y ago
  Causes havoc with societal cohesion. > Social cohesion is defined as the willingness of members of a society to cooperate with each other in order to survive and prosper. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3341872 https://www.jstor.org/stable/3341872
  - simlevesque 9y ago
    I'm not convinced that having something in common with someone corrolates with cooperation.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - toomuchtodo 9y ago
      Please read the entire article if you have the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_functionalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_functionalism
    - ameister14 9y ago
      Well, it definitely corrolates. That's how agreements are made, after all. If you have nothing in common with another person there is no framework for understanding.
      - simlevesque 9y ago
        Why would the type of content you listen to prevent us from ever collaborating ? You gotta be close minded not to collaborate with people who don't consume the same content as you do...
  - CaptSpify 9y ago
    I guess I'm not a big fan of too much social cohesion. I actually prefer societies that embrace differences. Though I would agree that can be taken to a dangerous extreme.
    - toomuchtodo 9y ago
      I'd be curious how, in your model, you'd moderate personal behaviors to tune macro results between social harmony and everyone being a low level sociopath. Historically, peer pressure and social moores provided that functionality. Isn't there a Black Mirror episode about this with social capital? [+] [+] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosedive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosedive
      - CaptSpify 9y ago
        > moderate personal behaviors to tune macro results between social harmony and everyone being a low level sociopath. I guess I'm not sure what you mean by that. examples maybe?
        toomuchtodo 9y ago
        At the lowest levels, balancing selfishness, vanity, the need for self-actualization, and the expression of empathy and compassion. On one extreme, you have the Dalai Lama, the latest Pope, and Bernie Sanders. The other: the Kardashians, Kanye West, and Martin Shkreli.
        CaptSpify 9y ago
        I guess that I've seen less moderation of personal behaviors via these mechanisms in our current society over my lifetime, and I'm not sure that's a big problem. I'd argue that most of the peer pressure and social moors society (especially local society) pushes are typically a net negative, and as we grow globally, we're realizing that they don't usually make sense. NOTE: I'm mostly talking out of my ass here as I've never really thought much about this subject before. I'd gladly welcome new ways of seeing this issue and facts that counter my view.
- dgfgfdagasdfgfa 9y ago
  I don't think you could talk about anything like this as "good" or "bad"; it's happening regardless of what anyone thinks, wants, or intends. However, alienation is about to get a hell of a lot more crushing.
AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
Interesting. Who gets to decide what commons we all should share? Record labels and publishers? Youtube, facebook and twitter are already exercising undue influence in terms of algo changes to suggested videos or auto-play videos. https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/1/16072840/youtube-placing-limits-on-supremacist-videos https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/1/16072840/youtube-placing-l... It's a marketplace of ideas. Let them compete. Google deciding what's good and what's not is not fair to the people who want to decide for themselves.
- module0000 9y ago
  How is that undue influence? Did you arrive at youtube without any action on your part, was it auto playing when you logged in to your computer? Sounds like you dislike big media... just not enough to tune out. tldrl; eat your own dogfood before telling others to do so.
  - AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
    Huh? Youtube is big media? It's only in recent history that Youtube is exercising power to decide what stays and what doesn't, even if it meets the youtube content policy. This is political opinion enforced by youtube. Given Google is a public company, taking one side or another in a political discussion may not be in their interest, it would be their right of first amendment to change the sites they own as they wish, but it dilutes the usefulness and trustworthiness of their product in the eyes of the customers, and the stock holders may not like it that way. The employees have fiduciary duty to not impose their political views on their product. I am asking these companies as a fan of their platform that they keep it neutral. I am not selling any dogfood. I am asking dogfood companies to sell it to all dog owners, don't discriminate if they have a poodle or a pit bull.

Of course, this also means you likely have much less in common with the person next to you.

CaptSpify 9y ago

Is that a problem? Legit question, because I'm not sure why you bring it up

toomuchtodo 9y ago
Causes havoc with societal cohesion. > Social cohesion is defined as the willingness of members of a society to cooperate with each other in order to survive and prosper. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3341872 https://www.jstor.org/stable/3341872
- simlevesque 9y ago
  I'm not convinced that having something in common with someone corrolates with cooperation.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - toomuchtodo 9y ago
    Please read the entire article if you have the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_functionalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_functionalism
  - ameister14 9y ago
    Well, it definitely corrolates. That's how agreements are made, after all. If you have nothing in common with another person there is no framework for understanding.
    - simlevesque 9y ago
      Why would the type of content you listen to prevent us from ever collaborating ? You gotta be close minded not to collaborate with people who don't consume the same content as you do...
- CaptSpify 9y ago
  I guess I'm not a big fan of too much social cohesion. I actually prefer societies that embrace differences. Though I would agree that can be taken to a dangerous extreme.
  - toomuchtodo 9y ago
    I'd be curious how, in your model, you'd moderate personal behaviors to tune macro results between social harmony and everyone being a low level sociopath. Historically, peer pressure and social moores provided that functionality. Isn't there a Black Mirror episode about this with social capital? [+] [+] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosedive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosedive
    - CaptSpify 9y ago
      > moderate personal behaviors to tune macro results between social harmony and everyone being a low level sociopath. I guess I'm not sure what you mean by that. examples maybe?
      - toomuchtodo 9y ago
        At the lowest levels, balancing selfishness, vanity, the need for self-actualization, and the expression of empathy and compassion. On one extreme, you have the Dalai Lama, the latest Pope, and Bernie Sanders. The other: the Kardashians, Kanye West, and Martin Shkreli.
        CaptSpify 9y ago
        I guess that I've seen less moderation of personal behaviors via these mechanisms in our current society over my lifetime, and I'm not sure that's a big problem. I'd argue that most of the peer pressure and social moors society (especially local society) pushes are typically a net negative, and as we grow globally, we're realizing that they don't usually make sense. NOTE: I'm mostly talking out of my ass here as I've never really thought much about this subject before. I'd gladly welcome new ways of seeing this issue and facts that counter my view.
dgfgfdagasdfgfa 9y ago
I don't think you could talk about anything like this as "good" or "bad"; it's happening regardless of what anyone thinks, wants, or intends. However, alienation is about to get a hell of a lot more crushing.

AmIFirstToThink 9y ago

Interesting. Who gets to decide what commons we all should share? Record labels and publishers? Youtube, facebook and twitter are already exercising undue influence in terms of algo changes to suggested videos or auto-play videos. https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/1/16072840/youtube-placing-limits-on-supremacist-videos https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/1/16072840/youtube-placing-l... It's a marketplace of ideas. Let them compete. Google deciding what's good and what's not is not fair to the people who want to decide for themselves.

module0000 9y ago
How is that undue influence? Did you arrive at youtube without any action on your part, was it auto playing when you logged in to your computer? Sounds like you dislike big media... just not enough to tune out. tldrl; eat your own dogfood before telling others to do so.
- AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
  Huh? Youtube is big media? It's only in recent history that Youtube is exercising power to decide what stays and what doesn't, even if it meets the youtube content policy. This is political opinion enforced by youtube. Given Google is a public company, taking one side or another in a political discussion may not be in their interest, it would be their right of first amendment to change the sites they own as they wish, but it dilutes the usefulness and trustworthiness of their product in the eyes of the customers, and the stock holders may not like it that way. The employees have fiduciary duty to not impose their political views on their product. I am asking these companies as a fan of their platform that they keep it neutral. I am not selling any dogfood. I am asking dogfood companies to sell it to all dog owners, don't discriminate if they have a poodle or a pit bull.