31 ms·
Prevent might be too strong a description, but discourage deeper engagement while radically facilitating the opposite? > can be tuned Sure, maybe. But thus f
by nullc 6y ago
Prevent might be too strong a description, but discourage deeper engagement while radically facilitating the opposite?
> can be tuned
Sure, maybe. But thus far they haven't been. I'm a bit dubious that intentional interventions wouldn't also have their own substantial negative effects.
Our online communications platforms have a much greater effect on many people than a great many drugs that we only make available by prescription do... yet we've tapped in most of the country to them on a 16-hour a day central line drip feed before we ever really began studying their effects.
- chalst 6y ago> But thus far they haven't been. They haven't been because the social media platforms have been chasing engagement as their only target and that favours toxicity. But many advertisers are allergic to toxicity: there may be space for a social media platform that tries to avoid the toxic forms of engagement. > I'm a bit dubious that intentional interventions wouldn't also have their own substantial negative effects. The current system has been shaped by intentional interventions. The alternative regime should be judged relative to the status quo. I recommend Richard Seymour's 'The Twittering Machine' on the nature of those intentional interventions; cf. review: https://www.rs21.org.uk/2019/11/16/review-the-twittering-machine/ https://www.rs21.org.uk/2019/11/16/review-the-twittering-mac...