6 ms·

What do you propose to combat disinformation campaigns? Look at what’s happening. The end results of allowing anything to happen on social media are not good.

by tyre 6y ago

What do you propose to combat disinformation campaigns? Look at what’s happening. The end results of allowing anything to happen on social media are not good. We’re not in a good place. So we can ignore that for rigid principles, or admit that those principles don’t stand up to the real world. No, no one hundreds of years ago had any idea about the scale or effect of social networks. Yes there was propaganda and brainwashing, but the speed and adaptability and design of these systems is so different as to be categorically unrecognizable. So. What do you propose?

RandomTisk 6y ago
People tend to over-inflate the potential impact of fake information sources. False information tends to hurt people and we're extremely adept at recognizing false agents, whether they be random tweets, facebook posts or media outlets. Some people walk around so afraid of someone spreading a lie that could hurt them that they insist on authoritarian controls on speech but the fear is completely unfounded. For smart intelligent people, false statements create untrustworthy agents. For oppressive despots, false statements are always the most expedient shortcuts to some desired outcome. What countries like China are doing are playing the despot and preventing their people from thinking critically as much as possible, and silicon valley thinks that's a wonderful idea.
rndgermandude 6y ago
We're far from being in a perfect place, but we're in a relatively good place compared to the rest of history. Reinstituting modernized versions of monarchs and clerics who tell us what we're allowed to know and to think. I neither want Facebook and a few corporations to declare themselves the gatekeeper of morality and acceptable thought nor do I want the oppressive regimes and dictators use freedom of expression against us by flooding us with misinformation and lies. But forking over control to a group of tech figures like Zuckerberg, Dorsey, Bezos, or Pichai cannot be the answer to the threat of Putin and Xi Jinping.
Karunamon 6y ago
Having principles hurts sometimes. Sometimes they require you to do things that are painful with the understanding that the alternative is even worse. I'd gladly take a world with disinformation over a world in which an unaccountable third party determines what is truth, and therefore okay to say. I can work around the first problem with some effort much easier than the second one.
- enumjorge 6y ago
  But the alternative doesn’t stop at misinformation. This propaganda is helping elect people like Trump who has expressed a desire to silence his critics through whatever means he has. I’d rather be censored by Facebook than the government.
- zimpenfish 6y ago
  > a world in which an unaccountable third party determines what is truth, and therefore okay to say We already have that - and have had for centuries - the people who control the press control what gets presented as "truth". Look at Fox or any other Murdoch property for a perfect example. (cf "History is written by the winners" for another angle.)
  - waterhouse 6y ago
    And is Fox successful in determining what is okay to say? Do you see ordinary people afraid to say something because Fox said it was wrong? Facing social, professional, and even legal consequences for expressing disagreement with Fox? There is competition in establishing the truth. Not as much as I'd like, but a decent amount. Reducing that competition would be bad.
- ahpearce 6y ago
  That is exactly the problem, though, isn't it? Unaccountable third parties are literally currently controlling the truth, via disinformation. An alarming number of people are convinced in conspiracies and untruths like the deep state, QAnon, anti-vax, flat earth... How is the ability to freely and massively distribute misinformation not a means of controlling the truth?
sovietmudkipz 6y ago
Keep the marketplace of information free and let people adapt. In the short term, will people be manipulated? Sure. Is that desirable? No. In the long term, as has happened before, people adapt to the new reality. Marketing has to change all the time because people wise up to manipulative strategies. The long term solution is a more intelligent public, not censorship.
dilippkumar 6y ago
> So. What do you propose? Not GP, but I propose doing absolutely nothing. There have always been tabloid newspapers, underground conspiracy theory magazines and various AM broadcasting stations peddling all kinds of nonsense. The internet is just a new medium that’s joining the club. There is no substitute for critical thinking. There are always going to be people who will hold opinions that are anathema to your beliefs. Often, those opinions will be the majority and you will be in the minority. You learn early in life to ignore the crazy people on the sidewalk holding up signs and screaming about lizard-men running the government. You also learn early in life that politeness and civility will carry you a long way towards being respected in your community. The internet is no different. If you can’t function without a school teacher in the room, you aren’t ready for the adult world. We don’t need facebook or twitter or anyone else babysitting us as we go about our lives.
- rdiddly 6y ago
  I don't necessarily disagree, but one big problem is that there is no "adult world" on the internet. If you can't function without a school teacher and aren't ready for the "adult world," you can nonetheless get a Twitter or Facebook account just like anybody else, and interact with the adults, and maybe even fool some of them. It takes a while to sort out who's an insane asshole. The only way to tell is by listening for a while to what's coming out of their megaphone that unfortunately millions of other people can also hear. Finally you decide they're a metaphorical non-adult and, I guess, block or unfriend them, but meanwhile millions of other non-adults are like "Yesss, finally someone said what my lizard-brain has been thinking all along!!" That's not what happens with the guy on the sidewalk holding the sign. Edit: Just noticed you said lizard and I said lizard. Any resemblance is entirely coincidental. I meant something about the basal ganglia or limbic system, whereas yours is an exotic & fantastical sci-fi scenario. Although interestingly if you consider all the venality and viciousness in national politics, and the fact that every politician has that same part of the brain, it's actually kind of true that lizard-men are running the government!
- virgil_disgr4ce 6y ago
  Pure ideology (how it ought to be) vs. immediate reality (shit is melting down in real time). It's easy to choose the former when you're not the one suffering.
glial 6y ago
Banning ad-based news, or at least ad-funded social media. They only push garbage because it attracts eyeballs, which makes them money. Just like tabloids.

by tyre 6y ago

RandomTisk 6y ago

People tend to over-inflate the potential impact of fake information sources. False information tends to hurt people and we're extremely adept at recognizing false agents, whether they be random tweets, facebook posts or media outlets. Some people walk around so afraid of someone spreading a lie that could hurt them that they insist on authoritarian controls on speech but the fear is completely unfounded. For smart intelligent people, false statements create untrustworthy agents. For oppressive despots, false statements are always the most expedient shortcuts to some desired outcome. What countries like China are doing are playing the despot and preventing their people from thinking critically as much as possible, and silicon valley thinks that's a wonderful idea.

rndgermandude 6y ago

We're far from being in a perfect place, but we're in a relatively good place compared to the rest of history. Reinstituting modernized versions of monarchs and clerics who tell us what we're allowed to know and to think. I neither want Facebook and a few corporations to declare themselves the gatekeeper of morality and acceptable thought nor do I want the oppressive regimes and dictators use freedom of expression against us by flooding us with misinformation and lies. But forking over control to a group of tech figures like Zuckerberg, Dorsey, Bezos, or Pichai cannot be the answer to the threat of Putin and Xi Jinping.

Karunamon 6y ago

Having principles hurts sometimes. Sometimes they require you to do things that are painful with the understanding that the alternative is even worse. I'd gladly take a world with disinformation over a world in which an unaccountable third party determines what is truth, and therefore okay to say. I can work around the first problem with some effort much easier than the second one.

enumjorge 6y ago
But the alternative doesn’t stop at misinformation. This propaganda is helping elect people like Trump who has expressed a desire to silence his critics through whatever means he has. I’d rather be censored by Facebook than the government.
zimpenfish 6y ago
> a world in which an unaccountable third party determines what is truth, and therefore okay to say We already have that - and have had for centuries - the people who control the press control what gets presented as "truth". Look at Fox or any other Murdoch property for a perfect example. (cf "History is written by the winners" for another angle.)
- waterhouse 6y ago
  And is Fox successful in determining what is okay to say? Do you see ordinary people afraid to say something because Fox said it was wrong? Facing social, professional, and even legal consequences for expressing disagreement with Fox? There is competition in establishing the truth. Not as much as I'd like, but a decent amount. Reducing that competition would be bad.
ahpearce 6y ago
That is exactly the problem, though, isn't it? Unaccountable third parties are literally currently controlling the truth, via disinformation. An alarming number of people are convinced in conspiracies and untruths like the deep state, QAnon, anti-vax, flat earth... How is the ability to freely and massively distribute misinformation not a means of controlling the truth?

sovietmudkipz 6y ago

Keep the marketplace of information free and let people adapt. In the short term, will people be manipulated? Sure. Is that desirable? No. In the long term, as has happened before, people adapt to the new reality. Marketing has to change all the time because people wise up to manipulative strategies. The long term solution is a more intelligent public, not censorship.

dilippkumar 6y ago

> So. What do you propose? Not GP, but I propose doing absolutely nothing. There have always been tabloid newspapers, underground conspiracy theory magazines and various AM broadcasting stations peddling all kinds of nonsense. The internet is just a new medium that’s joining the club. There is no substitute for critical thinking. There are always going to be people who will hold opinions that are anathema to your beliefs. Often, those opinions will be the majority and you will be in the minority. You learn early in life to ignore the crazy people on the sidewalk holding up signs and screaming about lizard-men running the government. You also learn early in life that politeness and civility will carry you a long way towards being respected in your community. The internet is no different. If you can’t function without a school teacher in the room, you aren’t ready for the adult world. We don’t need facebook or twitter or anyone else babysitting us as we go about our lives.

rdiddly 6y ago
I don't necessarily disagree, but one big problem is that there is no "adult world" on the internet. If you can't function without a school teacher and aren't ready for the "adult world," you can nonetheless get a Twitter or Facebook account just like anybody else, and interact with the adults, and maybe even fool some of them. It takes a while to sort out who's an insane asshole. The only way to tell is by listening for a while to what's coming out of their megaphone that unfortunately millions of other people can also hear. Finally you decide they're a metaphorical non-adult and, I guess, block or unfriend them, but meanwhile millions of other non-adults are like "Yesss, finally someone said what my lizard-brain has been thinking all along!!" That's not what happens with the guy on the sidewalk holding the sign. Edit: Just noticed you said lizard and I said lizard. Any resemblance is entirely coincidental. I meant something about the basal ganglia or limbic system, whereas yours is an exotic & fantastical sci-fi scenario. Although interestingly if you consider all the venality and viciousness in national politics, and the fact that every politician has that same part of the brain, it's actually kind of true that lizard-men are running the government!
virgil_disgr4ce 6y ago
Pure ideology (how it ought to be) vs. immediate reality (shit is melting down in real time). It's easy to choose the former when you're not the one suffering.

glial 6y ago

Banning ad-based news, or at least ad-funded social media. They only push garbage because it attracts eyeballs, which makes them money. Just like tabloids.