5 ms·

I grew up in the early 2000s. I find it difficult to understand as well, but I think what happened is that emotional human contact was overrun by corporate/nati

I grew up in the early 2000s. I find it difficult to understand as well, but I think what happened is that emotional human contact was overrun by corporate/nation-state bots. Bots cannot be convinced that their positions are wrong; they exist solely to spread discontent and fear. This is far different than the early Internet where you could safely assume everyone you were talking to is a real person. They may be a dangerous person, but a person nonetheless. You could equally assume that their day job does not consist of demoralizing or confusing people, and their positions on the issues were a result of genuine thought and strategy rather than a built in set of beliefs meant to serve some mystery person or group's end game. Basically, free speech only works if we have reason to believe the people holding onto the "bad" ideas in the idea marketplace listen. It stops being a solution when there are no consequences to being wrong, when your reputation doesn't matter, and when you can be as immoral or insidious as you want without a care in the world. This is the result of automation invading human spaces.

mnky9800n 6y ago
So make political bots illegal and the world becomes sane again?
- rtx 6y ago
  What needs to be banned is thinking that some people can't think for themselves.
  - gameswithgo 6y ago
    they clearly cannot though. example: the spread of qanon. and if you think that is real, then the example is everyone who think qanon is absurd.
    - ribosometronome 6y ago
      Antivaxxers, people who deny the efficacy of mask wearing and social distancing in preventing the spread of airborne diseases, climate change deniers, people who think emacs is better than vim. There's a lot of cases where the evidence is plentiful and unrestricted speech is at odds with keeping the world going.
    - nexuist 6y ago
      It is not just "some people are stupid", that is too small scale thinking. We are constantly assaulted by algorithms trained to manipulate people, trained off of millions of A/B tests and microinteractions, constantly being tweaked using real psychological research and real manipulation techniques. There are real weaknesses in the human mind, and we have to constantly be on guard to avoid them being exploited. For most people it is simply too much effort to go through life and read every comment as if it is trying to trick you. They just want entertainment, and that's totally fair.
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 6y ago
  I'm ready for a social media Butlerian Jihad.
- bigbubba 6y ago
  For every real bot there are probably 10 people accused of being bots because the accuser can't cope with people who disagree with them. In this respect 'bot' has become the new 'troll.'
  - cryptoz 6y ago
    The word 'bot' is overloaded unfortunately. It means today, both a robot as before, and also, a person who is unwilling or unable to have a normal conversation. Real people are 'bots' too today, when they don't actually talk to other people but only parrot the same points repeatedly. They may as well be robots as far as we can tell from their text online. > 10 people accused of being bots because the accuser can't cope with people who disagree with them. If those 10 people aren't really talking, though, then I would consider them bots too. If they are stating one point, over and over, and refusing to listen to others or change their minds about anything, then...they're bots.
    - rightbyte 6y ago
      You can't talk on Twitter. Any thread loses its order and it branches randomly. Different users sees different threads. It is made to encourage monologues. I guess it is why it is popular among politicians, celebs and journalist.
    - bigbubba 6y ago
      Maybe those ten accused people have the problem, or maybe their accusor has the problem. It's just as likely that somebody throwing around insults like 'bot' is the person with the problem. If I call somebody a jackass, maybe it's because they're a jackass or maybe it's because I am the jackass.
DudeInBasement 6y ago
Free speech works even if people don't listen. Respect/creditable is earned.
- bigbubba 6y ago
  Does this mean you agree in principle with George Bush's 'free speech zones' aka "you can say what you like, but you have to do it over there where nobody will hear you"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone

mnky9800n 6y ago

So make political bots illegal and the world becomes sane again?

rtx 6y ago
What needs to be banned is thinking that some people can't think for themselves.
- gameswithgo 6y ago
  they clearly cannot though. example: the spread of qanon. and if you think that is real, then the example is everyone who think qanon is absurd.
  - ribosometronome 6y ago
    Antivaxxers, people who deny the efficacy of mask wearing and social distancing in preventing the spread of airborne diseases, climate change deniers, people who think emacs is better than vim. There's a lot of cases where the evidence is plentiful and unrestricted speech is at odds with keeping the world going.
  - nexuist 6y ago
    It is not just "some people are stupid", that is too small scale thinking. We are constantly assaulted by algorithms trained to manipulate people, trained off of millions of A/B tests and microinteractions, constantly being tweaked using real psychological research and real manipulation techniques. There are real weaknesses in the human mind, and we have to constantly be on guard to avoid them being exploited. For most people it is simply too much effort to go through life and read every comment as if it is trying to trick you. They just want entertainment, and that's totally fair.
8f2ab37a-ed6c 6y ago
I'm ready for a social media Butlerian Jihad.
bigbubba 6y ago
For every real bot there are probably 10 people accused of being bots because the accuser can't cope with people who disagree with them. In this respect 'bot' has become the new 'troll.'
- cryptoz 6y ago
  The word 'bot' is overloaded unfortunately. It means today, both a robot as before, and also, a person who is unwilling or unable to have a normal conversation. Real people are 'bots' too today, when they don't actually talk to other people but only parrot the same points repeatedly. They may as well be robots as far as we can tell from their text online. > 10 people accused of being bots because the accuser can't cope with people who disagree with them. If those 10 people aren't really talking, though, then I would consider them bots too. If they are stating one point, over and over, and refusing to listen to others or change their minds about anything, then...they're bots.
  - rightbyte 6y ago
    You can't talk on Twitter. Any thread loses its order and it branches randomly. Different users sees different threads. It is made to encourage monologues. I guess it is why it is popular among politicians, celebs and journalist.
  - bigbubba 6y ago
    Maybe those ten accused people have the problem, or maybe their accusor has the problem. It's just as likely that somebody throwing around insults like 'bot' is the person with the problem. If I call somebody a jackass, maybe it's because they're a jackass or maybe it's because I am the jackass.

DudeInBasement 6y ago

Free speech works even if people don't listen. Respect/creditable is earned.

bigbubba 6y ago
Does this mean you agree in principle with George Bush's 'free speech zones' aka "you can say what you like, but you have to do it over there where nobody will hear you"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone