3 ms·

This is not "totalitarianism", it's the reduction of free newsfeed distribution. Twitter, and society, doesn't have a long-term interest in a newsfeed flooded w

This is not "totalitarianism", it's the reduction of free newsfeed distribution. Twitter, and society, doesn't have a long-term interest in a newsfeed flooded with false/defamatory information (widespread voter fraud, for example) >conspiracy theorists are trying to find the truth Some of the biggest conspiracy theories that flourish on the web are the result of viral, provably false, information. These people are not truth-seekers, there is no proper research or scientific method - it's instead the equivalent of the supermarket tabloid taken to the extreme: QAnon, flat earthers, 5G cancer, etc.

prohobo 6y ago
This tacit acceptance of a "newsfeed flooded with false/defamatory information" when it happens to support one obvious partisan side is, frankly, something embarrassing to have to see. I have no interest in defending the Trump administration except to point out that what you are supporting is, in fact, a hypocrisy. I can think of four examples which I know are hypocrisies that make it through the supposed "fake news" filter. 1) Russiagate, an unsubstantiated hoax promoted in the media for 3 years leading to countless defamatory attacks on Trump, and millions of dollars spent on investigations. 2) Cambridge Analytica, a tactic used by Obama's campaign which was praised in 2011 as being a new progressive way to reach voters, and then miraculously became an act of corruption when Trump did the same thing in 2016. 3) "Mostly peaceful protests", an ongoing gross misrepresentation of what normal people would call riots. 4) "Trump supporters are racist white men", an ongoing smear of the Trump administration and emotional abuse towards the Trump base (or anyone who doesn't buy into the narrative), which has been proven absolutely false by the latest election. So which is it? You do or you don't want a newsfeed flooded with false/defamatory information? Just allow the stuff you don't personally see as false/defamatory? This is an extremely dangerous problem, and people need to start waking up to it instead of thinking they got it all figured out, as if Alex Jones yelling at frogs is the reason everything is falling apart. The fragmentation of reality which we're seeing (Trumpers, leftists, QAnon, flat earth, 5G, etc.) will NOT be solved by slowing down how fast people can "like" something. The entire internet is broken, and the social media platforms need massive rewiring. We need to properly research the ways the current platforms poison discourse, and find remedies that work to dissolve fragmentation and help people communicate better. Currently, things are rapidly spinning out of control, and the social media platforms have decided to opt for totalitarianism. As they ban and hamstring everyone who doesn't buy in, good or bad, those people will find each other on the decentralized internet. This is creating a powder-keg for narrative chaos and conflict.
- drchopchop 6y ago
  You'd have a better argument if you left out the first half. >"Mostly peaceful protests", an ongoing gross misrepresentation of what normal people would call riots That's a partisan, Fox News talking point. Statistically, the BLM protests were overwhelmingly peaceful. The news happens to focus on the small number that were not. That's also an example of something which could be fairly, scientifically reported on. "Most protests were peaceful, and there were a few riots" is a good headline. "ANTIFA IS BURNING DOWN YOUR CITIES" is not. If the latter gets better/viral newsfeed distribution than the first, then we have a serious problem.
  - prohobo 6y ago
    That's exactly what we're talking about, isn't it? Fragmentation of reality on the internet. There's no way around it because someone will just deny someone else's reality and substitute their own. With intellectual honesty, the following can't be disputed: * "A few riots" is actually hundreds of riots over the longest sustained period of civil unrest in American history (besides the civil war). Here's a geographical chart of all protests and riots from May 2020 to August 2020: https://acleddata.com/acleddatanew/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Political-Violence-Demonstrations-Strategic-Developments-in-the-US-24-May-22-August-2020.png https://acleddata.com/acleddatanew/wp-content/uploads/2020/0... * For the people living in Portland, Seattle, New York, and other major cities the rioters were/are a threatening presence. In Minneapolis alone, 1,500 locations were damaged or destroyed by rioters. https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-st-paul-buildings-are-damaged-looted-after-george-floyd-protests-riots/569930671/ https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-st-paul-buildings-ar... How does the information I just showed you present a picture in which "mostly peaceful protests" is the most accurate summary? What kind of information would it take to change your mind? Would that even be possible? Is this cherry picking? I think on a forum like Hacker News we might actually get to the bottom of this particular point. But that's only because Hacker News isn't social media - it's a community based around tech, and it's heavily moderated. That changes the audience that will see our argument, and the entire dynamic of the dialogue. I'm not here to argue about the riots or left/right politics. I'm just trying to show you that you are capable of being wrong, so stop trying to argue the politics and try to tackle the problem of how to end fragmentation.
blackflame 6y ago
The election results are almost identically opposite this time around in swing states but suddenly no signs of russian interference anywhere. Imagine that.
dudeithinkBLM 6y ago
Ugh, those three listed are widely accepted in truth seeking community to be utter nonsense. They are ridiculed and dismissed as theories planted by shills and three letter agencies to make conspiracy theorists seem crazy. Instead substitute three conspiracy theories truth seekers actually believe: "three World Trade Center buildings fell on 9/11", "fluoride in the water lowers your IQ" and "vaccines are full of contaminants and neurotoxins". Just looking out for you bro.

prohobo 6y ago

This tacit acceptance of a "newsfeed flooded with false/defamatory information" when it happens to support one obvious partisan side is, frankly, something embarrassing to have to see. I have no interest in defending the Trump administration except to point out that what you are supporting is, in fact, a hypocrisy. I can think of four examples which I know are hypocrisies that make it through the supposed "fake news" filter. 1) Russiagate, an unsubstantiated hoax promoted in the media for 3 years leading to countless defamatory attacks on Trump, and millions of dollars spent on investigations. 2) Cambridge Analytica, a tactic used by Obama's campaign which was praised in 2011 as being a new progressive way to reach voters, and then miraculously became an act of corruption when Trump did the same thing in 2016. 3) "Mostly peaceful protests", an ongoing gross misrepresentation of what normal people would call riots. 4) "Trump supporters are racist white men", an ongoing smear of the Trump administration and emotional abuse towards the Trump base (or anyone who doesn't buy into the narrative), which has been proven absolutely false by the latest election. So which is it? You do or you don't want a newsfeed flooded with false/defamatory information? Just allow the stuff you don't personally see as false/defamatory? This is an extremely dangerous problem, and people need to start waking up to it instead of thinking they got it all figured out, as if Alex Jones yelling at frogs is the reason everything is falling apart. The fragmentation of reality which we're seeing (Trumpers, leftists, QAnon, flat earth, 5G, etc.) will NOT be solved by slowing down how fast people can "like" something. The entire internet is broken, and the social media platforms need massive rewiring. We need to properly research the ways the current platforms poison discourse, and find remedies that work to dissolve fragmentation and help people communicate better. Currently, things are rapidly spinning out of control, and the social media platforms have decided to opt for totalitarianism. As they ban and hamstring everyone who doesn't buy in, good or bad, those people will find each other on the decentralized internet. This is creating a powder-keg for narrative chaos and conflict.

drchopchop 6y ago
You'd have a better argument if you left out the first half. >"Mostly peaceful protests", an ongoing gross misrepresentation of what normal people would call riots That's a partisan, Fox News talking point. Statistically, the BLM protests were overwhelmingly peaceful. The news happens to focus on the small number that were not. That's also an example of something which could be fairly, scientifically reported on. "Most protests were peaceful, and there were a few riots" is a good headline. "ANTIFA IS BURNING DOWN YOUR CITIES" is not. If the latter gets better/viral newsfeed distribution than the first, then we have a serious problem.
- prohobo 6y ago
  That's exactly what we're talking about, isn't it? Fragmentation of reality on the internet. There's no way around it because someone will just deny someone else's reality and substitute their own. With intellectual honesty, the following can't be disputed: * "A few riots" is actually hundreds of riots over the longest sustained period of civil unrest in American history (besides the civil war). Here's a geographical chart of all protests and riots from May 2020 to August 2020: https://acleddata.com/acleddatanew/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Political-Violence-Demonstrations-Strategic-Developments-in-the-US-24-May-22-August-2020.png https://acleddata.com/acleddatanew/wp-content/uploads/2020/0... * For the people living in Portland, Seattle, New York, and other major cities the rioters were/are a threatening presence. In Minneapolis alone, 1,500 locations were damaged or destroyed by rioters. https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-st-paul-buildings-are-damaged-looted-after-george-floyd-protests-riots/569930671/ https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-st-paul-buildings-ar... How does the information I just showed you present a picture in which "mostly peaceful protests" is the most accurate summary? What kind of information would it take to change your mind? Would that even be possible? Is this cherry picking? I think on a forum like Hacker News we might actually get to the bottom of this particular point. But that's only because Hacker News isn't social media - it's a community based around tech, and it's heavily moderated. That changes the audience that will see our argument, and the entire dynamic of the dialogue. I'm not here to argue about the riots or left/right politics. I'm just trying to show you that you are capable of being wrong, so stop trying to argue the politics and try to tackle the problem of how to end fragmentation.

blackflame 6y ago

The election results are almost identically opposite this time around in swing states but suddenly no signs of russian interference anywhere. Imagine that.

dudeithinkBLM 6y ago

Ugh, those three listed are widely accepted in truth seeking community to be utter nonsense. They are ridiculed and dismissed as theories planted by shills and three letter agencies to make conspiracy theorists seem crazy. Instead substitute three conspiracy theories truth seekers actually believe: "three World Trade Center buildings fell on 9/11", "fluoride in the water lowers your IQ" and "vaccines are full of contaminants and neurotoxins". Just looking out for you bro.