3 ms·
The problem isn't free speech in itself. The problem is the amplification of that speech by algorithms optimizing for "engagement" which practically speaking en
by m12k 6y ago
The problem isn't free speech in itself. The problem is the amplification of that speech by algorithms optimizing for "engagement" which practically speaking ends up being synonymous with "conflict". The medium lends itself to spreading bullshit and outrage, not quiet reflection, empathy and 'thinking for yourself'. Lies simply scale better than truth, outrage scales better than understanding and clickbait scales better than accurate headlines. As if that's not bad enough on its own, authoritarian states have realized the potential in this, and weaponized it, by using sock puppet accounts and targeted advertisement to further amplify division and conspiracy theories, as a concerted attack on the electorate of western democracies.
- exdsq 6y agoSure, but is the internet to blame then? Everyone ends up in their own echo chamber, even us on HN right? And the media have been doing this for decades too... Maybe not to this level but I find it hard to believe democracy is that brittle, and I worry the narrative to remove sources of sharing info freely is actually anti-democratic (all news coming from 'authorised sources' at its most extreme).
- josephg 6y ago> Sure, but is the internet to blame then? Youtube has 55 hours uploaded every minute (iirc). Its not "the internet"'s fault that, of all the content available youtube recommended Alex Jones's videos 15 billion times. Or that facebook has been recommending and promoting antivaxer content and communities to mothers' groups. (And specifically mothers who its algorithms think might be taken in by conspiracy thinking). The blame lies with our peers who work at those companies. And every manager who prioritises their own advertising profits over healthy sensemaking amongst their billions of users.