5 ms·

Most media companies under capitalism end up acting like a paperclip maximizing AI[1]. They will eat the entire planet to get a few more eyeballs because no on

by slg 6y ago

Most media companies under capitalism end up acting like a paperclip maximizing AI[1]. They will eat the entire planet to get a few more eyeballs because no one taught them not to. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_convergence#Paperclip_maximizer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_convergence#Paper...

qart 6y ago
In contrast to what? Under communism, anyone who opposes the state narrative is disappeared.
- slg 6y ago
  It doesn't sound like you want to engage in this discussion in good faith if you are treating it as a binary choice between capitalism and communism. Any radical extreme is going to bad. EDIT: My views largely align with what jandrese said here[1]. [1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25662487 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25662487
jandrese 6y ago
In communism anyone who opposes the state is disappeared. In capitalism anyone who opposes the corporation is disappeared. You end up needing a mix of both. An independent news media with an explicit obligation to the truth, one that they can get in trouble for violating. We had that obligation for a long time through the middle of the 20th century. News organizations were well regarded even if they didn't always make the right calls they tried their best. But then Rhupert Murdock realized that you could simply pretend to be one of those respected parties and lie to the viewers constantly and there would be no consequences. The obligation to the truth turned out to be a gentleman's agreement and there were no truth police breaking down your door when you told lies. That's when we discovered that the media is like the Prisoner's Dilemma. Fox news discovered that as long as everybody else was beholden to the facts they could lie repeatedly and constantly win the game. They've only fallen from the very tippy top of the ratings in recent years as other news organizations like OAN have discovered that the bigger the lie the bigger the ratings. Fast forward to today and respect for the independent media (the all important 4th branch of government) is at an all time low and we have completely indoctrinated delusional people storming the Capitol building.
- slg 6y ago
  Well said. You answered that sibling comment that I refused to answer. I am not a fan of the specifics of the fairness doctrine, but I believe the current state in which media companies can freely and knowingly lie as long as they don't stray too far into defamation is not tenable.
- seamyb88 6y ago
  > In communism anyone who opposes the state is disappeared. Which chapter of the Communist manifesto is this from?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - mixedCase 6y ago
    None, as you well know. But it has been the result when self-proclaimed communists succeed in taking control of a state. The well-known phrase "it wasn't real communism" comes to mind because it applies and is true, since of course these results have never followed to the letter Marx's doctrine and intentions. But given the pattern of authoritarian states that follow every attempt at communism it is logical to conclude that the plan as stated simply does not survive in any desirable fashion once it starts being followed by real people to organize real people. Capitalism and Republicanism (and no, for some people in the US that need the clarification: I certainly don't mean the party) as perfect plans also fail allowing a lot of evil to flourish, but their failure modes have performed much better in the long run than everything else so far. You can pinpoint any flaws you want, but you can't argue the results as there is no real counterexample with universally better ones.
    - 8note 6y ago
      I would say constitutional monarchy has done better than republicanism for those failure modes. Economically, light socialism has also done better? Eg. Sweden or Canada.
      - 6y ago

by slg 6y ago

qart 6y ago

In contrast to what? Under communism, anyone who opposes the state narrative is disappeared.

slg 6y ago
It doesn't sound like you want to engage in this discussion in good faith if you are treating it as a binary choice between capitalism and communism. Any radical extreme is going to bad. EDIT: My views largely align with what jandrese said here[1]. [1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25662487 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25662487

jandrese 6y ago

In communism anyone who opposes the state is disappeared. In capitalism anyone who opposes the corporation is disappeared. You end up needing a mix of both. An independent news media with an explicit obligation to the truth, one that they can get in trouble for violating. We had that obligation for a long time through the middle of the 20th century. News organizations were well regarded even if they didn't always make the right calls they tried their best. But then Rhupert Murdock realized that you could simply pretend to be one of those respected parties and lie to the viewers constantly and there would be no consequences. The obligation to the truth turned out to be a gentleman's agreement and there were no truth police breaking down your door when you told lies. That's when we discovered that the media is like the Prisoner's Dilemma. Fox news discovered that as long as everybody else was beholden to the facts they could lie repeatedly and constantly win the game. They've only fallen from the very tippy top of the ratings in recent years as other news organizations like OAN have discovered that the bigger the lie the bigger the ratings. Fast forward to today and respect for the independent media (the all important 4th branch of government) is at an all time low and we have completely indoctrinated delusional people storming the Capitol building.

slg 6y ago
Well said. You answered that sibling comment that I refused to answer. I am not a fan of the specifics of the fairness doctrine, but I believe the current state in which media companies can freely and knowingly lie as long as they don't stray too far into defamation is not tenable.
seamyb88 6y ago
> In communism anyone who opposes the state is disappeared. Which chapter of the Communist manifesto is this from?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- mixedCase 6y ago
  None, as you well know. But it has been the result when self-proclaimed communists succeed in taking control of a state. The well-known phrase "it wasn't real communism" comes to mind because it applies and is true, since of course these results have never followed to the letter Marx's doctrine and intentions. But given the pattern of authoritarian states that follow every attempt at communism it is logical to conclude that the plan as stated simply does not survive in any desirable fashion once it starts being followed by real people to organize real people. Capitalism and Republicanism (and no, for some people in the US that need the clarification: I certainly don't mean the party) as perfect plans also fail allowing a lot of evil to flourish, but their failure modes have performed much better in the long run than everything else so far. You can pinpoint any flaws you want, but you can't argue the results as there is no real counterexample with universally better ones.
  - 8note 6y ago
    I would say constitutional monarchy has done better than republicanism for those failure modes. Economically, light socialism has also done better? Eg. Sweden or Canada.
    - 6y ago