10 ms·

Couldn’t one argue that we have had a (gnarly) A/B test in the past few years— Twitter, FB mostly let different groups use the platform as the latter see fit. E

Couldn’t one argue that we have had a (gnarly) A/B test in the past few years— Twitter, FB mostly let different groups use the platform as the latter see fit. End result is (mind you not theoretical): erosion of civil discourse, platforms being used to organize illegal activities, proliferation of misinformation (during a pandemic) etc. We are kinda beyond what we could happen if company X did not allow Y to begin with. It has already happened. I am more worried about where are we heading as a society? Why the heck is a regular joe (me) lying awake at night about armed unrest in the most powerful country in the world. Just beyond depressing.

LudwigNagasena 6y ago
> erosion of civil discourse What erosion of civil discourse are you talking about? 10 years ago half or more Americans were against gay marriage, today 30% of the US is against that, except nowadays they are also called neonazis and are being deplatformed from major platforms. Do you think 50 years ago there could be civil discourse on legalizing rape or celebrating Holocaust? No, these people would get the same treatment. Or, as a non-imaginary example, just remember McCarthyism. What changed is the level of discrepancy of Overton windows between rural and urban America. That’s all. > platforms being used to organize illegal activities Hah, but when they are used to organize illegal activities in countries like Egypt or Belarus it was not an issue. > proliferation of misinformation (during a pandemic) If you think that an average citizen is too stupid to think for themselves, we might as well just abolish voting rights. And surely there is a better way to combat misinformation than giving censorship powers to private technocrats.
- ahurmazda 6y ago
  >If you think that an average citizen is too stupid to think for themselves, ... I sincerely have no such intent. Apologies if it came out that way. >> erosion of civil discourse Maybe my naivete but it seems that online discussions are much less nuanced compared to face to face discussions we had when growing up. Sure I disagreed with relatives but it certainly feels a lot more intense now a days (quite possible that its just the nature of the medium). >>level of discrepancy of Overton windows between rural and urban America Do you have any recommendation on how to lessen this gap? I live in a major metropolis. But I keep getting a feeling that such a widening chasm can not be good for the society.
  - LudwigNagasena 6y ago
    > Maybe my naivete but it seems that online discussions are much less nuanced compared to face to face discussions we had when growing up. How often did you talk with complete strangers about politics when you were growing up? Are you now having more intense discussion with your relatives? Do you think it is can be attributed to Facebook? > Do you have any recommendation on how to lessen this gap? I live in a major metropolis. But I keep getting a feeling that such a widening chasm can not be good for the society. Uniform education with officially supported views on main topics will bridge the gap and, also anti free speech laws. Neither European countries nor China have such divergence of opinions. All of them police speech and ban certain viewpoints. Of course people from different stratas of society will always have different opinions: small business owners, industrial workers, intelligentsia, government workers, non-working people all have different interests. But common national viewpoints keep the fabric of society intact.
    - amanaplanacanal 6y ago
      I would rather internet platforms censor only on their own platform than have the government censor all of us.

LudwigNagasena 6y ago

> erosion of civil discourse What erosion of civil discourse are you talking about? 10 years ago half or more Americans were against gay marriage, today 30% of the US is against that, except nowadays they are also called neonazis and are being deplatformed from major platforms. Do you think 50 years ago there could be civil discourse on legalizing rape or celebrating Holocaust? No, these people would get the same treatment. Or, as a non-imaginary example, just remember McCarthyism. What changed is the level of discrepancy of Overton windows between rural and urban America. That’s all. > platforms being used to organize illegal activities Hah, but when they are used to organize illegal activities in countries like Egypt or Belarus it was not an issue. > proliferation of misinformation (during a pandemic) If you think that an average citizen is too stupid to think for themselves, we might as well just abolish voting rights. And surely there is a better way to combat misinformation than giving censorship powers to private technocrats.

ahurmazda 6y ago
>If you think that an average citizen is too stupid to think for themselves, ... I sincerely have no such intent. Apologies if it came out that way. >> erosion of civil discourse Maybe my naivete but it seems that online discussions are much less nuanced compared to face to face discussions we had when growing up. Sure I disagreed with relatives but it certainly feels a lot more intense now a days (quite possible that its just the nature of the medium). >>level of discrepancy of Overton windows between rural and urban America Do you have any recommendation on how to lessen this gap? I live in a major metropolis. But I keep getting a feeling that such a widening chasm can not be good for the society.
- LudwigNagasena 6y ago
  > Maybe my naivete but it seems that online discussions are much less nuanced compared to face to face discussions we had when growing up. How often did you talk with complete strangers about politics when you were growing up? Are you now having more intense discussion with your relatives? Do you think it is can be attributed to Facebook? > Do you have any recommendation on how to lessen this gap? I live in a major metropolis. But I keep getting a feeling that such a widening chasm can not be good for the society. Uniform education with officially supported views on main topics will bridge the gap and, also anti free speech laws. Neither European countries nor China have such divergence of opinions. All of them police speech and ban certain viewpoints. Of course people from different stratas of society will always have different opinions: small business owners, industrial workers, intelligentsia, government workers, non-working people all have different interests. But common national viewpoints keep the fabric of society intact.
  - amanaplanacanal 6y ago
    I would rather internet platforms censor only on their own platform than have the government censor all of us.