3 ms·
It's very possible I AM different. I have an insanely high tolerance for alcohol and most drugs (legal and otherwise). I've had situations where I was prescribe
by burnte 6y ago
It's very possible I AM different. I have an insanely high tolerance for alcohol and most drugs (legal and otherwise). I've had situations where I was prescribed vicodin for months at a stretch, and when the pain was gone, half a bottle sat in the drawer until I threw it out (TMJ neuralgia and gallstones leading to gallbladder removal). If I don't look at FB for a day or two, I feel no compulsion to look at it. Sometimes I don't open twitter for weeks. I use them to fill time in the bathroom or waiting on the wife. Maybe I'm just disproportionately well-balanced. I've had incredible hard times throughout my life, so maybe I just understand what's actually important better than the average bear.
I completely agree with the echo-chamber effect, but I also don't feel Facebook or Twitter are actually good sources for political discourse or information so I'm not exactly trusting anything I see there. I think cable news is far more "addictive" and mood-warping than Facebook, though. It's totally passive, you just sit there and absorb the anxiety-laden "coming up in just minutes, how some politician is literally trying to kill you and your family with new regulations on ocean cargo ships! After these ads."
Yes, they absolutely want to boost engagement and use. Yes, they use tested algorithms to select content appealing to you. Yes, some of them even have sleazy policies on content and ads. Some types of content and some types of personalities lend themselves well to that type of information dissemination, especially right-wing content due to the more conformist/authority-pleasing nature of those mentalities. Do I think Facebook and Twitter actually want to make me angry at people? No. People that use FB and Twitter for propaganda reasons do, but that's what propaganda from any source is meant to do, highlight differences between groups and increase inter-group tension to reinforce tribal identity.
But, you didn't actually answer my question. I asked how they affected YOU, not what the goals of these platforms are. I want to hear how they actually affected a person, not how they might affect groups. I'd really like to know how Google and Amazon fit in there too. Again, feel like it boils down to "maybe you shouldn't be so affected by people you don't know and ideas you haven't checked" but also again I don't want to victim blame. I also don't generally like blaming tools for problems, so I'm trying to get more data.
- coldtea 6y agoYou might or might no be that different. But it's worth to note that most people are delluded in this regard, thinking they're different. Besides "different in tolerance" and "hookable" are not entirely contradictory. One might resist Vicodin and fall for social media echo- bubbling for example, the same way some can resist alcohol, but fall for drugs or food at obesity-level, and so on. In other words, some are different in the set of tolerances, but still human, in that they have their soft spots. >But, you didn't actually answer my question. I asked how they affected YOU, not what the goals of these platforms are. That would still be asking the wrong question. We don't live in isolated fishbowls. What negatively affects others also affects me (that's not even to mention the direct harm to my family, relatives, and friends, I'm speaking in more general community terms).