4 ms·

Presentations like these assume people are dumb animals not being able to control their lives. They need to artificially constrained to help them live. Saying b

Presentations like these assume people are dumb animals not being able to control their lives. They need to artificially constrained to help them live. Saying bluntly, they need a nanny. I'm an active user or Google, Facebook, Apple, Twitter and all of them. I turned off GMail notifications for non-important mails. I unsubscribe/report spam promotional e-mail. YouTube autoplay is off (simply because the recommender is not good enough, but I'd happily turned them on otherwise). I unsubscribed from junk groups on Facebook, but the connections on Facebook is very important since I can't meet with most of my friends in person. My Twitter notifications are off, and I do mute often, but the remaining Twitter suggestions are quite interesting. Almost all notifications are off on my phone, but remaining are very helpful. And so on. The largest distraction in my life is a chat app which is used by my employer. But this is not service provider/product problem: it's company decision to use that application instead of e-mail. Other chat apps I'm used for communication with my friends are not distracting. The suggestions by the presentation author is irrational: let's stop business growth assuming it will make people more happy. This is not how the world works: if a company start making less efficient product, it will die, and not because of ads revenue, but simply because users will leave for someone who knows how to retain attention. That guy Tristan Harris who did the presentation is morally dishonest person: he wants to his cake and eat it. He got his millions from Google, and then decided to play good guy by virtue signalling with this presentation and by playing in Social Dilemma: working against the same companies which made him wealthy enough to not worry about money for the rest of his life.

cratermoon 5y ago
> Presentations like these assume people are dumb animals not being able to control their lives You're vastly underestimating the potential to exploit human nature. Just by being here ranting like this shows that the topic bypassed your rational executive function and fired up your sympathetic nervous system.
- asteroidbelt 5y ago
  > You're vastly underestimating the potential to exploit human nature. Human nature were exploited for thousand years, and humans are still doing fine. I didn't see strong arguments why current megacorp mind control is worse than usual. > Just by being here ranting like this shows that the topic bypassed your rational executive function and fired up your sympathetic nervous system. I didn't get it. Are you stating that commenting here is irrational? Or that my arguments are irrational?
  - cratermoon 5y ago
    > Human nature were exploited for thousand years "Collective behavior provides a framework for understanding how the actions and properties of groups emerge from the way individuals generate and share information. In humans, information flows were initially shaped by natural selection yet are increasingly structured by emerging communication technologies. Our larger, more complex social networks now transfer high-fidelity information over vast distances at low cost. The digital age and the rise of social media have accelerated changes to our social systems, with poorly understood functional consequences. This gap in our knowledge represents a principal challenge to scientific progress, democracy, and actions to address global crises. We argue that the study of collective behavior must rise to a “crisis discipline” just as medicine, conservation, and climate science have, with a focus on providing actionable insight to policymakers and regulators for the stewardship of social systems." - Stewardship of global collective behavior https://www.pnas.org/content/118/27/e2025764118 https://www.pnas.org/content/118/27/e2025764118 [emphasis added] > Are you stating that commenting here is irrational? Or that my arguments are irrational? Neither. Just that your attention is here, not on your work, your family, your hobbies, or literally anything else that deserves your attention.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
titzer 5y ago
> That guy Tristan Harris who did the presentation is morally dishonest person: he wants to his cake and eat it. He got his millions from Google, and then decided to play good guy by virtue signalling with this presentation and by playing in Social Dilemma: working against the same companies which made him wealthy enough to not worry about money for the rest of his life. This is like saying that no one is ever allowed to change their mind, and also that the person's point is wrong because they benefited by the very thing they are criticizing? That's not a logical argument, that's a straight-up ad hominem--character assassination, to be honest--and a complete distraction.
- asteroidbelt 5y ago
  > That's not a logical argument, that's a straight-up ad hominem and a complete distraction That was just a remark, not a substantiation of the arguments above. I'm sorry, I mixed it up. > This is like saying that no one is ever allowed to change their mind Everyone is allowed to change their mind, but it is helpful to know why and how they did change their mind.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

cratermoon 5y ago

> Presentations like these assume people are dumb animals not being able to control their lives You're vastly underestimating the potential to exploit human nature. Just by being here ranting like this shows that the topic bypassed your rational executive function and fired up your sympathetic nervous system.

asteroidbelt 5y ago
> You're vastly underestimating the potential to exploit human nature. Human nature were exploited for thousand years, and humans are still doing fine. I didn't see strong arguments why current megacorp mind control is worse than usual. > Just by being here ranting like this shows that the topic bypassed your rational executive function and fired up your sympathetic nervous system. I didn't get it. Are you stating that commenting here is irrational? Or that my arguments are irrational?
- cratermoon 5y ago
  > Human nature were exploited for thousand years "Collective behavior provides a framework for understanding how the actions and properties of groups emerge from the way individuals generate and share information. In humans, information flows were initially shaped by natural selection yet are increasingly structured by emerging communication technologies. Our larger, more complex social networks now transfer high-fidelity information over vast distances at low cost. The digital age and the rise of social media have accelerated changes to our social systems, with poorly understood functional consequences. This gap in our knowledge represents a principal challenge to scientific progress, democracy, and actions to address global crises. We argue that the study of collective behavior must rise to a “crisis discipline” just as medicine, conservation, and climate science have, with a focus on providing actionable insight to policymakers and regulators for the stewardship of social systems." - Stewardship of global collective behavior https://www.pnas.org/content/118/27/e2025764118 https://www.pnas.org/content/118/27/e2025764118 [emphasis added] > Are you stating that commenting here is irrational? Or that my arguments are irrational? Neither. Just that your attention is here, not on your work, your family, your hobbies, or literally anything else that deserves your attention.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

titzer 5y ago

> That guy Tristan Harris who did the presentation is morally dishonest person: he wants to his cake and eat it. He got his millions from Google, and then decided to play good guy by virtue signalling with this presentation and by playing in Social Dilemma: working against the same companies which made him wealthy enough to not worry about money for the rest of his life. This is like saying that no one is ever allowed to change their mind, and also that the person's point is wrong because they benefited by the very thing they are criticizing? That's not a logical argument, that's a straight-up ad hominem--character assassination, to be honest--and a complete distraction.

asteroidbelt 5y ago
> That's not a logical argument, that's a straight-up ad hominem and a complete distraction That was just a remark, not a substantiation of the arguments above. I'm sorry, I mixed it up. > This is like saying that no one is ever allowed to change their mind Everyone is allowed to change their mind, but it is helpful to know why and how they did change their mind.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]