4 ms·

"Oh no the Skinner box we built to exploit and manipulate people is being used to exploit and manipulate people!" "But why is that-" "Because OTHER people are

"Oh no the Skinner box we built to exploit and manipulate people is being used to exploit and manipulate people!" "But why is that-" "Because OTHER people are doing it!" "Oh no!"

Kiro 5y ago
Facebook is not ohnoing anything here. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if their algorithm boosts posts encouraging this kind of low-effort engagement.
- jjoonathan 5y ago
  Yeah. Other parties get data, FB gets cold hard cash. I bet they're quite happy with those terms.
sk2020 5y ago
That the author is peddling the absurd “Russians hacked muh servers” popular myth makes the comment all the more poignant. Social networks tolerate fake traffic because it increases their perceived value. The real crime is the fictive usage and engagement metrics they use to set ad pricing.
- GavinMcG 5y ago
  The "popular myth" is sourced to both independent security firms and multiple U.S. intelligence agencies, and isn't a partisan issue: https://www.wired.com/2017/03/marco-rubio-says-hack-attempts-russia-targeted/ https://www.wired.com/2017/03/marco-rubio-says-hack-attempts...
  - xqcgrek2 5y ago
    Oh it most definitely is a partisan issue. I'll wait for your evidence for if any votes were changed in machines, the only thing that could truly be construed as "hacking" a election.
    - GavinMcG 5y ago
      But that's not what anyone was saying. You're making up an easier position to defend. What about the claim that was actually made in the article? > target misleading messages based on material stolen in the Russian hack of Democratic National Committee servers
  - 93po 5y ago
    My understanding is that the only group that ever got access to Hillary's servers to do forensics was a service that Hillary paid directly and is absolutely not "independent".
- Pokepokalypse 5y ago
  Well, I prefer to victim-blame the idiots who shell out astronomical sums of money for ads; based on these fraudulent "statistics".
rexpop 5y ago
The problem is that we don't know how, how, or why (although, of course, the near-nultimate "why" is likely profit.) Facebook is a publicly traded company. It may have novel negative externalities, but we're largely comfortable with its impact: maximizing shareholder value. When Facebook manipulates us, we feel we can hold it accountable as an institution. We're wrong, but we're complacent. With these mystery accounts, we're out of our depth. We do not know "cui bono," and that's eerie.

"Oh no the Skinner box we built to exploit and manipulate people is being used to exploit and manipulate people!" "But why is that-" "Because OTHER people are doing it!" "Oh no!"

Kiro 5y ago

Facebook is not ohnoing anything here. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if their algorithm boosts posts encouraging this kind of low-effort engagement.

jjoonathan 5y ago
Yeah. Other parties get data, FB gets cold hard cash. I bet they're quite happy with those terms.

sk2020 5y ago

That the author is peddling the absurd “Russians hacked muh servers” popular myth makes the comment all the more poignant. Social networks tolerate fake traffic because it increases their perceived value. The real crime is the fictive usage and engagement metrics they use to set ad pricing.

GavinMcG 5y ago
The "popular myth" is sourced to both independent security firms and multiple U.S. intelligence agencies, and isn't a partisan issue: https://www.wired.com/2017/03/marco-rubio-says-hack-attempts-russia-targeted/ https://www.wired.com/2017/03/marco-rubio-says-hack-attempts...
- xqcgrek2 5y ago
  Oh it most definitely is a partisan issue. I'll wait for your evidence for if any votes were changed in machines, the only thing that could truly be construed as "hacking" a election.
  - GavinMcG 5y ago
    But that's not what anyone was saying. You're making up an easier position to defend. What about the claim that was actually made in the article? > target misleading messages based on material stolen in the Russian hack of Democratic National Committee servers
- 93po 5y ago
  My understanding is that the only group that ever got access to Hillary's servers to do forensics was a service that Hillary paid directly and is absolutely not "independent".
Pokepokalypse 5y ago
Well, I prefer to victim-blame the idiots who shell out astronomical sums of money for ads; based on these fraudulent "statistics".

rexpop 5y ago

The problem is that we don't know how, how, or why (although, of course, the near-nultimate "why" is likely profit.) Facebook is a publicly traded company. It may have novel negative externalities, but we're largely comfortable with its impact: maximizing shareholder value. When Facebook manipulates us, we feel we can hold it accountable as an institution. We're wrong, but we're complacent. With these mystery accounts, we're out of our depth. We do not know "cui bono," and that's eerie.