3 ms·

Why do you think Dorsey is personally responsible for swinging the world towards dystopia?

by finite_jest 5y ago

aardvarkr 5y ago
No kidding. Is Twitter perfect? Goodness no, but is it the root of all evil? That’s absurd
- rektide 5y ago
  IMO the the algorithmic basis of twitter is much less troubling than Facebook. Part of that is because Twitter is a far more alive means for discourse, for democratic processes to emerge & steer what gets raised. There's way less of the echo chamber. There's significantly more back & forth in the comments, way more cross-engagement, that highlights other views, that checks what's happening. On Facebook, the post & the link are primary & the comments are a mess, often a sea of amplification. Twitter- as a for the most part open discussion- is able to tap a "wisdom of the crowds" sensibility whereas Facebook is perpetually falling into dark rabbit holes. But all of this... blaming the tools... it doesn't click with me, really. As unknowable & scary as algorithmic selection is, it seems like a distant second compared to what the real story is. Isn't it obvious? It's us. It's humanity that is the problem. These are inherent problems with attention & broadcast, & how easy it is to feed on other people, to excite them & drive them to ends. Antagonism and zeal are a high-grade memetic weapons payload, and the easy democratic access to thought & conversation is easily subverted. We haven't much in the way of building up immunities- to this day, blocking people seems to be the one and only defense most people have online, and that is a shield which does nothing to contribute to general welfare, to helping align & raise up the infosphere. We live in a dystopian world with dystopian fallen people. It's a much closer together world, much better stitched together. This was of course going to cause problems. But I cannot imagine the horror of going back, of trying to establish authoritarian & limited channels for communication that the info-scarce world of the past was limited to. I do have great hope for progress, but humanity must innovate openly together, must build our own overlays to ourselves better comprehend the world.
  - MCRocco 5y ago
    Well put But given that we are all flawed and easily manipulated (on the macro) I think you might minimizing the roles these tools play when they are designed to exploit our flaws.
_blz2 5y ago
If he isn't, Mark isn't too.
- r00fus 5y ago
  whataboutism at play. Twitter doesn't have a real-name policy.
  - _blz2 5y ago
    The criticism about fb here isn't about the real name policy. Its the neutral content that they refuse to censor, for monetary reasons. Twitter does, for monetary reasons too.

Why do you think Dorsey is personally responsible for swinging the world towards dystopia?

aardvarkr 5y ago

No kidding. Is Twitter perfect? Goodness no, but is it the root of all evil? That’s absurd

rektide 5y ago
IMO the the algorithmic basis of twitter is much less troubling than Facebook. Part of that is because Twitter is a far more alive means for discourse, for democratic processes to emerge & steer what gets raised. There's way less of the echo chamber. There's significantly more back & forth in the comments, way more cross-engagement, that highlights other views, that checks what's happening. On Facebook, the post & the link are primary & the comments are a mess, often a sea of amplification. Twitter- as a for the most part open discussion- is able to tap a "wisdom of the crowds" sensibility whereas Facebook is perpetually falling into dark rabbit holes. But all of this... blaming the tools... it doesn't click with me, really. As unknowable & scary as algorithmic selection is, it seems like a distant second compared to what the real story is. Isn't it obvious? It's us. It's humanity that is the problem. These are inherent problems with attention & broadcast, & how easy it is to feed on other people, to excite them & drive them to ends. Antagonism and zeal are a high-grade memetic weapons payload, and the easy democratic access to thought & conversation is easily subverted. We haven't much in the way of building up immunities- to this day, blocking people seems to be the one and only defense most people have online, and that is a shield which does nothing to contribute to general welfare, to helping align & raise up the infosphere. We live in a dystopian world with dystopian fallen people. It's a much closer together world, much better stitched together. This was of course going to cause problems. But I cannot imagine the horror of going back, of trying to establish authoritarian & limited channels for communication that the info-scarce world of the past was limited to. I do have great hope for progress, but humanity must innovate openly together, must build our own overlays to ourselves better comprehend the world.
- MCRocco 5y ago
  Well put But given that we are all flawed and easily manipulated (on the macro) I think you might minimizing the roles these tools play when they are designed to exploit our flaws.

_blz2 5y ago

If he isn't, Mark isn't too.

r00fus 5y ago
whataboutism at play. Twitter doesn't have a real-name policy.
- _blz2 5y ago
  The criticism about fb here isn't about the real name policy. Its the neutral content that they refuse to censor, for monetary reasons. Twitter does, for monetary reasons too.