3 ms·

We know, beyond any doubt, that you can influence someone's behaviour by just showing them targeted videos and ads. It isn't rocket science or some conspiracy n

We know, beyond any doubt, that you can influence someone's behaviour by just showing them targeted videos and ads. It isn't rocket science or some conspiracy nonsense - just basic psychology. The argument being that if a foreign government has an app on the phones of most Americans it can, at any point, decide to show them content that will influence how they lean politically, morally, religiously, or in any other way - the possibilities are really quite endless. Knowing exactly what all users like and what kind of content they are likely to consume is just a tool that could enable it. If you ask "well why aren't we concerned about Facebook doing the same to citizens of some other country(or even Americans)" - we are, but this is specifically about American government.

kelseyfrog 4y ago
Thank you. I feel like I'm halfway to understanding. I'm afraid I'm not quite sure what the part "this is specifically about American government" means. Is it that the American government is afraid of this being done to Americans by the Chinese government? Are there any concrete concerns like, "China wishes to destabilize the US by decreasing social cohesion/increasing social divide" or "China wishes to destabilize capitalism itself"?
- gambiting 4y ago
  American government is worried about the Chinese government acting against it. I'm not aware of any concrete threats from China currently, but seeing as a conflict is brewing slowly(over Taiwan) I understand why the American government wants to limit this specific activity.
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    Thank you, that makes sense. I think the last point of confusion I have is just, did people suddenly come to this realization? It seems evidently clear that we exist an a mental ocean of teaming memetic competition. I wouldn't expect less of businesses, media, the US government, other governments, even here when discussing ideas with other people, I'm keenly aware of the fact that nearly all exchanges are an attempt to convince or be convinced of some idea. Am I skeptical, cynical, or hardened, or did people genuinely believe the marketplace of ideas represented a path toward an objective truth?
    - gambiting 4y ago
      >>did people suddenly come to this realization? Yes I think the American government was somewhat surprised by the fact that another country can run such an effective media machine within their own country and it took a really long time to react to this. It's as if they woke up one day to discover that most Americans watch Al Jazeera as their main news source instead of a domestic channel that can be controlled or influenced more easily.
      - kelseyfrog 4y ago
        Hmm, I guess it's just that establishing China as a memetic threat is an admission that the marketplace of ideas was itself an illusion crafted to appease, contain, and diffuse critique and wouldn't that be a kicking out a sort of load-bearing idea for a lot of people? I suppose I'm having a hard time grasping at how letting the cat out of the bag could be contained to just China, but maybe I'm missing something. It feels like it's a perfectly logical conclusion to say, "The ability to control the narrative ideas stops at existential threats to the US government and it's economic hegemony." Doesn't that sort of seem like a totalitarian stance? Maybe that's more acceptable to people than I thought?

kelseyfrog 4y ago

Thank you. I feel like I'm halfway to understanding. I'm afraid I'm not quite sure what the part "this is specifically about American government" means. Is it that the American government is afraid of this being done to Americans by the Chinese government? Are there any concrete concerns like, "China wishes to destabilize the US by decreasing social cohesion/increasing social divide" or "China wishes to destabilize capitalism itself"?

gambiting 4y ago
American government is worried about the Chinese government acting against it. I'm not aware of any concrete threats from China currently, but seeing as a conflict is brewing slowly(over Taiwan) I understand why the American government wants to limit this specific activity.
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  Thank you, that makes sense. I think the last point of confusion I have is just, did people suddenly come to this realization? It seems evidently clear that we exist an a mental ocean of teaming memetic competition. I wouldn't expect less of businesses, media, the US government, other governments, even here when discussing ideas with other people, I'm keenly aware of the fact that nearly all exchanges are an attempt to convince or be convinced of some idea. Am I skeptical, cynical, or hardened, or did people genuinely believe the marketplace of ideas represented a path toward an objective truth?
  - gambiting 4y ago
    >>did people suddenly come to this realization? Yes I think the American government was somewhat surprised by the fact that another country can run such an effective media machine within their own country and it took a really long time to react to this. It's as if they woke up one day to discover that most Americans watch Al Jazeera as their main news source instead of a domestic channel that can be controlled or influenced more easily.
    - kelseyfrog 4y ago
      Hmm, I guess it's just that establishing China as a memetic threat is an admission that the marketplace of ideas was itself an illusion crafted to appease, contain, and diffuse critique and wouldn't that be a kicking out a sort of load-bearing idea for a lot of people? I suppose I'm having a hard time grasping at how letting the cat out of the bag could be contained to just China, but maybe I'm missing something. It feels like it's a perfectly logical conclusion to say, "The ability to control the narrative ideas stops at existential threats to the US government and it's economic hegemony." Doesn't that sort of seem like a totalitarian stance? Maybe that's more acceptable to people than I thought?