3 ms·
A machine designed to self-optimize to manufacture as many paperclips as possible with no regard to any other parameters is not capable of morality. A person wh
by Zak 4y ago
A machine designed to self-optimize to manufacture as many paperclips as possible with no regard to any other parameters is not capable of morality. A person who creates one without taking steps to ensure it does not eat the world to turn the raw materials into paperclips is capable of morality and is morally responsible for that outcome.
Facebook has created a machine to capture attention and increase engagement with little regard to any other parameters. Despite being shown evidence that its machine contributes to political extremism and violence, it has typically refused to make changes that would reduce those effects if those changes would also reduce engagement.
It's fair to claim innocent intent early on, but someone who is aware their behavior has harmful impacts and continues that behavior has, at best negligent intent.
- daniel_reetz 4y agoYes. And this is an unprecedented industrial process, not least because attention is the input, and behavioral changes (well-tracked viewing and purchasing) are the output.
- yummypaint 4y agoI like this take on social media as the industrialization of behavior modification. Framing it that way effectively communicates the hazards to the layperson who thinks its purpose is to help people stay in touch.
- phendrenad2 4y agoSo a perfect free-speech forum where there is no algorithm would be okay? Or is the lack of algorithm also an algorithm? Is there any way to win this? Or is every website now doomed to an arbitrary level of required content moderation?
- throwaway313313 4y agoLarge crowds in some kinds of shapes of open spaces randomly result in stampedes and people dying. All shapes of spaces are not subject to this. There are general designs that don't have this problem and there are people that have various practical guidelines to counteract the stampede problem. Same with forums where people can say things. For example a simple algorithm that does not suffer from as gross feedback effects, that facebook eliminated early on, was the timeline view of activity. Timeline sorting did not use popularity or advertising promotion to sort items. Would the service be usable like this, well yes, facebook was perfectly usable during the era it worked like this. What is the hit to their bottom line if they changed their algorithm back to simple timeline sorting? Well we can guess it must be pretty big because their current algorithm seems to be pretty psychotic by comparison (in that it intentionally fans the flames of outrage with it's interaction seeking behavior) and they are willing to take all the negative PR for the sake of this interaction uplift.
- phendrenad2 4y agoI think that for most people calling for FB to be held responsible, removing the algorithm would not change their opinion.