5 ms·
People on TikTok are paying elderly women to sit in stagnant mud for hours, cry
- mcpackieh 3y agoEngagement optimizers may as well be paperclip optimizers. These systems don't have human values and will go far beyond what any person thinks is reasonable.
- warning26 3y agoIt's time to ban all social media, or at the very least any kind of "for you" feed. It's the only way to put a stop to this kind of engagement maximization.
- dangus 3y agoLet’s take it further: ban semiconductors. It’s the only way to put a stop to this kind of engagement maximization.
- mrguyorama 3y agoYou've really lubed up that slope!
- dangus 3y agoYes that was the satirical point I was making. The slippery slope was intentional.
- rhaway84773 3y agoYour comment is literally the slippery slope fallacy in action. A world without social media algorithmic feeds would be extremely tolerable and even better for the vast majority of people in the world. A world without semiconductors would not be. Also, a ban on semiconductors is not possible while one on algorithmic For You feeds isn’t just possible but would be fairly trivial requiring only the passage of a handful of bills across a handful of major countries, before it spread across the world.
- dangus 3y agoYes I know, the slippery slope was the idea. I was being satirical about the person I responded to, because their idea of an outright ban of personalized content is an incredible overreach. I also disagree that legislation is just that easy. Many proposed laws to restrict social media are unconstitutional under the 1st amendment. And to those who dislike algorithmic feeds I say “speak for yourself.” Banning them would be like banning ESPN because sports are a waste of of time.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- nine_k 3y agoLook how well does banning specific parts of the internet work in places like Turkey or Russia or India or even China. Look how well did banning of alcohol (which was a really problematic. destructive substance) work in the US. Banning what people crave is a stopgap measure at best, and it increases the popularity of the banned thing because it gives that thing more publicity, even while limiting its availability.
- wruza 3y agoYou’re comparing apples to oranges. Totalitarians ban information, not economy, which is weak anyway. When they ban (or get banned), nothing happens. When US bans a social media giant, it immediately loses most of its value. When EU agrees, it goes bankrupt. Look how well specific terms on pornsites were banned. E.g. young or sister.
- jstarfish 3y agoEradication isn't the point-- disruption is. > it increases the popularity of the banned thing because it gives that thing more publicity Popularity be damned, cocaine doesn't need a publicist. Yet we ban it to maximize the number of hoops people have to jump through to obtain it. As a result, you can only get your hands on so much, and it will cost you. The "ban" rate-limits consumption.
- mcpackieh 3y agoAll countries "ban specific parts of the internet" insofar as they have laws that make certain business models illegal and, those businesses being illegal, websites for them don't exist in the first place. For instance, websites to sell your organs are "illegal" in America because buying organs from people isn't a legal business practice in America. That kind of business isn't allowed, therefore that kind of website doesn't exist. So you don't ban social media websites; you ban social media business practices.
- autoexec 3y agoNo need to ban social media, but I'd agree that companies should be accountable for what they promote using their own algorithms
- anon7331 3y agoAhhh yes, our future generation. I'm glad I won't be around.
- YellOh 3y agoPlenty of us hate it just as much. Sadly I'll probably be around for it all, though.
- fnord77 3y agodepressing and dystopian. Industrialized misery for pity coins
- accrual 3y agoThat's pretty messed up. On one hand I can see why they do it - it pays better than back breaking labor. But on the other hand it absolutely shouldn't be that way. I don't hate TikTok. IMO they actually do a fairly decent job of moderating. And TikTok itself is just a tool like any other and can be used in good or harmful ways. The article mentions no specific content rule was broken and thus the streams were allowed, and it's a fine line for TikTok to walk. I guess I just don't see how to solve the problem. TikTok can ban the streams to avoid elder abuse, but then they may be forcing them back into labor. Is this something that needs to be addressed at the country level? Why are the elderly in this situation to begin with?
- megiddo 3y agoIsn't this just vilification of begging by technical means? The article says the mud bath participants were lining up for gigs. I don't understand the videos, but how is this morally different than criminalizing begging?
- mcpackieh 3y agoIt's on the same level as bumfights. Commercial exploitation of desperate people.
- paddw 3y agoHow are they being exploited? Assuming TikTok skims some revenue off the top, they are still being exploited far less than they would by any form of traditional employment. TikTok is a mirror to the suffering and depravity that occurs in these places. We should be focused collectively on trying to make conditions better for these people, not trying to smash the mirror.
- docandrew 3y agoI came here to say this. What’s funny to 13-year olds stops being funny at some point, but it seems like everything in our culture is being targeted towards that demographic.
- mrguyorama 3y agoEverything is calculated as lifetime subscriber value now so kids are inherently worth more to market to.
- jstarfish 3y agoThanks for that. I noticed this phenomenon but struggled to articulate it.
- tomjen3 3y agoThis sounds pretty horrible, but its also not that simple: >In an interview with Indonesian media outlet Detik in January, 55-year-old Inak Mawar, one of the participants in Akhyar’s videos, said she earned almost $600 after nine livestreams, and that she preferred TikTok to working in the fields in Lombok, where she earns $2 per day doing backbreaking labor. >Mutiara Ika Pratiwi, the head of Perempuan Mahardhika, a Jakarta-based women’s rights organization, told Rest of World the TikTok mud baths were a form of “commodification,” and that it didn’t matter if the women were seen as willing participants.
- KRAKRISMOTT 3y agoGamer girl bathwater production shouldn't be exclusive to young first world egirls
- Apocryphon 3y agoCompletely different approach, same goals (monetization), see NPC streaming: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36723934 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36723934
- micah94 3y agoWhen the French did this to Africans (taking them from their homes and throwing them into zoos), they weren't getting paid anything -- perhaps this is a step up in a dark morid kind of way. And the voyeurs had to travel to the zoos to see them. Now you just have to swipe or click. Our tech makes depravity easier. (<your search engine>: 'human zoos')
- tibbydudeza 3y agoIt seems rather mild compared to "Bum Fights" and Cartman's "Crack Baby Athletic Association".
- happytoexplain 3y agoNaively, yes. But I find it easy to imagine a human mindset that wants to see bums fight, while I can not imagine a human mindset that wants to see this, and therefore the audience for this seems much more disturbed or mentally ill.
- friend_and_foe 3y agoEnduring indignity for lucrative return is not unheard of or really all that uncommon. There's prostitution, pornography, and in most of the professional world there is some degree of hazing. It's a shame, and I'm a person that would not endure indignity like this for any amount of money (probably unless it was a ludicrous amount; we really don't know until the money is on the table in front of us), and I'm sure there are lots of proud people like me, but when these people say they'd rather do this than toil in the fields for $2 I have to say, as disgusting as it is, it's their choice. To say you don't like it is to say you wish there weren't people willing to pay for this, perhaps you find those people disgusting, and that you wish these people could find a less degrading way to make good money, but at least for me, it is not to say that you think they should be prohibited from doing it.
- nine_k 3y agoIt's relatively easy to reject "dirty money" if it's extra money on top of your normal, sustainable income. It's much harder to reject when you literally don't know how are you going to feed yourself, or your children, next week. This is what the poorest face.
- glimshe 3y agoAgreed. Even in fairly normal jobs like hotel room cleaning, workers have to endure indignities that a person with a reasonably high, stable income would never want to endure, such as handling bed sheets with bodily fluids, entering rooms with naked people etc. People who endure this humiliation usually have few other options. In the case of room cleaning, the downsides are largely intrinsic to the job and not necessarily immoral in my point of view - even if we should put mechanisms in place to try to get these people better pay. However, in the case of the TikTok videos, it's purely about exploiting the desperation of others, so I can't put it in the same level as normal unpleasant jobs.
- cafard 3y agoMechanisms in place: unions?
- gpas 3y agoPeople on Twitch are paying young women to sit in hot tubs for hours, write usernames on their exposed skin.