5 ms·
This article is profoundly unhelpful for people who's job is to determine what speech is promoted and what speech isn't.
by Dudelander 3y ago
This article is profoundly unhelpful for people who's job is to determine what speech is promoted and what speech isn't.
- azinman2 3y agoI don’t think that was the intended audience.
- Dudelander 3y agoSo the whole point of the article was "read a book dummies"?
- azinman2 3y agoI think it’s more like “rather than engaging with toxic material by you being toxic, just go to books that are high quality and now there’s less toxicity in your world.” I find this a helpful reminder.
- tom_ 3y agoTheir employer should be providing them guidance on the matter. This article is for the rest of us.
- dmbche 3y ago"I see a lot of bad speech scrolling through twitter, speech that would not be worth engaging with in any context and speech that is not worth engaging in a context where engagement is a metric the platform optimizes for. What is my solution to this? To ban this speech? To ban twitter, as a platform that is optimized for anger and hatred? My solution is to close the tab and to read a book. The most basic decision is not what to say, but what to listen to, since what we say is in some sense a response to that, and we will always respond in kind." This is advice for the layperson.
- mitthrowaway2 3y agoFor me, the times when I compulsively engage with something is more akin to a threat-response. The scary things I react to are things like a twitter-mob forming to take someone down, or some policy proposal to enrich billionaires, or a politician offering a feel-good one-liner built on broken math. I could go read a book, but blissful ignorance only lasts until the torches are burning down my own door. Perhaps it's better to try to engage in hopes of putting out the fires early? The foundation of democracy's is civic engagement.
- dmbche 3y agoThe agora in which civic engagement is happening is crowded by assholes with speakers, and bots, and anonymous posters. This is not conducive to progress. If you have problems with the world around you, you can act on these problems. Writing on social media is akin to making a powerpoint to change the world. It's just the wrong tool. Instead of getting worked up writing, sit down and think about the levers you have access to. You probably are in the 1% of the people with the most means in history right now, typing a few lines is very well below your means. What to do is left as an exercise to the reader.
- mitthrowaway2 3y agoI do still believe that the pen is mightier than the sword, though!
- dmbche 3y agoHere's a read if this is a subject you're interested in: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how...
- pmdulaney 3y ago"But if you want money for people with minds that hate All I can tell you is brother you have to wait"
- _chu1 3y agoWhy the fuck is that a job? Shouldn't what speech someone follows be up to their own discretion?
- shadowgovt 3y agoa) because services like Twitter and Facebook have to show something in the timeline. What they show is this job b) because in practice, an approach too laissez-faire here has negative impact both on customer adoption (most people don't actually enjoy cesspools, and they leave when they decide a service is one) and regulation (even in countries with broad free-speech protections, some communication is de facto illegal and there are consequences for a service taking no responsibility for keeping their house in order).
- _chu1 3y agoAlmost like these services are more trouble than they're worth.
- archarios 3y agoif only we could trust people to make informed decisions..
- tarboreus 3y agoAbout what to censor.
- bigstrat2003 3y agoWhether or not people are worthy of the trust, we must place it in them.
- jfengel 3y agoNot when they can't be trusted not to kill, harass, or beat people. And it really doesn't do us any good to go tsk-tsk after they've done so.