3 ms·

I don't see this as a left- or right-wing issue. Not least because it's manifestly obvious now that relatively illiterate people (and especially children) of al

I don't see this as a left- or right-wing issue. Not least because it's manifestly obvious now that relatively illiterate people (and especially children) of all views and walks have become totally warped by "a little knowledge" passed in sugar cubes along with the stick of social ostracizarion if they fail to conform to algorithms that encourage extremism. Social media firms should be held liable for the massive social damage they've inflicted and externalized. The entire paradigm needs to be reduced to dust just as much as Hamas does. It's an internal enemy and a time bomb for our civilization.

colechristensen 3y ago
People wouldn’t be any less stupid if you pulled the rug out from under the folks making money off of them. The problem has to be addressed elsewhere. Specially we need advertising out of the news business, to higher the level of education for the kids who choose it, and an alternate path for the kids who for whatever reason have no interest so they’ll get out of the way. In other words, some children need to be left behind so they’ll stop dragging everyone else down. Bring back real expulsion and make real requirements for graduation.
- noduerme 3y ago
  The thing is that social/religious/ethnic/racial radicalization and extremism which endangered civil order, threatened civil debate, and came from places of willful ignorance, always existed prior to the internet. But it existed it pockets of time and place, and its spread was limited. Moreover, most ordinary uneducated people had no chance to post back to amplify its content, even if that content was spread on radio as in Rwanda or nazi Germany. Therefore the bulk of people whose opinions should never have had purchase had no sense that their opinions mattered. Which was a good thing. Even more to the point, their inane debates (see: Fox News and MSNBC comments sections, Twitter, etc) wouldn't have generated advertising money. Their comments are not something that a sane civilization with a sense of self-preservation would wish to elevate to be seen by other people. The perversion of social media writ large is to make itself a Tribune of the People and compete with malevolent force of riot against protagonists of rhetoric. It is an insurgency in every sense of the word. Many of us who used to relish the idea of anarchist speech have realized that this insurgency is itself manipulated, that no free speech actually exists on these platforms but that they are simply used to whip the proletariat into frenzied riot on behalf of whoever controls them. Not dissimilar to any religious cult that, in trying to attain power, allows its adherents to incite violence while simultaneously denying its own culpability.
hackernewds 3y ago
did you just compare Facebook to Hamas?
- ilkke 3y ago
  Can someone with serious regard for quality of discussion on HN please explain why is this comment being downvoted?
  - noduerme 3y ago
    Which one, mine or the one you're responding to?
- noduerme 3y ago
  I wouldn't say they're unrelated. If your father is a religious zealot who hates a certain group of people, and your primary social contact is hanging out with your friends drinking coffee, you may end up extremist or not. If your primary social contact is being saturated with hate speech 24/7 on social media, where you're punished for dissent, you will almost certainly turn into a zealot yourself. Yet this isn't even the whole problem, because almost no one you read on social media should even have access to a keyboard, let alone be allowed to bully peers into acquiescing to hate and violence. Facebook is responsible for genocide in Myanmar, and I don't think it's a huge stretch to say that its model (and social media's model in general) is responsible for the enormous wave of terrorist radicalization, school shootings, and violent antipathy toward civilized society that has overwhelmed the world since 2008.
jraby3 3y ago
The fact that ~20% of gen Z don’t believe the holocaust happened is directly related to Tim Tok imo, and an absolute cancer for our culture and way of life. Something absolutely needs to be done about social media.
bryan_w 3y ago
Kind of an extreme view you're giving on this social media site...
- 2024throwaway 3y ago
  It's a bit reductive to compare a tech news discussion site with the kind of social media being discussed in the article.
  - latency-guy2 3y ago
    Not reductive at all, just something you personally dislike the comparison of. Very big difference.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - 2024throwaway 3y ago
      The article is titled “They’re knowingly addicting kids”. Please explain how Hacker News is doing that.
      - fragmede 3y ago
        To it's credit, HN does have a noprocrast feature, but I can easily see a teenager with poor self control spending every waking moment on this site, dreaming of being an entrepreneur, to the detriment of their studies and social life. I'm an adult and doing that so kids (teenagers) are even more helpless. The very nature of social media is addicting, Facebook didn't have to do anything special to get kids addicted to it.
        noduerme 3y ago
        What you say is true - HN might resemble a false ladder to popularity for a very small subset of teenagers - but content is at least as important as form. It's okay for there to be balkanized subsections of the internet that lead to serious discussion and which might occasionally lead to radical obsessions; take away the internet and that's just society in the streets of France in 1789 or Rome in 49 BC. The major difference is whether they find it or it finds them. Because if you find it, you can walk away from it once you grow up. If it finds you, you lose yourself and fail to develop the structure for independent / critical thought.

colechristensen 3y ago

People wouldn’t be any less stupid if you pulled the rug out from under the folks making money off of them. The problem has to be addressed elsewhere. Specially we need advertising out of the news business, to higher the level of education for the kids who choose it, and an alternate path for the kids who for whatever reason have no interest so they’ll get out of the way. In other words, some children need to be left behind so they’ll stop dragging everyone else down. Bring back real expulsion and make real requirements for graduation.

noduerme 3y ago
The thing is that social/religious/ethnic/racial radicalization and extremism which endangered civil order, threatened civil debate, and came from places of willful ignorance, always existed prior to the internet. But it existed it pockets of time and place, and its spread was limited. Moreover, most ordinary uneducated people had no chance to post back to amplify its content, even if that content was spread on radio as in Rwanda or nazi Germany. Therefore the bulk of people whose opinions should never have had purchase had no sense that their opinions mattered. Which was a good thing. Even more to the point, their inane debates (see: Fox News and MSNBC comments sections, Twitter, etc) wouldn't have generated advertising money. Their comments are not something that a sane civilization with a sense of self-preservation would wish to elevate to be seen by other people. The perversion of social media writ large is to make itself a Tribune of the People and compete with malevolent force of riot against protagonists of rhetoric. It is an insurgency in every sense of the word. Many of us who used to relish the idea of anarchist speech have realized that this insurgency is itself manipulated, that no free speech actually exists on these platforms but that they are simply used to whip the proletariat into frenzied riot on behalf of whoever controls them. Not dissimilar to any religious cult that, in trying to attain power, allows its adherents to incite violence while simultaneously denying its own culpability.

hackernewds 3y ago

did you just compare Facebook to Hamas?

ilkke 3y ago
Can someone with serious regard for quality of discussion on HN please explain why is this comment being downvoted?
- noduerme 3y ago
  Which one, mine or the one you're responding to?
noduerme 3y ago
I wouldn't say they're unrelated. If your father is a religious zealot who hates a certain group of people, and your primary social contact is hanging out with your friends drinking coffee, you may end up extremist or not. If your primary social contact is being saturated with hate speech 24/7 on social media, where you're punished for dissent, you will almost certainly turn into a zealot yourself. Yet this isn't even the whole problem, because almost no one you read on social media should even have access to a keyboard, let alone be allowed to bully peers into acquiescing to hate and violence. Facebook is responsible for genocide in Myanmar, and I don't think it's a huge stretch to say that its model (and social media's model in general) is responsible for the enormous wave of terrorist radicalization, school shootings, and violent antipathy toward civilized society that has overwhelmed the world since 2008.

jraby3 3y ago

The fact that ~20% of gen Z don’t believe the holocaust happened is directly related to Tim Tok imo, and an absolute cancer for our culture and way of life. Something absolutely needs to be done about social media.

bryan_w 3y ago

Kind of an extreme view you're giving on this social media site...

2024throwaway 3y ago
It's a bit reductive to compare a tech news discussion site with the kind of social media being discussed in the article.
- latency-guy2 3y ago
  Not reductive at all, just something you personally dislike the comparison of. Very big difference.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - 2024throwaway 3y ago
    The article is titled “They’re knowingly addicting kids”. Please explain how Hacker News is doing that.
    - fragmede 3y ago
      To it's credit, HN does have a noprocrast feature, but I can easily see a teenager with poor self control spending every waking moment on this site, dreaming of being an entrepreneur, to the detriment of their studies and social life. I'm an adult and doing that so kids (teenagers) are even more helpless. The very nature of social media is addicting, Facebook didn't have to do anything special to get kids addicted to it.
      - noduerme 3y ago
        What you say is true - HN might resemble a false ladder to popularity for a very small subset of teenagers - but content is at least as important as form. It's okay for there to be balkanized subsections of the internet that lead to serious discussion and which might occasionally lead to radical obsessions; take away the internet and that's just society in the streets of France in 1789 or Rome in 49 BC. The major difference is whether they find it or it finds them. Because if you find it, you can walk away from it once you grow up. If it finds you, you lose yourself and fail to develop the structure for independent / critical thought.