6 ms·

I absolutely love the way you are engaging with this problem, and really appreciate how you’re trying to make discourse about the fundamental issue rather than

I absolutely love the way you are engaging with this problem, and really appreciate how you’re trying to make discourse about the fundamental issue rather than the knee-jerk ‘murica “unrationale”. Personally I support the authoritarian measure against TikTok from a “general” standpoint since I firmly believe the nature of warfare lately has shifted to a more cultural front and thus is a matter of national security; Everything about this would be perfect if not for the glaring issue that is clear favoritism, and not addressing the root problem. Social media and its corresponding ad-tech at large is a publicly available propaganda engine that can be wielded by the highest state backed bidder via direct ads, or the highest spending intelligence actor via artificial accounts and discourse. LLM tech has only exacerbated this threat and in a perfect world this legislation would be the first of many steps to curtail the threat before it undermines the country any further. Now that I’ve said my controversial bits I would love to hear what your thoughts on the matter(s) are!

kelseyfrog 2y ago
If the choice is who are we going to make in charge of feeding us propaganda then the game is fixed. We play this trick on 4 year olds to make them do what we want and when done to adults it's paternalistic. Fifteen year old me was right on this one. It's better to burn it down than pick the lesser of two evils. We always reserve the right to create our own options if what's presented to us isn't honest.
- natpalmer1776 2y ago
  Sure the game is rigged so that someone will be feeding us propaganda, that much is a given in today’s society. I don’t believe however it is in any citizen’s best interests to allow a foreign nation to control that propaganda due to the invariably detrimental incentives at play. The American government is more likely to produce propaganda that promotes an increase in GDP. The increase being won by sacrificing individual autonomy or quality of life is something that is at least in your control (emigrating, voting, lobbying, etc) which makes it the lesser of two evils. As to burning it down and picking a third option… I agree in principle but recent history rarely supports that path; modern technology and weaponry renders any kind of organized revolution a nonstarter, while other means of subverting the status quo (economically, culturally, etc) have been set up to incentivize those capable of doing so to be completely apathetic in the face of obscene wealth tied directly to upholding said status quo. Put simply we are in a social construct that is resilient to any significant change in course (or destruction) while still under threat from a foreign social construct that wishes to subvert our society to the benefit of its own.
  - kelseyfrog 2y ago
    I'm happy that your view is compatible with you sense of self. That's how I feel about mine too.
    - natpalmer1776 2y ago
      :/ I was hoping you would debate my views, since everyone seems to either engage in bad faith or refuse to engage at all C’est la vie I guess
      - kelseyfrog 2y ago
        I have contact info in bio. This isn't one I want to debate publically or using rhetoric.

kelseyfrog 2y ago

If the choice is who are we going to make in charge of feeding us propaganda then the game is fixed. We play this trick on 4 year olds to make them do what we want and when done to adults it's paternalistic. Fifteen year old me was right on this one. It's better to burn it down than pick the lesser of two evils. We always reserve the right to create our own options if what's presented to us isn't honest.

natpalmer1776 2y ago
Sure the game is rigged so that someone will be feeding us propaganda, that much is a given in today’s society. I don’t believe however it is in any citizen’s best interests to allow a foreign nation to control that propaganda due to the invariably detrimental incentives at play. The American government is more likely to produce propaganda that promotes an increase in GDP. The increase being won by sacrificing individual autonomy or quality of life is something that is at least in your control (emigrating, voting, lobbying, etc) which makes it the lesser of two evils. As to burning it down and picking a third option… I agree in principle but recent history rarely supports that path; modern technology and weaponry renders any kind of organized revolution a nonstarter, while other means of subverting the status quo (economically, culturally, etc) have been set up to incentivize those capable of doing so to be completely apathetic in the face of obscene wealth tied directly to upholding said status quo. Put simply we are in a social construct that is resilient to any significant change in course (or destruction) while still under threat from a foreign social construct that wishes to subvert our society to the benefit of its own.
- kelseyfrog 2y ago
  I'm happy that your view is compatible with you sense of self. That's how I feel about mine too.
  - natpalmer1776 2y ago
    :/ I was hoping you would debate my views, since everyone seems to either engage in bad faith or refuse to engage at all C’est la vie I guess
    - kelseyfrog 2y ago
      I have contact info in bio. This isn't one I want to debate publically or using rhetoric.