4 ms·

A former sausage maker here. I (used to) design these engagement/recommendation engines for a large corp, did academic research in the field, went to conferenc

by quanto 2y ago

A former sausage maker here. I (used to) design these engagement/recommendation engines for a large corp, did academic research in the field, went to conferences, etc. In general, I wholehearted support the freedom of speech, and if it were any other case, I would agree with the EFF statement here. However, knowing how the sausages are made, I am reluctantly agreeing with the ban, at least for now. People underestimate how powerful these tools can be. Based on simple, readily available "anonymous" data, we can already impute your demographics data -- age, gender, family relations, occupation, income, etc -- using a decade-old ML techniques. In some cases, we can detect which stage of your emotional journey you are in and nudge you towards our target state. What surprised me about Cambridge Analytica was its ineffectiveness, at least as reported. There are plenty of teams out there that use these techniques to greatly further their gains, whatever those may be. In Primakov doctrine, information warfare through sowing discontent and/or eroding psychological well-being is very much real and actualizable. I am not claiming that a foreign government is currently single-handedly controlling TikTok to brainwash the American youth; we do not have conclusive proof of that. However, the fact that such a tool is in a foreign country's arsenal is itself a massive danger to America's national security.

fulafel 2y ago
> the fact that such a tool is in a foreign country's arsenal is itself a massive danger to America's national security This implies people outside the US should relate the same way to Meta, X, etc. (Which seems fine to me, just pointing it out)
- quanto 2y ago
  yes, and they do. Even the US allies in Europe don't completely trust the US with their citizens data, hence the on-shore data requirements. This is despite the US is footing the bill for Ukraine and, by extension, defending Europe right now.
  - fulafel 2y ago
    Facebook and X blocking mostly happens in authoritarian nations, most places are more hands-off so far. A lot of climate change inaction propaganda for example comes from these platforms and is aligned with the new US presidency and Musk agenda, which is a bigger national security threat than anything in China-US relations or the Ukraine events.
  - herbst 2y ago
    > This is despite the US is footing the bill for Ukraine and, by extension, defending Europe right now. Things like this is exactly why we don't trust US media and data management. This is only just enough close to the truth so it doesn't sound absolutely absurd but still is so far from it.
  - Etheryte 2y ago
    European nations have provided more aid to Ukraine in total in both absolute and relative terms than the US. Hopefully the irony isn't lost on you when we're talking about controlling the narrative here.
    - bdangubic 2y ago
      this is what happens when people (in the USA) largely get their information from the TikTok :)
    - mantas 2y ago
      More aid in general - yes. But in the battlefield US was much bigger part. While non-lethal aid is important too, without lethal aid there may be no need for non-lethal support anymore. And even talking about lethal aid, some European countries loved to play the numbers (hi Estonia).
    - quanto 2y ago
      The Ukraine comment is supposed to be a casual quip, but I suppose it struck a cord with folks here. I am happy to be corrected, but I do see in the data the US as the single largest donor by far on the battlefield. https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/ https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-s...
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
  Why? The US is not an adversary to most. But if they did, sure, it's their country.
jim-jim-jim 2y ago
I detect an undercurrent of pride that drives you to ascribe undue agency to your work. "Brainwashing" isn't real. Bleak material circumstances sow division, not memes. Oversocialized urban professionals have only pushed this narrative because media is an abstract low-friction environment where they can pretend to still exert control and avoid ever addressing real problems. A "national security risk" is only a problem for the national security apparatus itself—not actual Americans. Kids don't want to die for their government because its failures have already shaped so much of their personal lives. It's evident in their rents, their student/medical bills, and the character of their neighborhoods. It's rather insulting to say shifty Chinamen are tricking them in all this.
- Cyph0n 2y ago
  First, it is much easier to blame everything on a boogeyman than to invest actual effort in improving the lives of Americans and investing in their education. Tale as old as time. Second, the US realizes that it cannot reliably manufacture consent if its citizens are not tuned in to the information sources that it can influence.
- pas 2y ago
  There's no need to demonize people, soulless systems will do just fine. Game theory is pushing continental powers against maritime ones. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcVSgYz5SJ8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcVSgYz5SJ8
Eextra953 2y ago
Where does one learn more about these topics? I've been interested in learning just how these apps influence people and would like to learn more.
eviks 2y ago
> People underestimate how powerful these tools can be. It's rather you're overestimating it (no wonder the ineffectiveness of CA was a surprise to you). It's such a low-power tool that it couldn't even be used to avoid its ban. > In some cases In some cases you don't need any of the ML techniques to do that. But at any rate, that's an irrelevant scale when it comes to "massive danger"

by quanto 2y ago

fulafel 2y ago

> the fact that such a tool is in a foreign country's arsenal is itself a massive danger to America's national security This implies people outside the US should relate the same way to Meta, X, etc. (Which seems fine to me, just pointing it out)

quanto 2y ago
yes, and they do. Even the US allies in Europe don't completely trust the US with their citizens data, hence the on-shore data requirements. This is despite the US is footing the bill for Ukraine and, by extension, defending Europe right now.
- fulafel 2y ago
  Facebook and X blocking mostly happens in authoritarian nations, most places are more hands-off so far. A lot of climate change inaction propaganda for example comes from these platforms and is aligned with the new US presidency and Musk agenda, which is a bigger national security threat than anything in China-US relations or the Ukraine events.
- herbst 2y ago
  > This is despite the US is footing the bill for Ukraine and, by extension, defending Europe right now. Things like this is exactly why we don't trust US media and data management. This is only just enough close to the truth so it doesn't sound absolutely absurd but still is so far from it.
- Etheryte 2y ago
  European nations have provided more aid to Ukraine in total in both absolute and relative terms than the US. Hopefully the irony isn't lost on you when we're talking about controlling the narrative here.
  - bdangubic 2y ago
    this is what happens when people (in the USA) largely get their information from the TikTok :)
  - mantas 2y ago
    More aid in general - yes. But in the battlefield US was much bigger part. While non-lethal aid is important too, without lethal aid there may be no need for non-lethal support anymore. And even talking about lethal aid, some European countries loved to play the numbers (hi Estonia).
  - quanto 2y ago
    The Ukraine comment is supposed to be a casual quip, but I suppose it struck a cord with folks here. I am happy to be corrected, but I do see in the data the US as the single largest donor by far on the battlefield. https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/ https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-s...
2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
Why? The US is not an adversary to most. But if they did, sure, it's their country.

jim-jim-jim 2y ago

I detect an undercurrent of pride that drives you to ascribe undue agency to your work. "Brainwashing" isn't real. Bleak material circumstances sow division, not memes. Oversocialized urban professionals have only pushed this narrative because media is an abstract low-friction environment where they can pretend to still exert control and avoid ever addressing real problems. A "national security risk" is only a problem for the national security apparatus itself—not actual Americans. Kids don't want to die for their government because its failures have already shaped so much of their personal lives. It's evident in their rents, their student/medical bills, and the character of their neighborhoods. It's rather insulting to say shifty Chinamen are tricking them in all this.

Cyph0n 2y ago
First, it is much easier to blame everything on a boogeyman than to invest actual effort in improving the lives of Americans and investing in their education. Tale as old as time. Second, the US realizes that it cannot reliably manufacture consent if its citizens are not tuned in to the information sources that it can influence.
pas 2y ago
There's no need to demonize people, soulless systems will do just fine. Game theory is pushing continental powers against maritime ones. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcVSgYz5SJ8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcVSgYz5SJ8

Eextra953 2y ago

Where does one learn more about these topics? I've been interested in learning just how these apps influence people and would like to learn more.

eviks 2y ago

> People underestimate how powerful these tools can be. It's rather you're overestimating it (no wonder the ineffectiveness of CA was a surprise to you). It's such a low-power tool that it couldn't even be used to avoid its ban. > In some cases In some cases you don't need any of the ML techniques to do that. But at any rate, that's an irrelevant scale when it comes to "massive danger"