2 ms·

Do social movements _always_ have people at the top pulling the strings? Is it _never_ the case that even when you can identify thought leaders, the movement it

Do social movements _always_ have people at the top pulling the strings? Is it _never_ the case that even when you can identify thought leaders, the movement itself is organic and broadly supported?

indoordin0saur 11mo ago
Yeah, this is much more easily explained by the fact that a lot of things on the internet are damaging kids.
- mindslight 11mo ago
  Yes, and that thing is chiefly corporate social media. Which could be fixed literally overnight by parents, over a few weeks by school district policy, and over a few months with sites publishing metadata to aid client side blocking. Phones, the primary independent computing device for kids, are already locked down to the point that an owner has to jump through many (detectable and auditable) hoops to install arbitrary software. None of this requires some draconian regime where it becomes sites' own responsibilities to obtain and verify their users meatspace identities.
tokai 11mo ago
This isn't a social movement.
- everdrive 11mo ago
  Concern over accessibility of internet pornography is absolutely a social movement. I don't necessarily agree with some of what is being pushed, but there's a large constituency here.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
Larrikin 11mo ago
Internet comments aren't a social movement Everything that these laws are supposedly regulating has always been there and we have an entire generation now that grew up with it. Everyone was fine just like video games were fine, movies were fine, racy books were fine, and the printing press was fine. The Internet comments make it seem like lazy parents but it's very convenient that the solution is to ID every single person on the Internet. Facebook pushed this hard with their real name policy and then had to back off because people complained about trans people being forced to use their old names. They've been successfully demonized so now it's time to push as hard as they can. It's probably not just Facebook but it's obviously not organic.
- everdrive 11mo ago
  >Internet comments aren't a social movement This seems strictly wrong. People talk online. People get their ideas online, and share their ideas online. Internet comments _alone_ are not a social movement, but they certainly do frequently represent social movements.
  - Larrikin 11mo ago
    Musk in his tit for tat with Trump recently revealed huge numbers of the Internet comments supporting MAGA were foreign plants. He didn't reveal which accounts were bots though. All these comments supporting censorship appear mostly on platforms that would love to ID every person on their platform. Internet comments do not represent anything anymore that doesn't manifest in the actual world. They are excellent at having a few influence the many
    - everdrive 11mo ago
      I agree with you, and probably more than it sounds. But I think the point you make is still too strong a case. ie, even if the online comments are ~90% foreign influence it doesn't also follow that everything is astroturfing or that real people do not discuss issues online. To your point though, maybe we can no longer reliably tell the difference, and so it'd be better to adopt your view as a rule of thumb.

Do social movements _always_ have people at the top pulling the strings? Is it _never_ the case that even when you can identify thought leaders, the movement itself is organic and broadly supported?

indoordin0saur 11mo ago

Yeah, this is much more easily explained by the fact that a lot of things on the internet are damaging kids.

mindslight 11mo ago
Yes, and that thing is chiefly corporate social media. Which could be fixed literally overnight by parents, over a few weeks by school district policy, and over a few months with sites publishing metadata to aid client side blocking. Phones, the primary independent computing device for kids, are already locked down to the point that an owner has to jump through many (detectable and auditable) hoops to install arbitrary software. None of this requires some draconian regime where it becomes sites' own responsibilities to obtain and verify their users meatspace identities.

tokai 11mo ago

This isn't a social movement.

everdrive 11mo ago
Concern over accessibility of internet pornography is absolutely a social movement. I don't necessarily agree with some of what is being pushed, but there's a large constituency here.
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]

Larrikin 11mo ago

Internet comments aren't a social movement Everything that these laws are supposedly regulating has always been there and we have an entire generation now that grew up with it. Everyone was fine just like video games were fine, movies were fine, racy books were fine, and the printing press was fine. The Internet comments make it seem like lazy parents but it's very convenient that the solution is to ID every single person on the Internet. Facebook pushed this hard with their real name policy and then had to back off because people complained about trans people being forced to use their old names. They've been successfully demonized so now it's time to push as hard as they can. It's probably not just Facebook but it's obviously not organic.

everdrive 11mo ago
>Internet comments aren't a social movement This seems strictly wrong. People talk online. People get their ideas online, and share their ideas online. Internet comments _alone_ are not a social movement, but they certainly do frequently represent social movements.
- Larrikin 11mo ago
  Musk in his tit for tat with Trump recently revealed huge numbers of the Internet comments supporting MAGA were foreign plants. He didn't reveal which accounts were bots though. All these comments supporting censorship appear mostly on platforms that would love to ID every person on their platform. Internet comments do not represent anything anymore that doesn't manifest in the actual world. They are excellent at having a few influence the many
  - everdrive 11mo ago
    I agree with you, and probably more than it sounds. But I think the point you make is still too strong a case. ie, even if the online comments are ~90% foreign influence it doesn't also follow that everything is astroturfing or that real people do not discuss issues online. To your point though, maybe we can no longer reliably tell the difference, and so it'd be better to adopt your view as a rule of thumb.