4 ms·

Social media has influenced at least one Presidential Election and the Brexit Campaign to the point where educated adults were manipulated into voting against t

Social media has influenced at least one Presidential Election and the Brexit Campaign to the point where educated adults were manipulated into voting against their own interests. If educated adults in possession of their full critical faculties can be hoodwinked to this extent, then surely it behooves us as a society to put in some consensus based guardrails to protect our most vulnerable. This is not an attempt to censor or otherwise diminish anyone's intellectual or cultural journey, but simply an acknowledgement of the tragedy of the (media) commons. It's the equivalent of going to see the Mona Lisa, and being forced to dodge some weirdo running around the Louvre in a knock-off Spiderman costume, screaming about men in women's sports.

MyMemoryfails 20d ago
We have laws to combat the disinformation, its just we just stopped enforcing it because it was the political's best interests. Like we actually have fined (X for 120M). So solution is gate it behind age? It doesnt fix disinformation problem, i refuse to belive that they cant just run transcription via AI and spot disinformation to delete. If EU thinks AI is good enough to invade our privacy via chat control. Why not use this to combat disinformation? or even easier just find repeating messages and block that (since lots campaigns work like this) Theres so many solutions before having to resort age gate, the worst is. Putting it behind gate doesnt protect from people who can vote, so what they are even trying fix there? People also seem forget, on household, we share devices with children. So user can share +18 flag easy as parents are lending tablet for them play games. Im referring the OS level age verification system which is happening around US.
mdp2021 20d ago
> educated adults were manipulated Same as "educated adults went to the library, picked the loudest books and were manipulated". They must have not been educated well enough then. > guardrails to protect our most vulnerable Whatever you do, you have to do it properly. Of course guardrails that are defeatist and that impact on fundamental rights are unacceptable. > It's the equivalent of going to see the Mona Lisa Not really: visit the room where the Mona Lisa is and avoid the unwanted rooms. It is not sensible to impede access to the Mona Lisa because of the "knockoff spiderman" exhibits and performers. > Social media has influenced YouTube is the place where the Intellectuals debating critical matters are supposed to be found.
- piltdownman 19d ago
  > Whatever you do, you have to do it properly. Of course guardrails that are defeatist and that impact on fundamental rights are unacceptable. Agreed. > Not really: visit the room where the Mona Lisa is and avoid the unwanted rooms. It is not sensible to impede access to the Mona Lisa because of the "knockoff spiderman" exhibits and performers. The problem is the access is already impeded - the unsolicited actor in this case manifesting via UI/UX dark patterns, SEO, keyword manipulation, targeted advertising and so forth.
  - mdp2021 18d ago
    > access is already Hindered, maybe, not "impeded". With proficiency I have little issue in getting from YouTube what I want. Instead: if they block access to the learners, the learners will grow wasted; if they ask for an ID or equivalent, proper people will desert it.
rdm_blackhole 20d ago
> Social media has influenced at least one Presidential Election and the Brexit Campaign to the point where educated adults were manipulated into voting against their own interests. The people voted wrong so we must censor or put a gate in front of social media. Next year, we'll simply retire voting entirely because we just can't trust people to make the right choice. This is democracy TM. > If educated adults in possession of their full critical faculties can be hoodwinked to this extent Of course if I asked you who you voted for or why you would probably say that you made the right choice based on solid evidence but the people who did not vote like you, no way, they were just hoodwinked or tricked. Condescending much? > This is not an attempt to censor or otherwise diminish anyone's intellectual or cultural journey Of course it is, you are simply justifying the censorship because it suits your purpose at this present time. Protecting kids, stopping terrorism and keeping the population safe are always the same reasons given by governments on this planet to reduce the civil liberties of the population. Today it's selfies and government ID to view social media and if you have something against that then maybe you are a terrorist or a child molester, tomorrow we''ll ask for the full access to your emails, text messages, browser history because we just can't trust that you are not either doing or planning something nefarious. Slippery slope all the way but no worries, its for the kids.
- piltdownman 19d ago
  > The people voted wrong so we must censor or put a gate in front of social media. Next year, we'll simply retire voting entirely because we just can't trust people to make the right choice. This is democracy TM. You must be confused. I'm referring to the 13 Russian indicted nationals and three Russian entities charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States in connection with the 2016 United States national elections; specifically their illegal use of social media "to sow political discord, including actions that supported the presidential candidacy of Donald Trump and disparaged his opponent, Hillary Clinton." https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-troll-farm-13-suspects-indicted-for-interference-in-us-election/2018/02/16/2504de5e-1342-11e8-9570-29c9830535e5_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russi... This is of course an aside from the other electoral interference scandal that resulted in the liquidation of Cambridge Analytica and a $5 billion fine for Facebook. > Of course if I asked you who you voted for or why you would probably say that you made the right choice based on solid evidence but the people who did not vote like you, no way, they were just hoodwinked or tricked. Condescending much? I'm not an American Citizen so can't vote, but that's irrelevant to the overall point regarding political literacy and comprehension amongst the greater American public. At a binary level, 40% of Americans still do not believe that Joe Biden legitimately won the 2020 presidential election. This is not a safe fundamental basis from which to perpetuate an able democracy. More worryingly, roughly 23% of U.S. adults fully or mostly agree with core QAnon tenets, such as the idea that a secret group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles controls the government and media. As Steve Bannon ably noted it was the press, rather than Democrats, that represented Trump's primary adversary and "the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit." As such, it would be deeply condescending, not to mention disingenuous, to not actively decry the state of media literacy in the American populace and the extent of social media disinformation they are subjected to. >Of course it is, you are simply justifying the censorship because it suits your purpose at this present time. Protecting kids, stopping terrorism and keeping the population safe are always the same reasons given by governments on this planet to reduce the civil liberties of the population. I really am not, as evident from my post-history. If anything I'm a free-speech absolutist in the Voltarian sense, and I have many issues with the EU on the extent and scope of this and many of their other societal initiatives. I can support the ethos and intent of such legislation without necessarily endorsing their mechanism of operation. Put simply, I feel there is a moral and ethical necessity to ensure that the vulnerable aren't taken advantage of en masse to the detriment of their wellbeing. The world can't afford another Pizzagate scenario, particularly after the events of Jan 8th. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory https://www.foxnews.com/us/pizzagate-gunman-refuses-to-dismiss-online-conspiracy-theory-claims-about-child-sex-ring https://www.foxnews.com/us/pizzagate-gunman-refuses-to-dismi... I have no truck with moral hand-wringing masquerading as ethics. I stand by the quote often attributed to Twayne, "Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it". I simply don't conflate safeguarding the vulnerable with restricting an adult's rights, but at some point every child needs to take their parents car keys away before they inevitably cause a serious incident.

MyMemoryfails 20d ago

We have laws to combat the disinformation, its just we just stopped enforcing it because it was the political's best interests. Like we actually have fined (X for 120M). So solution is gate it behind age? It doesnt fix disinformation problem, i refuse to belive that they cant just run transcription via AI and spot disinformation to delete. If EU thinks AI is good enough to invade our privacy via chat control. Why not use this to combat disinformation? or even easier just find repeating messages and block that (since lots campaigns work like this) Theres so many solutions before having to resort age gate, the worst is. Putting it behind gate doesnt protect from people who can vote, so what they are even trying fix there? People also seem forget, on household, we share devices with children. So user can share +18 flag easy as parents are lending tablet for them play games. Im referring the OS level age verification system which is happening around US.

mdp2021 20d ago

> educated adults were manipulated Same as "educated adults went to the library, picked the loudest books and were manipulated". They must have not been educated well enough then. > guardrails to protect our most vulnerable Whatever you do, you have to do it properly. Of course guardrails that are defeatist and that impact on fundamental rights are unacceptable. > It's the equivalent of going to see the Mona Lisa Not really: visit the room where the Mona Lisa is and avoid the unwanted rooms. It is not sensible to impede access to the Mona Lisa because of the "knockoff spiderman" exhibits and performers. > Social media has influenced YouTube is the place where the Intellectuals debating critical matters are supposed to be found.

piltdownman 19d ago
> Whatever you do, you have to do it properly. Of course guardrails that are defeatist and that impact on fundamental rights are unacceptable. Agreed. > Not really: visit the room where the Mona Lisa is and avoid the unwanted rooms. It is not sensible to impede access to the Mona Lisa because of the "knockoff spiderman" exhibits and performers. The problem is the access is already impeded - the unsolicited actor in this case manifesting via UI/UX dark patterns, SEO, keyword manipulation, targeted advertising and so forth.
- mdp2021 18d ago
  > access is already Hindered, maybe, not "impeded". With proficiency I have little issue in getting from YouTube what I want. Instead: if they block access to the learners, the learners will grow wasted; if they ask for an ID or equivalent, proper people will desert it.

rdm_blackhole 20d ago

> Social media has influenced at least one Presidential Election and the Brexit Campaign to the point where educated adults were manipulated into voting against their own interests. The people voted wrong so we must censor or put a gate in front of social media. Next year, we'll simply retire voting entirely because we just can't trust people to make the right choice. This is democracy TM. > If educated adults in possession of their full critical faculties can be hoodwinked to this extent Of course if I asked you who you voted for or why you would probably say that you made the right choice based on solid evidence but the people who did not vote like you, no way, they were just hoodwinked or tricked. Condescending much? > This is not an attempt to censor or otherwise diminish anyone's intellectual or cultural journey Of course it is, you are simply justifying the censorship because it suits your purpose at this present time. Protecting kids, stopping terrorism and keeping the population safe are always the same reasons given by governments on this planet to reduce the civil liberties of the population. Today it's selfies and government ID to view social media and if you have something against that then maybe you are a terrorist or a child molester, tomorrow we''ll ask for the full access to your emails, text messages, browser history because we just can't trust that you are not either doing or planning something nefarious. Slippery slope all the way but no worries, its for the kids.

piltdownman 19d ago
> The people voted wrong so we must censor or put a gate in front of social media. Next year, we'll simply retire voting entirely because we just can't trust people to make the right choice. This is democracy TM. You must be confused. I'm referring to the 13 Russian indicted nationals and three Russian entities charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States in connection with the 2016 United States national elections; specifically their illegal use of social media "to sow political discord, including actions that supported the presidential candidacy of Donald Trump and disparaged his opponent, Hillary Clinton." https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-troll-farm-13-suspects-indicted-for-interference-in-us-election/2018/02/16/2504de5e-1342-11e8-9570-29c9830535e5_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russi... This is of course an aside from the other electoral interference scandal that resulted in the liquidation of Cambridge Analytica and a $5 billion fine for Facebook. > Of course if I asked you who you voted for or why you would probably say that you made the right choice based on solid evidence but the people who did not vote like you, no way, they were just hoodwinked or tricked. Condescending much? I'm not an American Citizen so can't vote, but that's irrelevant to the overall point regarding political literacy and comprehension amongst the greater American public. At a binary level, 40% of Americans still do not believe that Joe Biden legitimately won the 2020 presidential election. This is not a safe fundamental basis from which to perpetuate an able democracy. More worryingly, roughly 23% of U.S. adults fully or mostly agree with core QAnon tenets, such as the idea that a secret group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles controls the government and media. As Steve Bannon ably noted it was the press, rather than Democrats, that represented Trump's primary adversary and "the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit." As such, it would be deeply condescending, not to mention disingenuous, to not actively decry the state of media literacy in the American populace and the extent of social media disinformation they are subjected to. >Of course it is, you are simply justifying the censorship because it suits your purpose at this present time. Protecting kids, stopping terrorism and keeping the population safe are always the same reasons given by governments on this planet to reduce the civil liberties of the population. I really am not, as evident from my post-history. If anything I'm a free-speech absolutist in the Voltarian sense, and I have many issues with the EU on the extent and scope of this and many of their other societal initiatives. I can support the ethos and intent of such legislation without necessarily endorsing their mechanism of operation. Put simply, I feel there is a moral and ethical necessity to ensure that the vulnerable aren't taken advantage of en masse to the detriment of their wellbeing. The world can't afford another Pizzagate scenario, particularly after the events of Jan 8th. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory https://www.foxnews.com/us/pizzagate-gunman-refuses-to-dismiss-online-conspiracy-theory-claims-about-child-sex-ring https://www.foxnews.com/us/pizzagate-gunman-refuses-to-dismi... I have no truck with moral hand-wringing masquerading as ethics. I stand by the quote often attributed to Twayne, "Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it". I simply don't conflate safeguarding the vulnerable with restricting an adult's rights, but at some point every child needs to take their parents car keys away before they inevitably cause a serious incident.