Yup.
Just another example where social media has weaponized our data against us to the highest bidder.
It's hard to explain to people who don't spend 10 hours a day on Twitter what this type of story does to people who don't understand computers. I'm not doubting the story but I've seen people who host podcasts have very persistent trolls accusing them of being bots. And entire trending topics be dismissed as bot manipulation because they started getting popular during business hours in Moscow. Because Putin can't comprehend night shift posting logistics I guess
Ultimately what I'm suggesting is a basic competency and critical thinking test before you can use the internet
I think that might be framing it perhaps a bit too kindly. I don't think they're supporting this (and they are) in the name of freedom as much as in the name of engagement, unfortunately for us. Even beyond easy onboarding. They know these propaganda networks exist, and they want them there.
I do think though that when it comes to individual developers (who don't matter for the purpose of culpability here imho), you're right and you do get more of the "in the name of freedom" line, but even then...I bet a subset of those espousing philosophy find it is an incredibly convenient one morally... :)
Nobody tells themselves they're burning the midnight oil for "engagement." They're doing it for freedom.
Every argument I ever had with the admins at Reddit was about impinging on the users' "freedom." "Engagement" is this nasty thing your ad rep gets to talk about. You? You're here to strike a blow for John Galt.
Always.
Yeah. Engagement needs a "governing philosophy" to keep the worker bees in line with minimal effort, and freedom is a great one.
Propaganda used to build the propaganda machine. We're getting recursive here.
The tough part for me that needs to be acknowledged is that some of these networks (well mostly Twitter) I find very useful for getting the best information from actual experts. If you are extremely proficient you can put a lot of effort into curating your follow list to build better news channels than our modern news platforms. Instead of NYT, CNN, Wall Street Journal, etc, you have a superior custom-made panel of experts who actually inform those other platforms (or write for them).
But I feel like using it productively like that is akin to making the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs, and running into an Imperial blockade if you don't.
Epipens were created to deliver atropine through a chemical warfare suit while you're busy frying on nerve gas. That they keep my daughter alive in the face of accidental peanut ingestion is a nice outcome; that their containers work awesome for holding jeweler's files and hobby knives is a long damn way from the original intent. But hey you know what? I can't use an epipen without creating a $25k ambulance ride so fuckin' hell I will absolutely use their containers to keep my jeweler's files in. At least they're doing something.
I would argue that Twitter was intended for news curation but it was designed for the bots. If you look at it, a million simple devices spewing a million simple thoughts to a million other simple devices is pretty much the fundamental use case of Twitter. Chrissy Tiegen's pithy witticisms? Afterthought.
So yeah - a lot of us can carry around epipens in case we eat a peanut. A few of us can even find something to keep our riffler files in. But the vast ecosystem exists for chemical warfare. I follow plenty of humans but my favorite accounts by far are
- normal cat pictures and
Twitter wanted to be broadcast SMS. It was for asking all your friends if they wanted to get beer at once. It got adopted for more because that same _why post that inspired tumblr got the Ruby community really excited about spewing whatever crossed their mind at the world.
Back when it was twttr you interacted with it by sending a text message to its shortcode and it relayed it. Also displaying the messages publicly on the web seemed like a privacy issue to techcrunch of all things. They really caught on by pushing it at sxsw for keeping up with other people there.
As for the Ruby thing, I didn't follow it that closely. _why coined the term tumblelog for a blog consisting of really short posts, links and images. Microblogging was the term that stuck, but tumblelog gave tumblr its name. Because _why was excited about the format and he had his weird cult of personality going the Ruby community got excited about it too. Twitter started out as a Rails application, so a lot of its early users where Ruby guys, for the same reason there were a lot of lispers on reddit early on.
I almost always close Twitter feeling worse for it. Not much different than cable news. It seems to prioritize content that elicits a reaction. My feed looks very different and less controversial if I order posts by time.
Perhaps we'll build a social immunity to this bullshit, but maybe not.
I've procured some links you'll hate. :D
It took Scientific American too many words to say: Yup, stupid people are more susceptible to fake news.
And my god, do we have a lot of stupid people. That poll cannot be right. If it's correct, America might only barely achieve herd immunity after a working vaccine is developed, due to tens of millions refusing to vaccinate.
Maybe I'll go tornado chasing today.
What, through regulation?!? Now you’re censoring my free speech and right to consume blatantly false information, which increasingly overlap with my misplaced sense of American exceptionalism!
Perhaps. Much of the world doesn’t allow for the purchase of most tissues and organs to prevent exploitation. The purchase of data could be exploitative, or done as a work-around. For example, an ISP could simply give a discount to customers that give their data.
To me, it doesn’t matter. When 50% (or whatever) of the “people” you are engaging with around a given topic do not exist and are paid propaganda channels, Something has gone wrong and “the deal” has been broken. Twitter is representing to me that these are people.