razorpit

dysamoria said:

fahlman said:

Facebook is a medium to express oneself. If that expression is anger, it is not Facebook's fault. What she is suggesting is corporate censorship. She wants to pass final judgement over what someone says based on whether she agrees with it. Heck, I do not agree with a lot of stuff I read on Facebook. It is trash. But I am smart enough to separate the wheat from the chaff. It's a slippery slope. Not one I am willing to jump on.

1. Censorship happens all the time. Look at the article itself. The word “pissed” is censored. Anyone complaining about that? I think that’s infantilizing the audience, personally. It’s AI’s right to censor whatever they want, though, because freedom of speech is irrelevant unless we are talking about speech being oppressed by government.

2. Joanna Hoffman said nothing about wanting to be the party passing judgement over what anyone says. Perhaps you’re projecting a preoccupation with authoritarianism, because it’s not present in the article.

3. Most people are not equipped with enough critical thinking skills (nor time, or experience doing research for quality info) to “separate the wheat from the chaff” as you put it. We need far better average education for starters. While we are failing to enact those standards, we need a stopgap for regulating garbage info, and, more specifically, compelling companies to not use it as bait to sell advertising spots.

The whole reason regulation exists is because of cause & effect: abuse happens, and then society deems it important enough to instill regulation to protect itself from more of said abuse. Child labor laws aren’t authoritarianism. Banning the use of myths and lies as bait for advertising is a reasonable response to the harm it does. (HOW to ban it isn’t something I’m going to attempt to investigate here)

You cannot run a society on the notion of zero compulsion until you have created a society of rational and logical beings... and that’s nowhere near to even being on the horizon.

4. “The slippery slope” is a logical fallacy used to push FUD, not logical reasoning. Try a different approach.

GeorgeBMac said:

razorpit said:

GeorgeBMac said:

It is not ONLY social media peddling fear and anger to advance their cause and self interest....

While FB & others have learned to profit from it, thugs (both paid and radicalized fools) patrol it looking to attack anything and anybody who does not toe the line they set.   

We learned from Cambridge Analytica and the Internet Research Agency how social media can be used by professional propagandists to support and propagate a political agenda.  And, since then, the political propagandists have become even more proficient at using it to manipulate public opinion.  They are at war and use multiple fronts and means on social media to advance their agenda.  FB and Social media are now just one of those fronts.

Meanwhile, the founder of FB says he can't stand what FB has become -- but will do nothing to rein it in.  He knows if he does, he will be attacked -- on FB.

Haven’t spent much time on FB lately, but if they are allowing all discussion than that’s a good thing. What you consider news I might consider propaganda and vice-versa. Twitter flat out shuts you down if you don’t agree with their editorial view. Their definition of what’s allowable and what isn’t is a joke.

My mind is always open to new information. It might be right, it might be wrong. It’s up to me to process the information given to me based upon everything that preceded it. Problem today is everybody wants the headline without the story or facts to back it up. Very few are capable of putting any context in to events that happened yesterday let alone 150 years ago.

You are conflating reporting with propaganda and facts with "alternative facts" to the point where truth no longer matters.

We learned in 2016 how that can be used by professional propagandists to effectively undermine our elections and democracy.  And, with social media they can target that propaganda with pinpoint accuracy to stir doubt, confusion, suspicion, fear, hatred and anger in groups and sub-groups:  "White, working class males concerned about....".

... Our enemies attacked our country with it once.   We know they are doing it again this election.  Supporting them is supporting an attack on our country and our democracy.

There are some naive innocents who believe it is just innocuous sharing of opinions.

There are some radicalized nuts who use it to further their agendas

... They both call it:   "Just sharing opinions" and other means of normalizing and minimizing it.

GeorgeBMac said:

It is not ONLY social media peddling fear and anger to advance their cause and self interest....

While FB & others have learned to profit from it, thugs (both paid and radicalized fools) patrol it looking to attack anything and anybody who does not toe the line they set.   

We learned from Cambridge Analytica and the Internet Research Agency how social media can be used by professional propagandists to support and propagate a political agenda.  And, since then, the political propagandists have become even more proficient at using it to manipulate public opinion.  They are at war and use multiple fronts and means on social media to advance their agenda.  FB and Social media are now just one of those fronts.

Meanwhile, the founder of FB says he can't stand what FB has become -- but will do nothing to rein it in.  He knows if he does, he will be attacked -- on FB.

seanismorris said:

Still requires WiFi.  Looks like my updates will be delayed anyways...

I used over 75GBs last month on my iPad, but I’m prevented from downloading Apple’s piddling little updates.