Congresswoman to Google CEO: Why when I search ‘idiot’ do I get pictures of Trump? Claims conspiracy.

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
This thread has degenerated to a name calling contest, so I'm going to attempt to get some useful conversation going again before I just ignore this whole thread, and here is something actually worth talking about.

This is a problem, and honestly I have no idea what to do about it. Social media has become an important part of American (and really world) culture. It kind of depends on the ability for people to post about the things they are thinking about, which means we can't really heavily regulate content without killing what makes social media work. There is just not many ways to filter out the real content from propaganda, because propaganda works by getting normal people to repeat it. Simply put propaganda when well done is real content for social media, and I for one don't want what would end up amounting to a 'thought police' that tells us what we can and can't talk about, because that is going to get corrupted almost instantly.

Holding social media responsible after the fact seems wrong as well when we can't even come up with some way that they could have prevented it. So, what do we do? Any ideas?
C-suite executives get paid to mitigate risk and face the consequences when they fail to do so. You can’t release products into the wild with inherent flaws and hope for the best later. Some companies are able to self regulate. The government steps in when they arrogantly refuse to do so to the detriment of society. Also, there is enough evidence to suggest that some of these platforms had an inclination as to what was happening and chose not to.

While investigations may be reactive, it sets precedence and tone. Furthermore, until you take the time to evaluate where the chain broke, how can you regulate the construction of a new one?
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
C-suite executives get paid to mitigate risk and face the consequences when they fail to do so. You can’t release products into the wild with inherent flaws and hope for the best later. Some companies are able to self regulate. The government steps in when they arrogantly refuse to do so to the detriment of society. Also, there is enough evidence to suggest that some of these platforms had an inclination as to what was happening and chose not to.

While investigations may be reactive, it sets precedence and tone. Furthermore, until you take the time to evaluate where the chain broke, how can you regulate the construction of a new one?

Yeh, blame everybody but the actual perps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: greatnoob

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
23,326
10,230
136
Yes I am aware of that but are you self aware enough to realize that it is a result of your conditioned hatred of liberals? Could you ever realize that is why you demand perfection from Democrats before you will stop calling them evil?
He can't change until he gets the bothsides stick out of his ass.
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,202
4,401
136
C-suite executives get paid to mitigate risk and face the consequences when they fail to do so. You can’t release products into the wild with inherent flaws and hope for the best later. Some companies are able to self regulate. The government steps in when they arrogantly refuse to do so to the detriment of society. Also, there is enough evidence to suggest that some of these platforms had an inclination as to what was happening and chose not to.

While investigations may be reactive, it sets precedence and tone. Furthermore, until you take the time to evaluate where the chain broke, how can you regulate the construction of a new one?

That gives us no answers. You are just looking for who to blame. We can work blame out later, the question at hand should be how do we fix it?
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
That gives us no answers. You are just looking for who to blame. We can work blame out later, the question at hand should be how do we fix it?
Accountability is part of the fix.

This assumes we are both looking to solve the same problem. As I see this as a mix of multiple problems, the fix is:

Term limits and campaign finance reform to prevent politicians from becoming beholden to corporate interests, but this is not unique to tech.

Investments in technology and security to keep social media “clean”,

Incentives, some regulatory some punitive, to motivate behaviors and investments in those technologies.

I could also see the formation of a federal task force or agency to better address the regulation of technology. The current agencies seem ill equipped to do so as their models are around radio, television, telecommunications and cable.

Imagine if we could go back to the dawn of the industrial engage and balance its growth with the creation of the EPA at a time when it could have been more proactive.

What is currently happening in social media is simply a different form of pollution.
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,202
4,401
136
Accountability is part of the fix.

I agree, but the problem is that before we can hold them accountable we have to have a clear idea on what they should have done differently.

Term limits and campaign finance reform to prevent politicians from becoming beholden to corporate interests, but this is not unique to tech.

This, once again, is about assigning blame. Sure there are politicians to blame, and there are things we can do to prevent that, but it does not address the problem we are talking about, how to keep social media from being used as a propaganda tool against us. This will perhaps help the related issue of minimizing the harm that the propaganda can do by reducing the pool of corruptible politicians, so it is worth doing.

Investments in technology and security to keep social media “clean”,

This is a wave my magic wand solution. It is just rephrasing the problem to look like a solution. How do we keep social media 'clean'? What does 'clean' even mean for social media? What sort of technologies would help?

Incentives, some regulatory some punitive, to motivate behaviors and investments in those technologies.

This is getting closer, but it still dodges around the main question, what behaviors and investments do we want to motivate? How do we tell the difference between propaganda and political commentary?
That is the real problem here. how do we tell the difference between the two with out breaking some of the very fundamental concepts of our democracy?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
In the case I mentioned, the executives are arguably perps as well.

That's ridiculous. They got played as much as any Trump voter. The Russians exploited their platforms in a whole new & extremely imaginative way, as did Trump & the GOP. It was brilliant, audacious & incredibly effective. I'll bet you still believe in "Crooked Hillary!"
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
That's ridiculous. They got played as much as any Trump voter. The Russians exploited their platforms in a whole new & extremely imaginative way, as did Trump & the GOP. It was brilliant, audacious & incredibly effective. I'll bet you still believe in "Crooked Hillary!"
I have come to accept it was her turn and that we will never know a more inspired and qualified candidate ever again.

Nobody got played.
 
Last edited:

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
I agree, but the problem is that before we can hold them accountable we have to have a clear idea on what they should have done differently.

This, once again, is about assigning blame. Sure there are politicians to blame, and there are things we can do to prevent that, but it does not address the problem we are talking about, how to keep social media from being used as a propaganda tool against us. This will perhaps help the related issue of minimizing the harm that the propaganda can do by reducing the pool of corruptible politicians, so it is worth doing.

This is a wave my magic wand solution. It is just rephrasing the problem to look like a solution. How do we keep social media 'clean'? What does 'clean' even mean for social media? What sort of technologies would help?

This is getting closer, but it still dodges around the main question, what behaviors and investments do we want to motivate? How do we tell the difference between propaganda and political commentary?
That is the real problem here. how do we tell the difference between the two with out breaking some of the very fundamental concepts of our democracy?
We could start by filtering out or otherwise censoring that which is fundamentally flawed and easily refutable. We could start by reducing the amount of noise in the system simply by filtering the content that is clearly of malicious intent...a determination based on origin, content or other established patterns.

Will their be free speech considerations? Absolutely. That’s why we have advocacy groups and the judiary to keep the whole thing in check.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
We could start by filtering out or otherwise censoring that which is fundamentally flawed and easily refutable. We could start by reducing the amount of noise in the system simply by filtering the content that is clearly of malicious intent...a determination based on origin, content or other established patterns.

Will their be free speech considerations? Absolutely. That’s why we have advocacy groups and the judiary to keep the whole thing in check.

Yeh, we should filter out the GOP & Fox entirely but that won't happen. We need to get our fellow Americans to reconsider a lot of what they believe to be true about the rest of us & what we need to do to maintain a free & democratic society & govt. We need to set that above winning any particular battle.

We need to understand that the GOP has repudiated the principles of democracy & reject them on that basis alone, regardless of the issues. They would be tyrants if we let them.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
You never pass up an opportunity to concern troll Democrats, that's for sure.
How horrible! That’s odd, because on a daily basis, notable right wing publications like the NYT, WAPO, Slate and others concern troll the Democrats over numerous topics. They also do the same for the GOP. This is somehow offensive to you that criticisms of the Democrats resonate for me.

Yeh, we should filter out the GOP & Fox entirely but that won't happen. We need to get our fellow Americans to reconsider a lot of what they believe to be true about the rest of us & what we need to do to maintain a free & democratic society & govt. We need to set that above winning any particular battle.
I agree

We need to understand that the GOP has repudiated the principles of democracy & reject them on that basis alone, regardless of the issues. They would be tyrants if we let them.
I agree with this as well
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
That's ridiculous. They got played as much as any Trump voter. The Russians exploited their platforms in a whole new & extremely imaginative way, as did Trump & the GOP. It was brilliant, audacious & incredibly effective. I'll bet you still believe in "Crooked Hillary!"

Yes, poor Facebook

Delay, Deny and Deflect: How Facebook’s Leaders Fought Through Crisis

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/...tion=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

They even managed to go after Soros
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Yes, poor Facebook

Delay, Deny and Deflect: How Facebook’s Leaders Fought Through Crisis

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/technology/facebook-data-russia-election-racism.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

They even managed to go after Soros

Facebook isn't trying to hide anything at this point- watch the vid, too-

[1uote]“What is clear is that all of the messaging clearly sought to benefit the Republican Party — and specifically Donald Trump,” the report says. “Trump is mentioned most in campaigns targeting conservatives and right-wing voters, where the messaging encouraged these groups to support his campaign. The main groups that could challenge Trump were then provided messaging that sought to confuse, distract and ultimately discourage members from voting.” [/quote]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/tech...e-sweep/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7b17bdfbbcaf
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,511
29,090
146
This thread has degenerated to a name calling contest, so I'm going to attempt to get some useful conversation going again before I just ignore this whole thread, and here is something actually worth talking about.



This is a problem, and honestly I have no idea what to do about it. Social media has become an important part of American (and really world) culture. It kind of depends on the ability for people to post about the things they are thinking about, which means we can't really heavily regulate content without killing what makes social media work. There is just not many ways to filter out the real content from propaganda, because propaganda works by getting normal people to repeat it. Simply put propaganda when well done is real content for social media, and I for one don't want what would end up amounting to a 'thought police' that tells us what we can and can't talk about, because that is going to get corrupted almost instantly.

Holding social media responsible after the fact seems wrong as well when we can't even come up with some way that they could have prevented it. So, what do we do? Any ideas?

social media doesn't make your life better than it was before

you don't have a sudden complete lack of time in your life (compared to all previous generations of humans that, you know, also lived complete and very busy lives) where social media is necessary to make things easier for you.

social media is not an essential tool. in fact, social media represents the antithesis of sociability. it is, by and large, making us less approachable, less friendly towards one another.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...ndermines-democracy-siva-vaidhyanathan-review
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-harke/is-social-media-making-us_1_b_875455.html

But this goes back well before antagonist state actors grabbed the reigns of the platform to grab our brains and use it against us--the model was always thus. It is the inevitable consequence of such a platform, and I still remain befuddled how billions of presumably thinking adult humans don't see this. Obviously, I'm wrong because I think differently than those billions....or maybe at least in this one thing, I am one of those very few that is actually thinking?

so, my answer is the obvious: delete that shit. get your face out of your phone. live your life while you are actually still breathing; not some false assumption that digital preservation of a fleeting image is somehow better than actually experiencing that moment or place when you are actually there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,202
4,401
136
social media doesn't make your life better than it was before
That matters a on your definitions of somethings. There was definitely a period in my life when social media made my life a whole lot better.

social media is not an essential tool.

I agree, Anandtech is really the only social media I use, if it can really be called social media (and I am not sure it can, see below.)

in fact, social media represents the antithesis of sociability.

This I disagree with. This is only true if you define society as fundamentally a property of being physical close to other people. If you define socializing as sharing moments in real time social media does a fantastic job of letting us socialize.

live your life while you are actually still breathing; not some false assumption that digital preservation of a fleeting image is somehow better than actually experiencing that moment or place when you are actually there.

I agree, but it is worth pointing out that to socialize is more than to just be in a place with other people, it is to connect with those people and sharing in the moment with them. That is what social media, when used right, can do very effectively.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zinfamous

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,511
29,090
146
socialize: you want socializing to mean something like "sharing things," but you ignore the tools and functions and ways that humans actually socialize (you know, what the word actually means)--how we communicate and actually share experiences.

This is never done online. rarely over the phone. Never. We didn't evolve that way. 20 years of this nerd shit simply can't compete with 3+ million years of dedicated, tested, refined evolution. Don't even fucking try with this bullshit.

Humans are meant to be in the presence of humans when they talk--period., End of fucking story. This is how we learn. This is how we communicate. Your face and your body are doing things that you barely understand, every second you are talking to someone, and absorbing all of that other communication from the other person. All of those tools.

This will never happen in a digital medium such as this. It simply won't.

10-20 years of our generation growing up without this garbage, still communicating with humans as we more or less evolved to do, is completely incomparable to our children, and their bullshit little screens. The prospects really are mind-boggling. Parents have to "Schedule" kids to meet up and "play." I don't even understand this paradigm. Adult humans have convinced themselves that they don't have time to be humans, raise their kids...because the little screens tell them that other adult humans are doing other things that demand their time.

This horseshit needs to end.

We think this country has an opioid-addiction problem right now...lol. This fucking world has a digital screen addiction pandemic right now.
 
Last edited:
Mar 11, 2004
23,030
5,495
146
social media doesn't make your life better than it was before

you don't have a sudden complete lack of time in your life (compared to all previous generations of humans that, you know, also lived complete and very busy lives) where social media is necessary to make things easier for you.

social media is not an essential tool. in fact, social media represents the antithesis of sociability. it is, by and large, making us less approachable, less friendly towards one another.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...ndermines-democracy-siva-vaidhyanathan-review
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-harke/is-social-media-making-us_1_b_875455.html

But this goes back well before antagonist state actors grabbed the reigns of the platform to grab our brains and use it against us--the model was always thus. It is the inevitable consequence of such a platform, and I still remain befuddled how billions of presumably thinking adult humans don't see this. Obviously, I'm wrong because I think differently than those billions....or maybe at least in this one thing, I am one of those very few that is actually thinking?

so, my answer is the obvious: delete that shit. get your face out of your phone. live your life while you are actually still breathing; not some false assumption that digital preservation of a fleeting image is somehow better than actually experiencing that moment or place when you are actually there.

Its amusing watching you become an old man and descend into "old man yell's at cloud" mentality.

Like with just about everything else, social media isn't wholly good. But its not the end of humanity like some of you people try to declare. They said the same shit about video games. They said the same shit about movies, music, and just about everything else. Do you not even see how similar your argument is to what crazy religious conservatives say about shit like porn and other stuff (that somehow hasn't destroyed humankind yet)? Your argument isn't different from someone decrying that radio helped Hitler spread his message. If I remember right, the guy that invented the speakerphone (basically like the the PA system like you'd find in stadiums and the like) was supposedly devastated by the fact that his invention helped Hitler. That's a bit absurd, don't you think? Its not the format that is the problem, its the specific people that use it for nefarious means.

Are there problems with social media? Absolutely. Would I shed a tear if all the companies running social media platforms went out of business? Nope. But, its not like people only fell for bullshit once social media got here. Its not like the white supremacists and Nazis weren't there the entire time. We've just been made hyper aware of people's inner feelings.

The funniest part though is that if humans had just become tuned out zombies like TV was supposed to make everyone, that we wouldn't have this problem because they'd not have bothered to get up and vote for Turmp.

We're just seeing that people are the same as they ever were, susceptible to being manipulated quite easily.