How Silicon Valley broke democracy

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Oh noes, someone committed multiple felonies and we now have no way to enforce our laws because there are now electronic ways of subverting such laws is more like it.

You continue to miss the point.

No I get your “point” but don’t care. If progressives can’t be more persuasive than some Russian trolls then you deserve to lose elections.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,189
14,114
136
No I get your “point” but don’t care. If progressives can’t be more persuasive than some Russian trolls then you deserve to lose elections.

The proponents of remain didn't even know about the ads, because they were narrowly targeted at people who had expressed fear or anger toward Muslims on Facebook. Hence, they didn't have much opportunity to respond to the ads while they were being run.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
The proponents of remain didn't even know about the ads, because they were narrowly targeted at people who had expressed fear or anger toward Muslims on Facebook. Hence, they didn't have much opportunity to respond to the ads while they were being run.

Still don’t care. Trying to be the gatekeepers of information to people so you can influence their votes is both a fools errand and undemocratic itself. The reason those ads were effective is that unlike you they spoke to the hidden will of the voters which you were trying to suppress as “racist.” Attempting to cast political positions you dislike as being verboten to speak aloud doesn’t make them go away.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,993
13,519
136
No I get your “point” but don’t care. If progressives can’t be more persuasive than some Russian trolls then you deserve to lose elections.

Then you truly dont fucking get it ... what you are advocating is a race to the bottom, install and overflow your target audience with fear thus overshadowing any real policy discussion. Are your target audience disagreeing with the tax cuts? Overflow them with lies about murder muslims with no accountability cause Facebook wont tell on you.
Thats disgusting.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,993
13,519
136
Still don’t care. Trying to be the gatekeepers of information to people so you can influence their votes is both a fools errand and undemocratic itself. The reason those ads were effective is that unlike you they spoke to the hidden will of the voters which you were trying to suppress as “racist.” Attempting to cast political positions you dislike as being verboten to speak aloud doesn’t make them go away.

Spitting straight up lies into faces of people with NO accountability ... is ok with you?
 

mect

Platinum Member
Jan 5, 2004
2,424
1,636
136
Still don’t care. Trying to be the gatekeepers of information to people so you can influence their votes is both a fools errand and undemocratic itself. The reason those ads were effective is that unlike you they spoke to the hidden will of the voters which you were trying to suppress as “racist.” Attempting to cast political positions you dislike as being verboten to speak aloud doesn’t make them go away.
So you are saying you oppose campaign finance laws, am I correct?
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Spitting straight up lies into faces of people with NO accountability ... is ok with you?

To counter lies like “to want to reduce immigration is racism” or the like? Sure.

A big part of the problem is that positions you are holding as “truth” are simply opinions. Ditto for what you consider “lies.”
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,993
13,519
136
To counter lies like “to want to reduce immigration is racism” or the like? Sure.

A big part of the problem is that positions you are holding as “truth” are simply opinions. Ditto for what you consider “lies.”

have you seen the ted talk?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
No I get your “point” but don’t care. If progressives can’t be more persuasive than some Russian trolls then you deserve to lose elections.

Lies can be crafted to appeal to people's hopes & fears in ways that the truth can't be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dank69

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
have you seen the ted talk?

Yes, what of it? Again if your position is flimsy enough to be overcome by Russian trolls you need to work on it harder. Not everyone comes with the same political assumptions as you when it comes to issues and you’re a fool to dismiss the different assumptions held by others.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
36,129
30,521
136
Yes, what of it? Again if your position is flimsy enough to be overcome by Russian trolls you need to work on it harder. Not everyone comes with the same political assumptions as you when it comes to issues and you’re a fool to dismiss the different assumptions held by others.
There are laws against buying votes for a reason, asshole.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
There are laws against buying votes for a reason, asshole.

Buying ads and votes are very different things. You seem to have forgotten the deplorables have opinions too and sometimes those opinions diverge from yours.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,993
13,519
136
Yes, what of it? Again if your position is flimsy enough to be overcome by Russian trolls you need to work on it harder. Not everyone comes with the same political assumptions as you when it comes to issues and you’re a fool to dismiss the different assumptions held by others.
Its one of these things where its hard to understand that we dont reach the same conclusions, that is all... When you write Russians I am thinking that it is SO much bigger than Russians.. Russia is like a foot note in this context, this is about our future as free people is what I am thinking... It rocks the fundamental building blocks of society..


edit : look at this one also

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/...-teen-earns-thousands-publishing-lies-n692451

This piece :

"
The challenge of engaging readers on social media is one familiar to most journalists. They have a formidable opponent in Dimitri and his peers; analysis by BuzzFeed after the election showed that fake news websites actually performed better than conventional press and television.

Dimitri is unequivocal about why the mainstream couldn't compete: "They're not allowed to lie."
"
 
Last edited:

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Its one of these things where its hard to understand that we dont reach the same conclusions, that is all... When you write Russians I am thinking that it is SO much bigger than Russians.. Russia is like a foot note in this context, this is about our future as free people is what I am thinking... It rocks the fundamental building blocks of society..


edit : look at this one also

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/...-teen-earns-thousands-publishing-lies-n692451

This piece :

"
The challenge of engaging readers on social media is one familiar to most journalists. They have a formidable opponent in Dimitri and his peers; analysis by BuzzFeed after the election showed that fake news websites actually performed better than conventional press and television.

Dimitri is unequivocal about why the mainstream couldn't compete: "They're not allowed to lie."
"

The "Russians" is a stand-in for any "outside influence" on elections. Instead of Russians it could be Belgians advocating that American voters support climate change initiatives. It still boils down to the same thing, the belief that you can somehow suppress information. Maybe in the 1950s would laws like this make sense, they're archaic and stupid nowadays. Passing laws against such activities is roughly akin to Trump wanting a border wall to "stop illegal immigration," it's both ineffective and in many ways counterproductive. Totalitarian regimes show you can't suppress ideas by the force of the state.
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
Case Study.
How conservative media, Fox, Sinclair, Breitbart ruined democracy.

Imagine that your enterprise is so successful that you can 1. effectivley lay out conservative propaganda in a vast network and 2. simply buy policy in form of senators and potuses.

Now reach in to your scared little heart and imagine this power shifting from shitbags like murdochs to that of suckerbags.

It wasnt right the first time around, and its still not right just cause it promises to lay waste to you alt-right-wing-cucks the second time around.


The entire 1 in 5 myth which led to a decade of hysteria and discord was started by NPR.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-media-is-making-college-rape-culture-worse

The lefts bonobo push was based on junk science to push an agenda denying human nature.
Here's how the poly push turned out from the horses mouth.
http://archive.fo/UY37w


He who controls the flow of information wields ultimate power. You want the people to be in control of that or the murdochsuckerbags?
The argument you're making here is essentially a straw man, and strongly suggests you didn't bother to watch the Ted Talk. The issue she is raising is, first, that these things happened and people should know, and also, that the UK has laws putting caps on how much you can spend on an election. The trouble is that there is no way for them to track spending on social media ad buys because people like Zuckerberg think they're outside UK jurisdiction and hence refuse to cooperate. So these social media ad buys are now a huge loophole in laws which used to be effective.

No argument for censorship is being made. What she's saying is that if they're going to create technology which can be used to spread dishonest propaganda, they can at least cooperate with legitimate criminal investigations into whether already existing election laws have been violated.


How much did russia spend again?

How much is bbc media bias, entertainment celebrity pundit etc worth?

What percentage of the official british government media was pro brexit.

Do tell, this is supposed to be fair right?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Yes, what of it? Again if your position is flimsy enough to be overcome by Russian trolls you need to work on it harder. Not everyone comes with the same political assumptions as you when it comes to issues and you’re a fool to dismiss the different assumptions held by others.

Is there some part of preying on people's emotions you refuse to acknowledge? It's easy when you're prepared to lie, difficult when telling the truth. It also needs to be understood that foreign meddling generally isn't intended to benefit the target population at all.

In the case of Brexit foreign operators paid for social media ads that violated UK law & benefited Brexiteers. Remainers had to stay within UK spending limits & didn't have foreign help. In the wake of that, social media providers refused to even identify the purchasers to UK authorities.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Then you truly dont fucking get it ... what you are advocating is a race to the bottom, install and overflow your target audience with fear thus overshadowing any real policy discussion. Are your target audience disagreeing with the tax cuts? Overflow them with lies about murder muslims with no accountability cause Facebook wont tell on you.
Thats disgusting.

The bolded has been happening my entire life. Well before personal computers, the internet, social media, and russian trolls were invented. Well maybe not Russian trolls. That goes back to 1917. I'm not that old.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cytg111

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
The "Russians" is a stand-in for any "outside influence" on elections. Instead of Russians it could be Belgians advocating that American voters support climate change initiatives. It still boils down to the same thing, the belief that you can somehow suppress information. Maybe in the 1950s would laws like this make sense, they're archaic and stupid nowadays. Passing laws against such activities is roughly akin to Trump wanting a border wall to "stop illegal immigration," it's both ineffective and in many ways counterproductive. Totalitarian regimes show you can't suppress ideas by the force of the state.

That's diversionary bullshit. The part you're deliberately missing is the deception, the posing of foreign propagandists as Americans , Brits, or whatever. You're also glossing over the proven ability of algorithm driven facebook ads to target particular demographics in ways invisible to people outside the target group. It's one thing when selling diapers or blue jeans, entirely another when it comes to politics.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,993
13,519
136
The "Russians" is a stand-in for any "outside influence" on elections. Instead of Russians it could be Belgians advocating that American voters support climate change initiatives. It still boils down to the same thing, the belief that you can somehow suppress information. Maybe in the 1950s would laws like this make sense, they're archaic and stupid nowadays. Passing laws against such activities is roughly akin to Trump wanting a border wall to "stop illegal immigration," it's both ineffective and in many ways counterproductive. Totalitarian regimes show you can't suppress ideas by the force of the state.

You dont need a stand-in though. R's or D's could do the same right now! Just might have been doing it since.....
The life you are living right now is proof that information CAN be suppressed and Putins Russia is a glorious example of how a state can suppress ideas.. and at the same time weaponize freedom of speech against its own people. Freedom of speech is one of our finest privileges.. its also one of our biggest weaknesses... exploitable.
I like the romantic idea that true information wants to be free.. Its just not true in my world.. Not without oversight, you have to be accountable for the shit you spew in the face of other people.