[careinke]

I just finished watching "The Social Dilemma" on Netflix. Hopefully some of you have also watched it, because I'm curious on your take. It certainly made me look at a lot of things very differently. I wonder if we have all been programmed in our beliefs, not out of any desire to change things for the good, but merely to make us generate more money the social media companies.

Unforeseen consequence of these Algorithms, have been tribalism and the polarization of societies. Examples are given not just in the US but world wide.

Anyway, I strongly recommend watching this documentary. It could alter your current paradigm, in a short hour and a half.

Hopefully comments on this thread will be limited to the people who actually watched "The Social Dilemma." My preconceptions about the Documentary were completely off base, yours may be too.

[Plantagenet]

I'm sorry but I didn't watch "The Social Dilemma" and I don't subscribe to Netflix.

Nonetheless, the question of whether or not social media is causing an increase in political polarization and tribalism is being discussed in many places in addition to the presentation you saw on netflix.

Personally, I think its already clear that social media does have some very negative consequences and I'm amazed that anyone would question it. There have been a series of scientific studies that have already proven that social media causes increased political polarization. For instance consider this scientific study published in 2018:

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization

Personally I avoid all social media (with the exception of this website). In particular I consider TWITTER to be a tool of the devil, and anytime I read about any tweet from Trump or Biden or Pelosi or anybody, I try very hard not to pay attention to it, because the entire format of TWITTER is designed to encourage short, infuriating shots that will get people wee-wee'd up, but not present any thoughtful commentary or data to back up the Tweet. As far as I'm concerned that is dumb and I don't care about it.

Cheers!

[Ibon]

Careinke

Thanks for the recommendation. Watched that documentary tonight on Netflix with my family here at Mount Totumas. It wedges together with a post I made earlier today
here:

let-s-dig-up-dead-people-because-they-are-racist-t71520-460.html#p1458090

I mentioned in that post that we have digital fake tribalism. After seeing this documentary it seems this fake tribalism is designed tribalism since tribalism itself is such a successful way for these technology companies to compete for more of your time which is ultimately how the turn you into a comodity.

What is truth, what is original thought. What is free will in this digital age where these algorithms are designed around the commodification of users?

A tree is worth more processed than alive. So is a whale. And now humans have become the commodity product.

Careinke, your agorist belief system of a voluntary exchange without coercion between individuals must have been firing adrenalin flight response to your nervous system when you were watching that documentary !!!!!!!

That documentary put the nail in the coffin for me that the tribalism we see happening today is indeed a digital fake matrix.

[careinke]

Careinke, your agorist belief system of a voluntary exchange without coercion between individuals must have been firing adrenalin flight response to your nervous system when you were watching that documentary !!!!!!!

That documentary put the nail in the coffin for me that the tribalism we see happening today is indeed a digital fake matrix.

I have to admit this documentary certainly brought on a visceral response from me. I mean, I knew most of this stuff, but I'd never seen it combined into a complex system/web. It was like inadvertently using Permaculture for evil. It was also put together very well, by people who are beyond credible sources.

Still the problem is the solution, and until I can come up with something more effective, at least promoting this Documentary is a start. Abolish Ignorance.

[Ibon]

Still the problem is the solution, and until I can come up with something more effective, at least promoting this Documentary is a start. Abolish Ignorance.

The same government that we disparage, the same government we recognize as corrupt, the same government run by parties that put forth clowns as candidates, the same government elected by the very people manipulated by this digital matrix, that very same government has to regulate this tech industry if we want to see any kind of solution. That is sobering.

Along with the fact that the underlying issue that needs to be reformed is the monetization of the users. That is by the way the natural end game of unregulated capitalism. Talk about the chickens coming home to roost.......

[asg70]

I see it as more of the unintended consequences of technology than just a simplistic top down profit conspiracy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksDh2QSUcfU

[careinke]

I see it as more of the unintended consequences of technology than just a simplistic top down profit conspiracy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksDh2QSUcfU

Although I have not watched your link yet, (I will), I agree with you. I don't think they started out trying to promote tribalism or discord. They started out by trying to analyze what you liked or were interested in, and providing faster access to it.

Then they went after providing you with advertisements for stuff you would probably want to buy.

Unfortunately, that led to polarization, and frankly the mess we have today.

This could be the root cause of basically a global civil war, and it's not going to look like our civil war, with boundaries and standing armies. Think Syria, Somalia, etc.

But Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc will still be making money selling your data....

[asg70]

Capitalism appealing to primal urges is nothing new and it's not even just about anger either.

For instance:

Sex then:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0K5BgCI-U7c

Sex now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc5IbN4xw70

So if we're going to attack captains of industry for gaming the human mind for profit we really should start much much earlier than the internet.

My opinion is that it's the responsibility of individuals not to allow themselves to be subliminally sucked into brain-stem thinking. Demonizing Madison Avenue or silicon valley is putting the cart before the horse. It also, paradoxically, generates just another flavor of outrage rather than getting to the root of the problem, which is the vulnerability of human nature itself.

Too many people live unexamined lives and it's childish nanny-state thinking to simply point the finger upwards to business.

Outside of non-profits I don't think socially responsible capitalism exists. What looks like altruism is most often just a marketing tactic--like we see most often these days with woke entertainment and virtue signals. Even Ben & Jerry's sold out in the end.

[careinke]

Capitalism appealing to primal urges is nothing new and it's not even just about anger either.

For instance:

Sex then:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0K5BgCI-U7c

Sex now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc5IbN4xw70

So if we're going to attack captains of industry for gaming the human mind for profit we really should start much much earlier than the internet.

My opinion is that it's the responsibility of individuals not to allow themselves to be subliminally sucked into brain-stem thinking. Demonizing Madison Avenue or silicon valley is putting the cart before the horse. It also, paradoxically, generates just another flavor of outrage rather than getting to the root of the problem, which is the vulnerability of human nature itself.

Too many people live unexamined lives and it's childish nanny-state thinking to simply point the finger upwards to business.

Outside of non-profits I don't think socially responsible capitalism exists. What looks like altruism is most often just a marketing tactic--like we see most often these days with woke entertainment and virtue signals. Even Ben & Jerry's sold out in the end.

We are not disagreeing here.

This is just another, although the biggest ever, shark in the water. My concern is people are not even aware of the this existential threat. Critical thinking is rapidly fading away. Add to the fact with these algorithms, it makes it harder to even see views that oppose your own views.

The solution is simple, and the producers of this documentary are helping implement it, by exposing it to the light. Which is what I'm trying to do.

I'm also looking into other platforms like "Brave."

[Ibon]

So if we're going to attack captains of industry for gaming the human mind for profit we really should start much much earlier than the internet.

My opinion is that it's the responsibility of individuals not to allow themselves to be subliminally sucked into brain-stem thinking. Demonizing Madison Avenue or silicon valley is putting the cart before the horse. It also, paradoxically, generates just another flavor of outrage rather than getting to the root of the problem, which is the vulnerability of human nature itself.

In that documentary you saw interviewed the very captains or architects of these industries sounding the alarm. It was not journalists or idealogues. The concern is coming from within the tech industry by some of the most influential architects of the design of these platforms that have sounded the alarm. And yes, what they are warning us of was mainly inadvertent. It was not by design.

Yes it is the responsibility of individuals but as the documentary shows the tribalism that these algorithms inadvertently created is increasingly driven by fake news which then elicits a tribalism to the uneducated who are molded into an angry digital mob. As illustrated in the documentary in rural Mayanmar it was specifically Facebook and Whatsapp posts that went viral in the rural southern areas against the muslim community which then resulted in a literal mob lynching and burning down of entire muslim communities.

Bring it home to the USA. The support of Trump as demagogue and populist stays strong among his base regardless of how many impeachable offenses or acts of egregious incompetency (handling of Covid19) . A big part of this is reinforced in social media , all those fake conspiracy theories and lies that reinforce the split. And of course there is no real rational process because tribalism makes both sides irrational and unable to communicate with eachother.

The individual who takes responsibility cannot insulate him or herself from the tribal mob that undermines civic cohesiveness in society. THat is why you cannot just let it up to each individual. These tech industries have unleashed a force that is molding culture and the tribalism is irrational and aberrant to enlightenment and more conducive to totalitarianism actually.

Funny, remember the promise of the internet in the beginning to empower the individual? It still does fulfill that promise in many ways but it has awakened a collective beast that reinforces a fake kind of tribal alliance based on lies and misinformation that is downright scary. And it was inadvertent

This industry has to be regulated. But by whom? Again, the only regulatory body is the government.

I think both the tech industry and the government is scratching their heads at the moment how to even begin this process of regulation?

[Tanada]

Have not watched it yet but put it in my Netflix cue so I can when I get time to spare.

[asg70]

That is why you cannot just let it up to each individual.

Which is why I support a technocracy. The intelligentsia needs to save the knuckle draggers from their own base instinct. It's elitist but it reflects the world as I see it.

[jedrider]

That is why you cannot just let it up to each individual.

Which is why I support a technocracy. The intelligentsia needs to save the knuckle draggers from their own base instinct. It's elitist but it reflects the world as I see it.

B.F. Skinner is smiling from his grave:

Skinner - Operant Conditioning
https://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html

Skinner is regarded as the father of Operant Conditioning, but his work was based on Thorndike’s (1898) law of effect. According to this principle, behavior that is followed by pleasant consequences is likely to be repeated, and behavior followed by unpleasant consequences is less likely to be repeated.

Skinner introduced a new term into the Law of Effect - Reinforcement. behavior which is reinforced tends to be repeated (i.e., strengthened); behavior which is not reinforced tends to die out-or be extinguished (i.e., weakened).

Skinner (1948) studied operant conditioning by conducting experiments using animals which he placed in a 'Skinner Box' which was similar to Thorndike’s puzzle box.

OK. Do I get any +1 LIKES now?

[careinke]

That is why you cannot just let it up to each individual.

Which is why I support a technocracy. The intelligentsia needs to save the knuckle draggers from their own base instinct. It's elitist but it reflects the world as I see it.

B.F. Skinner is smiling from his grave:

Skinner - Operant Conditioning
https://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html

Skinner is regarded as the father of Operant Conditioning, but his work was based on Thorndike’s (1898) law of effect. According to this principle, behavior that is followed by pleasant consequences is likely to be repeated, and behavior followed by unpleasant consequences is less likely to be repeated.

Skinner introduced a new term into the Law of Effect - Reinforcement. behavior which is reinforced tends to be repeated (i.e., strengthened); behavior which is not reinforced tends to die out-or be extinguished (i.e., weakened).

Skinner (1948) studied operant conditioning by conducting experiments using animals which he placed in a 'Skinner Box' which was similar to Thorndike’s puzzle box.

OK. Do I get any +1 LIKES now?

+1

My faculty advisor in college was a Skinner prodigy. She had the most well trained dogs.

She used to say reinforcement was the best way, but punishment is faster. LOL

[jedrider]

That is why you cannot just let it up to each individual.

Which is why I support a technocracy. The intelligentsia needs to save the knuckle draggers from their own base instinct. It's elitist but it reflects the world as I see it.

But we have a mono-cracy, which is the single-minded pursuit of money. China is far closer to being a technocracy than we will ever be.

The intelligentsia under a mono-cracy are just the tools to keep the rabble in line. China is very top down and does not appear to even have an intelligentsia, as that would be extremely dangerous to top-down rule.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Capitalism appealing to primal urges is nothing new and it's not even just about anger either.

...

So if we're going to attack captains of industry for gaming the human mind for profit we really should start much much earlier than the internet.

My opinion is that it's the responsibility of individuals not to allow themselves to be subliminally sucked into brain-stem thinking. Demonizing Madison Avenue or silicon valley is putting the cart before the horse. It also, paradoxically, generates just another flavor of outrage rather than getting to the root of the problem, which is the vulnerability of human nature itself.

Al true, but it's getting really difficult to effectively combat the problem now because of complexity and the sophistication of the modern internet "steering" AI's, as the documentary points out.

Way back in the 50's, GM, for example was blatantly using the "make your neighbors jealous when you buy a fancy new GM. Oh, and you'll look prosperous too!" line. But that WAS blatantly obvious, at least.

Now, as the documentary alluded to, the problem re a virtual reality distortion field to help sell ads is so pervasive and subtle that it's tough to know how to actually fix it. It's not like in America we're going to ban the internet or free speech (nor should we, of course). And it's not like Americans are going to LISTEN to sage advice on the dangers of blindly following internet messaging and believing shady internet news sources. (Look how Americans are dealing with science re COVID-19, and letting political ideology, not reason, shape their attitudes/beliefs in HUGE numbers, as just one obvious example).

I'm guilty of discussing things for various articles and occasionally here, and have a DISQUS ID. I'll admit that, but at least I don't spend huge amounts of time doing that.

I'm feeling FAR better about NEVER having joined FB or any of that nonsense, including twitter (I didn't like their manipulation when I tried to sign up, thankfully). I'm also feeling far better about NEVER having had a smart phone, since I have all the internet I need or want at home, and I still haven't seen that killer app I just can't live without -- not even close.

...

Sadly, I strongly suspect that even though this documentary shows that social media on the internet is to reality distortion as obesity is (mostly) due to a bad diet and too little activity, VERY FEW people are going to be willing or psychologically able to PUT DOWN the internet fork.

[Ibon]

Sadly, I strongly suspect that even though this documentary shows that social media on the internet is to reality distortion as obesity is (mostly) due to a bad diet and too little activity, VERY FEW people are going to be willing or psychologically able to PUT DOWN the internet fork.

The concern is not so much for the individuals who are addicted and cant PUT DOWN the internet fork as you say. The problem is the way this collectively distorts reality and the line between truth and fakedom becomes fuzzy and all of this moves culture in unpredictable and unintended directions.

WHen an obese person eats and gets morbidly fat this does not impact the collective culture nor the direction it goes. It is an individual problem
WHen a drug addict becomes a chronic terminal user he or she is not contributing much of anything to the collective. It is his or her individual problem

Aa the documentary shows this distortion is everyones problem, even if folks like you OUtcast don't even own a smart phone and dont use Facebook or Twitter. You suffer the consequences as well how this moves the collective in asocial directions.

That is why this is different than just another "addiction"

You know, this was unintended as the documentary stated but something needs to be clarified about this point of unintended. Yes, the distortion is taking unintended directions that has the unpredictability similar like the psychology of a mob but all of those architects designing the platforms to compete for users attention knew very well that this was causing addiction. In that sense these tech companies have a liability issue just like the tobacco industry did. The product was designed to addict you. Most may not agree with me but just because there is no biochemical substance like nicotine involved does not mean that the addiction is any less powerful.

[careinke]

Sadly, I strongly suspect that even though this documentary shows that social media on the internet is to reality distortion as obesity is (mostly) due to a bad diet and too little activity, VERY FEW people are going to be willing or psychologically able to PUT DOWN the internet fork.

The concern is not so much for the individuals who are addicted and cant PUT DOWN the internet fork as you say. The problem is the way this collectively distorts reality and the line between truth and fakedom becomes fuzzy and all of this moves culture in unpredictable and unintended directions.

WHen an obese person eats and gets morbidly fat this does not impact the collective culture nor the direction it goes. It is an individual problem
WHen a drug addict becomes a chronic terminal user he or she is not contributing much of anything to the collective. It is his or her individual problem

Aa the documentary shows this distortion is everyones problem, even if folks like you OUtcast don't even own a smart phone and dont use Facebook or Twitter. You suffer the consequences as well how this moves the collective in asocial directions.

That is why this is different than just another "addiction"

You know, this was unintended as the documentary stated but something needs to be clarified about this point of unintended. Yes, the distortion is taking unintended directions that has the unpredictability similar like the psychology of a mob but all of those architects designing the platforms to compete for users attention knew very well that this was causing addiction. In that sense these tech companies have a liability issue just like the tobacco industry did. The product was designed to addict you. Most may not agree with me but just because there is no biochemical substance like nicotine involved does not mean that the addiction is any less powerful.

We certainly seem to be on the same page here. Compulsive gamblers use no drugs, (if you don't count endorphins), but they are still addicts. Same principles apply here.

[Ibon]

Compulsive gamblers use no drugs, (if you don't count endorphins), but they are still addicts. Same principles apply here.

Yes. Good point.

[Ibon]

Which is why I support a technocracy. The intelligentsia needs to save the knuckle draggers from their own base instinct. It's elitist but it reflects the world as I see it.

In my more darker cynical analysis I have shared a number of posts on this site through the years advocating the elimination of an empowered
middle class and a return to a tiny elite with the bulk of humanity being serfs or indentured servants to the wealthy. It seems we are moving in this direction. The heads of these technology companies during the past 8 months of 2020 have seen their net worth exponentially grow while most have flat lined or fallen into unemployment and increased debt.

The emerging middle class post WWII had the greatest opportunity in the history of mankind to use the abundant resources to better educate themselves and live debt free. Instead they followed materialism and mediocrity and squandered the planets resources and are mostly deeply in debt.

I see an interesting parallel with the digital malaise we are discussing on this thread. The internet just like the wealth of the post WWII decades promised the individual a revolution of empowerment. And what has been the result? A dumbing down of the citizen as a result of using the internet for mundane mediocrity and being corralled into tribalism based on fake news and misinformation.

So the conclusion for me is that it is a bad investment to empower the bulk of humanity with wealth or access to information. It is squandered and wasted because the bulk of humanity do not take advantage of the potential of this empowerment.

From an ecological perspective the global middle class has indeed been the greatest mis allocation of resources in the history of mankind.
From the perspective of human cultural and intellectual development the abundant resources, both materially and digital, have been wasted on the bulk of humanity.

Take a moment and reflect on the vast resource base of the past 100 years and the amazing progress of technology and then stand that reality side by side with your average middle class global citizen and his or her values? As much as one might be tempted to blame the outcome on capitalism, or the big white man, or colonialism, let's get real here. The bulk of humanity squanders opportunity instead of using it toward greater enlightenment.

The inflection point we are now seeing, what I consider to be the end of the age of enlightenment, is actually a capitulation to the truth of what we have squandered. I seriously believe we are moving back to the historical norm of the past 9000 years of human civilization, a tiny empowered elite and the rest of us with greatly limited access to resources. Serfdom here we come. It wont happen over night but by the end of this century the new paradigm should be well established.

From an ecological perspective this will probably be the best path forward toward some sustainable consumption and population base for our species. Ecologically this shift will be positive and the planet will slowly heal as per capita consumption declines sharply.