Slashdot Mirror
Former Reddit CEO Decries 'Rage-Induced Interactions' on Facebook and Twitter (wired.com)
Were the creators of Facebook and Twitter oblivious to how social networks could be abused? "I struggle to believe that these brilliant product CEOs, who have created social media services used by millions of people worldwide, are actually naive," writes Ellen Pao, the former CEO of Reddit. "It's a lot more likely that they simply don't care."
[S]ocial media companies and the leaders who run them are rewarded for focusing on reach and engagement, not for positive impact or for protecting subsets of users from harm. They're rewarded for keeping costs down, which encourages the free-for-all, anything-goes approach misnomered "free speech." If they don't need to monitor their platforms, they don't need to come up with real policies -- and avoid paying for all the people and tools required to implement them....
In the earliest days, it wasn't always obvious what these platforms were doing and what they would become -- even to insiders. But at a certain point, it became clear that money was the driving factor, and dopamine- or rage-induced interactions meant more money.... CEOs should just forget about hiding behind "naivete" and "free speech," and instead remind themselves they can take actions that will meaningfully change the direction of the future. The first step is acknowledging the problem... You've solved for increasing engagement; now it's time to make real, positive interactions a priority.
The next time a CEO claims ignorance, "we must hold them accountable," the essay argues, complaining that right now there's a vacuum of leadership.
So instead, "Everyone's holding hands on the road to hell."
In the earliest days, it wasn't always obvious what these platforms were doing and what they would become -- even to insiders. But at a certain point, it became clear that money was the driving factor, and dopamine- or rage-induced interactions meant more money.... CEOs should just forget about hiding behind "naivete" and "free speech," and instead remind themselves they can take actions that will meaningfully change the direction of the future. The first step is acknowledging the problem... You've solved for increasing engagement; now it's time to make real, positive interactions a priority.
The next time a CEO claims ignorance, "we must hold them accountable," the essay argues, complaining that right now there's a vacuum of leadership.
So instead, "Everyone's holding hands on the road to hell."
Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
Zuck: Just ask
Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS
[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?
Zuck: People just submitted it.
Zuck: I don't know why.
Zuck: They "trust me"
Zuck: Dumb fucks
Meanwhile people keep telling me she should just be a welder a few make $26/hr ignoring that's only the top 10% and they're doing dangerous work.
Welding is not dangerous, and $26/hr is way less than the top 10% make. Pay is proportional to skill. If all you know how to do is stick welding from your high school shop class, you may not make much. But if you learn MIG, TIG, or acetylene welding, and are good at it, you can earn $50/hr or more even in flyover country.
Disclaimer: I am not a very good welder.
^ The trolls have taken over here...
Slashdot is a cesspool of idiocy these days.
For example shouting "FIRE!" in a crowded theater.
You might want to read the history of this analogy. It was first used by Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. His reasoning was that obviously the government had the power to arrest someone for shouting fire in a theater, so, hey, it was also okay for the government to arrest people for speaking out against the WW1 draft. Totally the same thing.
So the defendants went to prison, where they were beaten and abused. Some of them died there.
So using stupid analogies to justify political censorship has a long history.
Later in his life, Oliver Wendell Holmes said this ruling was one of his biggest regrets.
Shouting fire in a crowded theater
Schenck v. United States
Of late, Reddit has just banned a bunch of random accounts because they're Iranian bots, apparently, colluding to drive narratives to specific ends.
They were clearly successful, given the accounts (before being wiped) had histories of posting literally all over the political spectrum, on a wide variety of topics, the majority of which had nothing to do whatsoever with politics or geopolitical issues.
Meanwhile, of course, any Redditor can tell you of the massive and weird shift of one of Reddit's most popular subreddits, politics, underwent: before Bernie bro'd out, the sub made even diehard Trumpers look like saints in terms of vitriol spewed towards Clinton. As Bernie was being knocked out? Might've been the second coming of Jeebus, given the amount of inane fanfare for Clinton. What happened? Simple. A group (several, actually) worked in concert to take over the subreddit and drive their narrative.
I have no problem with that in itself; what's damning is the fact that some people get a pass, while others get a, "REEEEEEEEEEE BOTS NARRATIVE PROPAGANDA!"
But of course, silencing political foes while letting your friends do as they wish is what the Party is all about. Pao wasn't the originator of the Reddit Thought Police, but she moved them along briskly, and they're still picking up speed - one only needs to listen, not even carefully, and the intermission between jackboots hitting pavement is ever decreasing.
The problem with social media, and all internet discussion, is people like you who can't stay on topic and want to turn everything into a discussion about politics. Rather than being about social media, your post is about college costs, medical costs and Nancy Pelosi. You try to loosely associate it with the topic with the first and last sentence, but really it's just an off-topic rant. Then some people who agree with your opinion come and upvote your post, making it the most prominent on the page, so the discussion becomes completely derailed.
People like you ruin internet discussion for others. When every topic turns into a discussion about politics, people simply give up and stop participating.
You are the problem. Please stop.
Underwater welding is actually EXTREMELY dangerous. Its one of the most dangerous professions on the planet.
and the high pay for underwater welding skews the figures on income for welders. Most welders make $15-$18/hr. In 2018 that's not a middle class life. That's a bare minimum living wage and you better hope you never get sick or injured...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
So exactly what are you saying then ? That people should have the right to yell FIRE! in a theater ?
Of course not. I am saying that equating "yelling fire in a theater" with "hate speech", as the GPP was doing, is idiotic.
How is allowing Ann Coulter to speak on campus harming anyone? Being offended is not "harm".
As an aside, I can't understand why liberals want to silence Ann Coulter. I can't imagine a better spokesperson for any cause that I despise.