KingPin!
In my defence, I was left unsupervised ^^
VU Donator
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
VU Challenge Team
Reviewer
Watched this documentary on Netflix and it struck a cord with me more info here or just Check it on Netflix https://www.thesocialdilemma.com/the-film/
so onto my post about the documentary (buckle up, top up the vape)
Profitability is the business model...social media depends on user engagement, retention and growth. If these factors are negatively impacted then a company’s value slides, the very opposite of what any social media company wants.
Whilst businesses in the private sector start out with this at the back of their minds (after all making money is what it’s all about at the end of the day) is it true to say these platforms started out with that as their primary mission statement...or was is something more innocent like “We want to positively connect people”, perhaps what’s lost along the way is that original vision when growth and investor pressure mounts...as they say in the documentary “if you don’t pay for the product, you are the product”
It was argued that the original designers and engineers of these platforms didn’t set out with a negative goal in mind; take the co-designer of the Facebook like button in the documentary:he now recognised its effects on instant gratification, sowing importance into how you are perceived by strangers, and it’s negative effects especially on the early to mid teens who didn’t know a time before social media, how it empowers your own biases and world views by giving you your own feed separate to everyone else...none of this was on his original radar, rather it was meant as just a positive sharing idea. It goes to show you what you design and how something is used take on a “life of its own” after the fact.
This is a really interesting topic for ethics in terms of what users do with the function, how Artificial Intelligence (A.I) learns to use it as a tool or nefarious actors using it to exploit a system for gain (political and public thinking) when designing applications, how you envision something to be used and what actually happens are often very different things.
The point here is how this ties into exploiting the “human condition” the general need to connect with other people, we are after social creatures for the most part, I also think it’s fair to say “most” people care at some level there are others out there who think like they do, it’s why we spend so much trying to argue our points across right?
We also know these things exists “it’s free so expect ads, getting sucked into social media rabbit holes, arguments with strangers over stupid things, ads popping up when you type or verbally speak moments later, the behaviours such as watching recommenced videos, picking up your phone when you get a notification, constantly refreshing the feed, looking for confirmations of your own beliefs...ultimately the collection of your data drives all of this, you are teaching the very thing you hate how to manipulate you with every click.
A.I is very good at learning how to exploit these human weaknesses and biases, it’s not out get you rather it’s been instructed by humans to find the most efficient way of keeping you “hooked” and this is at the centre of the documentary’s message, with the dilemma being “how do we address this in a business sustainable and ethical way“ because it’s effects are shifting from the original paradigm “we want to positively connect people”
What the documentary does lack, as is the case with many of these thought provoking key note speeches or documentaries” is how to address the problem or rather possible solutions....ok we now know the problem, we want to discuss but what’s next?
Zuckerbergs idea for Facebook was to introduce more A.I to snuff out the fake news the other A.I is pushing...but how does it learn what’s fake and what isn’t...also won’t there just be another A.I out there looking to exploit and get around the other one...we just end up with a de-facto A.I war of mans making trying to get your attention fixed and take action...and that to me is dangerous.
The people saying we can’t change so why care? Well thats certainly an option; see where the experiment takes us, although personally I don’t accept that...the first step to recovery is accepting there’s a problem.
The simplistic reactionary view of just get rid of it...that might be an option for you but it’s here to stay globally, if still affects you...because you are connected to people... your kids, friends, colleagues use it...and let’s not forget it can be a force for good as well.
it’s not even been lost on me, how do I know the documentary in itself is not designed to manipulate my thinking...clearly it has...deep stuff right
well anyway folks thought I’d open up the floor here, perhaps have a watch then let’s discuss your thoughts on it all...also what could be done to tackle this issue (other than trying to fool ourselves into thinking we can unplug and trick the system to not follow us)
so onto my post about the documentary (buckle up, top up the vape)
Profitability is the business model...social media depends on user engagement, retention and growth. If these factors are negatively impacted then a company’s value slides, the very opposite of what any social media company wants.
Whilst businesses in the private sector start out with this at the back of their minds (after all making money is what it’s all about at the end of the day) is it true to say these platforms started out with that as their primary mission statement...or was is something more innocent like “We want to positively connect people”, perhaps what’s lost along the way is that original vision when growth and investor pressure mounts...as they say in the documentary “if you don’t pay for the product, you are the product”
It was argued that the original designers and engineers of these platforms didn’t set out with a negative goal in mind; take the co-designer of the Facebook like button in the documentary:he now recognised its effects on instant gratification, sowing importance into how you are perceived by strangers, and it’s negative effects especially on the early to mid teens who didn’t know a time before social media, how it empowers your own biases and world views by giving you your own feed separate to everyone else...none of this was on his original radar, rather it was meant as just a positive sharing idea. It goes to show you what you design and how something is used take on a “life of its own” after the fact.
This is a really interesting topic for ethics in terms of what users do with the function, how Artificial Intelligence (A.I) learns to use it as a tool or nefarious actors using it to exploit a system for gain (political and public thinking) when designing applications, how you envision something to be used and what actually happens are often very different things.
The point here is how this ties into exploiting the “human condition” the general need to connect with other people, we are after social creatures for the most part, I also think it’s fair to say “most” people care at some level there are others out there who think like they do, it’s why we spend so much trying to argue our points across right?
We also know these things exists “it’s free so expect ads, getting sucked into social media rabbit holes, arguments with strangers over stupid things, ads popping up when you type or verbally speak moments later, the behaviours such as watching recommenced videos, picking up your phone when you get a notification, constantly refreshing the feed, looking for confirmations of your own beliefs...ultimately the collection of your data drives all of this, you are teaching the very thing you hate how to manipulate you with every click.
A.I is very good at learning how to exploit these human weaknesses and biases, it’s not out get you rather it’s been instructed by humans to find the most efficient way of keeping you “hooked” and this is at the centre of the documentary’s message, with the dilemma being “how do we address this in a business sustainable and ethical way“ because it’s effects are shifting from the original paradigm “we want to positively connect people”
What the documentary does lack, as is the case with many of these thought provoking key note speeches or documentaries” is how to address the problem or rather possible solutions....ok we now know the problem, we want to discuss but what’s next?
Zuckerbergs idea for Facebook was to introduce more A.I to snuff out the fake news the other A.I is pushing...but how does it learn what’s fake and what isn’t...also won’t there just be another A.I out there looking to exploit and get around the other one...we just end up with a de-facto A.I war of mans making trying to get your attention fixed and take action...and that to me is dangerous.
The people saying we can’t change so why care? Well thats certainly an option; see where the experiment takes us, although personally I don’t accept that...the first step to recovery is accepting there’s a problem.
The simplistic reactionary view of just get rid of it...that might be an option for you but it’s here to stay globally, if still affects you...because you are connected to people... your kids, friends, colleagues use it...and let’s not forget it can be a force for good as well.
it’s not even been lost on me, how do I know the documentary in itself is not designed to manipulate my thinking...clearly it has...deep stuff right
well anyway folks thought I’d open up the floor here, perhaps have a watch then let’s discuss your thoughts on it all...also what could be done to tackle this issue (other than trying to fool ourselves into thinking we can unplug and trick the system to not follow us)
Last edited: