version
Well-known member
It's being encouraged by DC though. The two parties have huge media machines exploiting exactly the mechanisms being disclosed.
Why Conspiracy Theories?
- Thread starter sherief
- Start date
-
- Tags
- apples are not racist black eyed babies conspiragasms conspiranauts control craner's defence league haugen 2024 homedawg1 king of the goblin nonces lizards moon unit mr tea is a cop nanoo nanoo nazis all over the shop nazis in exeter nazis nazis nazis nebuchadnezzar patty is an old whig pogrom massive san francisco is a suburb of ipswich steve jobs is living egypt the day yyaldrin went vegan tin foil hats where is ghislaine’s other foot? zoom in
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
One of her big points so far is that facebooks Programmers and operational technicians don’t even fully understand how the machine learning algorithms are impacting users, but they have been aware of evidence for many of the mental health effects.
version
Well-known member
I wouldn't be surprised if she ends up with some sort of media or political career off the back of this, maybe a Time Person of the Year cover, a book deal and a bunch of TV appearances and magazine features.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
Yeah like Cambridge Analytica, psychographics, etc.
Cutting edge precision marketing that has remained too mysterious for too long.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
She should link up with Progressive International, who already have canonized Assange In similar principles.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
Well it could be me at some point. “Testimonial optimization” etc.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
Zuckerberg and Facebook now seem to constitute a borderline national security threat, and in bipartisan opinion no less. I haven’t seen them appear this united and driven about anything.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
One of the senators was fishing for evidence or testimony about facebooks engagements with other national security threats, name state actors like CCP.
version
Well-known member
I was just about to bring up Assange. I was going to say I have more trust in a whistleblower the establishment goes after, like him, Manning and Snowden, than I do one who's welcomed with open arms.
The difference here is a private company's the target rather than the state so it's obviously a different dynamic, but you get my point. If a whistleblower appears who perfectly sets out the accepted talking points then it makes sense to be a little suspicious.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
She does seem like she could be a special case. She made those 60+ year old congressmen empathize with teenage girls suffering from this 24/7 barrage of public scrutiny and celebrity.
william_kent
Well-known member
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
This was also the most empathetic hearing I’ve watched so far. There was another one about neurodegenerative diseases that aroused such bipartisan sympathy, but this hearing is also a rally, in effect.
edit: error fix from “watch” to “watched”
edit: error fix from “watch” to “watched”
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
She killed that role.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
It's to bring in wholesale Internet censorship, China-style
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
She did say she was supporting “non-content-based” approaches, for what that is worth. But really the priority seems to be to develop a better understanding of the algorithms, and how that kind of diligence can be enforced, similar to how regulators can enforce a better understanding of complex financial instruments.
Anyway here free speech and privacy seem like they can be accounted accounted for, from a policymaking perspective.
One of the senators explicitly asked how oversight can be reconciled with privacy, and I don’t know about you but I have a touch time generating answers here.
Anyway here free speech and privacy seem like they can be accounted accounted for, from a policymaking perspective.
One of the senators explicitly asked how oversight can be reconciled with privacy, and I don’t know about you but I have a touch time generating answers here.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
If rules that effect many need to be written by few, I’d rather those decisions be made with whatever public scrutiny we can muster, even if the lobbying scrubs away much of that effort.
Our lives are already being programmed, so I’d rather the government seize better control, for they seem like the lesser evil compared to the likes of Facebook.
What may actually happen, or at least what I would naively suggest, would be that Congress mandate that Facebook establish a compliance department and/or an office for an Inspector General who would be independent of Facebook and directly subject to congressional oversight.
Our lives are already being programmed, so I’d rather the government seize better control, for they seem like the lesser evil compared to the likes of Facebook.
What may actually happen, or at least what I would naively suggest, would be that Congress mandate that Facebook establish a compliance department and/or an office for an Inspector General who would be independent of Facebook and directly subject to congressional oversight.
version
Well-known member
Assuming the two aren't coordinating... Facebook was founded the same day they shut down DARPA's LifeLog project,
LifeLog aimed to compile a massive electronic database of every activity and relationship a person engages in. This was to include credit card purchases, web sites visited, the content of telephone calls and e-mails sent and received, scans of faxes and postal mail sent and received, instant messages sent and received, books and magazines read, television and radio selections, physical location recorded via wearable GPS sensors, biomedical data captured through wearable sensors. The high level goal of this data logging was to identify "preferences, plans, goals, and other markers of intentionality".