The Meta problem (1 Viewer)

funky

funky

(OMF)
Joined
Apr 30, 2004
Messages
103,941
Feel like we need a thread as this news topic continues to rage on, messily and without a solution in sight.



Imagine your argument being “social media is not addictive” - and said with a straight face.
 
Making any dent on destroying social media is some level of progress in destroying capitalist pigs and bringing late stage capitalism to it's natural conclusion.

Equally of course those with power no doubt have plans to destroy humanity and leave it for themselves and this case won't make a shred of difference.
 
It’s quite sad that the tech bros all ultimately get into bed with the establishment. They all start off with these progressive ideas and commitment to lefty, inclusive work cultures and the moment they start being mega successful and go public, now they’re just like every other major CEO - desperate to increase revenue to save their jobs, and completely dependent on the worst kinds of politicians and lobbyists.
Problem with the tech bros versus other industries is that they have way more dangerous leverage to maintain their position. They’re not just offering dodgy investment and kickbacks, they’re offering major public influence. They’re shaping governments way more effectively than the oil, steel, coal, property and even other media industries ever did.
 
Were they ever lefty idealists to begin with?

Zuckerberg didn't start Facebook with noble intentions

Many of the tech employees are as you describe, but I'm not convinced the founders and head honchos were ever going to fight a social cause. They came from either trust funds or windowless basements.
 
Exactly. It's just that culture in the mid-late 2010s was more in tune with inclusion and flexibility, so their HR teams played the game. As soon as it fell out of fashion circa 2022, and AI hit hard, they ditched any notion of being or doing "good".
 
Oh the companies were very different back then. They definitely had different ideals and objectives. I never worked directly with Meta, but I did work a lot with Google, Amazon and Twitter. Compared to the rest of the media industry, they were so employee-first, but a lot of that had to do with they had more money than they knew what to do with, so things like 24 hour cafeterias with free food was not an issue to them, and politics was far from their radar at the time, and vice versa.
 
I do think for the most part a lot of social networks set out with at least egalitarian, noble intentions but money and power corrupt like fuck.

Twitter especially, lol.
 
From my perspective I actually think social native kids are savvy to the algos. They know from early on they are there to hook and manipulate and don't fall for it. Its the older kids and indeed the fucking 50+ idiots who are falling for it hook like and sinker.

We're at the end of this cycle of tech IMO, 5-10 years they either wont exist or will be vastly different.
 
I actually think the current generation of tech bros are the WORST demographic that you could ever gift social influence to.

They are fully subscribed to the mantra that technological progress TRUMPS (geddit) every and all social consideration.

If DYSFUNCTIONAL YOUTH and MASS HUMAN UNEMPLOYMENT are the price of a tech bro saying "look how smart I am and what I can build", they will gladly have us all pay it.

Loufoque is right - they bought into "employee first" when it was fashionable. But I highly doubt because of ideals. But because they thought they could use it to attract engineers and investment firms who had a glossy "social value" annual report to write.

Maybe the next gen will be better.
 
Silicon Valley was never cleanly “lefty.” It’s always been a weird mixture of 1960s counterculture, techno-utopianism, libertarianism, New Age thinking, etc.

Also, political trajectory doesn’t really explain the underlying problem here. Once ANY institution accumulates that much power, it starts to preserve itself, expand its influence, suppress threats and rationalize whatever behavior serves those goals. That happens to corporations, governments, political parties, unions, religious institutions, universities, etc. all the time.

Right- and left-wing policies attempt to regulate the accumulation and concentration of power in different ways, and some do it better than others. But neither eliminates the underlying human behavior: when people accumulate wealth, status and control, they tend to protect and reproduce it.
 
Shoat said:
I actually think the current generation of tech bros are the WORST demographic that you could ever gift social influence to.

They are fully subscribed to the mantra that technological progress TRUMPS (geddit) every and all social consideration.
Click to expand...
The entire lineup of Elon’s Doge Team
IMG_4785.jpeg
 
Also American parents have done a piss poor job doing their part to regulate their own children's relationship with technology. The number of parents I know who'll just casually let an iPad babysit their child for 5 hours straight is astounding.

And now it's much harder to reverse because refusing social media can now exclude an adolescent from parts of their peer culture.
 
K.C. said:
Also American parents have done a piss poor job doing their part to regulate their own children's relationship with technology. The number of parents I know who'll just casually let an iPad babysit their child for 5 hours straight is astounding.

And now it's much harder to reverse because refusing social media can now exclude an adolescent from parts of their peer culture.
Click to expand...

I can tell you now every parent says pre birth they wont be the ipad at the dinner table while eating out type and then fails.

We've developed technology to do all our shit jobs and free up our time but instead of embracing that time we fill it with a perception we should just increase our output. The societal pressures to be increasingly more productive are insane so of course when you finally get 5 minutes, you want the child to just shut the fuck up for a bit.
 
Joseph said:
View attachment 45148
Click to expand...

Well I certainly trust them on sight. I reckon 4 Trust Funds, 2 Basement Dwellers.

K.C. said:
Also American parents have done a piss poor job doing their part to regulate their own children's relationship with technology. The number of parents I know who'll just casually let an iPad babysit their child for 5 hours straight is astounding.

And now it's much harder to reverse because refusing social media can now exclude an adolescent from parts of their peer culture.
Click to expand...

Is this an America-specific issue? I'd wager fairly widespread in the UK as well if not other western societies.

And it'll be a mix of the reason Big Ron's given (exhausted parents), but I also think for some there's a genuine desire / pride in their children being as engaged with tech as they possibly can be. I know some of my relatives see it as a badge of honour that their kids are much more adept and prepared for "modern life" as they can be.
 
Shoat said:
Is this an America-specific issue? I'd wager fairly widespread in the UK as well if not other western societies.
Click to expand...
Definitely not just America. I just used that example cuz of that specific lawsuit in the OP.
 
big ron said:
I do think for the most part a lot of social networks set out with at least egalitarian, noble intentions but money and power corrupt like fuck.

Twitter especially, lol.
Click to expand...
Money and power destroy the soul, we've seen it time and time again. Something seems to happen to people at a certain level of wealth - the brain seems to just shut off any suggestion that there might be some level of inequality and turn the person into a total sociopath.
 
octophone said:
Money and power destroy the soul, we've seen it time and time again. Something seems to happen to people at a certain level of wealth - the brain seems to just shut off any suggestion that there might be some level of inequality and turn the person into a total sociopath.
Click to expand...
I hope I'm not reading your post too literally Octy, but I don't think things are that clean and deterministic. Humans aren't passive victims of a static external formula beyond their control. I think wealth changes the environment in which a person makes choices. Becoming wealthy often means you get political privilege, social influence, legal exemptions etc. Those all distort a person's judgement because they can now indulge in more of their impulses and ambitions and get away with it.

Whatever decisions that individual person makes with that power go on to shape their moral character. Next time they make a selfish decision, will they choose to correct themselves, or will they rationalize it because it's personally beneficial, therefore setting a precedent that will make it easier to rationalize that same selfishness in the future? It's a slippery slope and before you know it they've seared their own conscience.
 
K.C. said:
I hope I'm not reading your post too literally Octy, but I don't think things are that clean and deterministic. Humans aren't passive victims of a static external formula beyond their control. I think wealth changes the environment in which a person makes choices. Becoming wealthy often means you get political privilege, social influence, legal exemptions etc. Those all distort a person's judgement because they can now indulge in more of their impulses and ambitions and get away with it.

Whatever decisions that individual person makes with that power go on to shape their moral character. Next time they make a selfish decision, will they choose to correct themselves, or will they rationalize it because it's personally beneficial, therefore setting a precedent that will make it easier to rationalize that same selfishness in the future? It's a slippery slope and before you know it they've seared their own conscience.
Click to expand...
As with everything I post on Moopy, it's a post rather than an attempt at a coherent philosophy. A certain level of wealth transforms one's environment, that is inevitable and, yes, the other people in that environment become influential. But why do they all seem to become so evil? What shuts off, when and how? We have enough of them for a coherent study of some description.
 
Shoat said:
I actually think the current generation of tech bros are the WORST demographic that you could ever gift social influence to.

They are fully subscribed to the mantra that technological progress TRUMPS (geddit) every and all social consideration.

If DYSFUNCTIONAL YOUTH and MASS HUMAN UNEMPLOYMENT are the price of a tech bro saying "look how smart I am and what I can build", they will gladly have us all pay it.
Click to expand...

And this is why we are now in a world of mass data centres as AI becomes the new arms race, working towards evolving AI at a ridiculous pace before we know what it could do, whether we may or may not need it, or what we even need it for. Not just presenting danger to the world but also creating the biggest false economy in history. It makes the dotcom bubble look like a local pop-up store.
 
octophone said:
As with everything I post on Moopy, it's a post rather than an attempt at a coherent philosophy. A certain level of wealth transforms one's environment, that is inevitable and, yes, the other people in that environment become influential. But why do they all seem to become so evil? What shuts off, when and how? We have enough of them for a coherent study of some description.
Click to expand...
I don't think anything "shuts off" physiologically. I think they make incremental selfish decisions, gradually rationalizing them, and behavior that they used to find abhorrent shortly becomes normalized. It's especially easy when they see similar/worse behavior being ignored or rewarded. And from there they surround themselves with people who will cheer and encourage it, and now you have a whole corrupt institution.
 
Shoat said:
Well I certainly trust them on sight. I reckon 4 Trust Funds, 2 Basement Dwellers.



Is this an America-specific issue? I'd wager fairly widespread in the UK as well if not other western societies.

And it'll be a mix of the reason Big Ron's given (exhausted parents), but I also think for some there's a genuine desire / pride in their children being as engaged with tech as they possibly can be. I know some of my relatives see it as a badge of honour that their kids are much more adept and prepared for "modern life" as they can be.
Click to expand...
I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with wanting your kids to be tech savvy and attuned with the modern world as much as possible, just like I don't think there is much harm in going the complete opposite, because ultimately I think society's woes are far removed from tech, they're just the lens we filter them through at present.

Put it this way. I had a mate at school whose parents believed the hype that TV would be the downfall of society and was polluting the minds of children. He wasn't allowed one at home at all. He turned out just like the rest of us 🤷‍♀️
 
I can understand TikTok not wanting to attend this potential public lynching, but this is just going to keep going on and on. At some point media platforms are just going to have to work harder to control their content. It's not like they don't have the money to put more resources into it.

www.bbc.com

TikTok declines Irish invite to discuss dangerous driving videos

Thre social media company was asked to attend to discuss "content that glorifies irresponsible or illegal activity".
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
 
funky said:
And this is why we are now in a world of mass data centres as AI becomes the new arms race, working towards evolving AI at a ridiculous pace before we know what it could do, whether we may or may not need it, or what we even need it for. Not just presenting danger to the world but also creating the biggest false economy in history. It makes the dotcom bubble look like a local pop-up store.
Click to expand...

COMPLETELY

Ethics aside. It does feel like an almighty bust's coming when funds realise how much COBBLERS they've invested in.

Linkedin is flooded with AI startups, and fuck off are they all going to be an Anthropic or OpenAI. "We automate your business operations with AI" - no Jenson you just added a chatbot to your existing RUBBISH and we still don't know what it actually does.

big ron said:
I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with wanting your kids to be tech savvy and attuned with the modern world as much as possible, just like I don't think there is much harm in going the complete opposite, because ultimately I think society's woes are far removed from tech, they're just the lens we filter them through at present.

Put it this way. I had a mate at school whose parents believed the hype that TV would be the downfall of society and was polluting the minds of children. He wasn't allowed one at home at all. He turned out just like the rest of us 🤷‍♀️
Click to expand...

Agree with the first point - it's 100% necessary for kids to be tech savvy.

I will disagree slightly on the TV comparison though. TV is much more heavily regulated, and it (mostly) isn't real-time so dodgy material can be filtered before ever making it to air. The tech bros have been actively FIGHTING against regulation of the internet, and national governments have proven weak pulling them into line.

Andrew Tate is one of the most obvious and visible examples. Removed from Big Brother as soon as they twigged he was a shitbag. 10 years later when he's become a much more dangerous figure - greater reach, much more explicit with his views, and facing rape and trafficking charges - and Elon lets him back on Twitter and endorses his posts, whilst sacking his moderation team.

Social media platforms aren't a problem in principle. The scumbags currently in control of them are.
 
:D

We have done nothing wrong. In our lives. Ever.

But because we're LOVELY SAINTLY PEOPLE, we are gifting billions and billions and billions that we very clearly don't have to. We love society.
 
Their chief lawyer has absolutely drunk the kool aid

“Because teens move fluidly across dozens of apps, we need an industry-wide solution. We therefore call on our industry peers, TikTok, Snap, and YouTube, to implement this new framework, right away,” Mahoney said in a statement. “As a parent, I’m proud of both the work Meta has done to protect kids historically, and of this new groundbreaking agreement. But its success depends on all other social media platforms following Meta’s lead.”
Click to expand...

The fact they say these things and mean it.

Interesting they called out Google, Snap and TikTok though. Will they get ahead of this or avoid the shift as long as they can and risk a consumer trust problem.
 
That's corpo drivel. They definitely know they're full of shit. But trying to save face by using language like "groundbreaking" and "follow our lead" and deflecting to other platforms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom