From 654d8915e7c14c500d4fafba66dbc988890627b0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Christine Dodrill Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 16:34:04 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] blog: add philosophical post about social media (#310) Signed-off-by: Christine Dodrill --- Cargo.lock | 2 - blog/social-media-mistake-2021-01-26.markdown | 273 ++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 273 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) create mode 100644 blog/social-media-mistake-2021-01-26.markdown diff --git a/Cargo.lock b/Cargo.lock index 99a4705..4d1a4ab 100644 --- a/Cargo.lock +++ b/Cargo.lock @@ -1785,7 +1785,6 @@ dependencies = [ "percent-encoding", "pin-project-lite 0.2.3", "serde", - "serde_json", "serde_urlencoded", "tokio 0.2.24", "tokio-tls", @@ -2805,7 +2804,6 @@ dependencies = [ "pretty_env_logger", "prometheus", "rand 0.8.2", - "reqwest 0.10.10", "reqwest 0.11.0", "ructe", "sdnotify", diff --git a/blog/social-media-mistake-2021-01-26.markdown b/blog/social-media-mistake-2021-01-26.markdown new file mode 100644 index 0000000..cb1554f --- /dev/null +++ b/blog/social-media-mistake-2021-01-26.markdown @@ -0,0 +1,273 @@ +--- +title: "Was Social Media a Mistake?" +date: 2021-01-26 +tags: + - philosophy +--- + +# Was Social Media a Mistake? + +Subjective Opinions Ahead + +This entire post is a big pile of opinions. Please feel free to skip this one if +you don't want to hear it. It says so in the footer of each page, but I want to +emphasize that these opinions are my own and not that of my employers (past, +current or future). This is my subjective opinion. I cannot be unbiased about +this topic (though I also doubt that anyone who has experienced it can be), so +instead of trying to pretend to be unbiased in this article I'm just going to +let the words out. + +I also don't really have any solution to propose in this article. This is a +problem that is way bigger than a single shitposter like me can really handle on +their own. I am one person among an unfathomably large crowd. If this makes you +think, then I have done my job. + +Buckle up, I'm doing a philosophy. + +> It is difficult +> to get the news from poems +> yet men die miserably every day +> for lack +> of what is found there. + +- [Asphodel, That Greeny Flower](https://poets.org/poem/asphodel-greeny-flower-excerpt) (William Carlos Williams) + +Traditionally, getting your message in front of thousands or millions of people +required you to be a public figure working for a media company. The idea of a +self-service tool for individuals to get a message out to anyone who cared to +read it was expensive, and usually limited to small areas due to the expense of +mailing things. [In the late +1960's](https://www.history.com/news/who-invented-the-internet), +[ARPANET](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET) was created by the US +Department of Defense as a project to enable remote access to computers over the +existing phone network. Some of the first services that were created are +constants even today: remote login, file transfer and email. After a decade of +experimentation, the National Science Foundation funded the installation of +supercomputers at a few universities and provided connectivity between them. +Ordinary people wanted to hook into these supercomputers and the internet as we +know it today blossomed forth. + +With this new network it was easier than ever to get your message out to the +world, all you needed to do was install expensive hardware, an expensive type of +phone line and potentially custom software to serve your message over a protocol +such as [Gopher](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gopher_(protocol)). Or, you could +just lease space from someone else who had set all this up. During this time +everything was a bit experimental. Everything was quirky. Personality and flair +oozed from the edges of every handcrafted page you set your eyes on. Of course, +making those pages was an art in its own right. + +These bursts of creativity gave people ideas, and as time progressed, companies +formed around the idea of making it easier to let people get their message out +to the internet via their servers. Geocites, Livejournal, Blogger, Wordpress, +Tumblr, Twitter, Facebook, Orkut and others formed to help people communicate. +Facebook became larger than most countries. Twitter became the communications +media of choice for global superpowers. Wordpress became one of the biggest +attack vectors on the internet. Geocites lived, died and was reborn. The +survivors were branded "social media". Social media forms the backbone of a lot +of our modern culture. You probably got the link to this article from some form +of social media. + +> "Glum, Marc, glum" The clap on the shoulder made him start, look up. It was +> that brute Henry Foster. "What you need is a gramme of soma. All the +> advantages of Christianity and alcohol; none of their defects". + +- Brave New World (Aldous Huxley), Location 672-674 + +And through all of it people got their messages out. Entire social movements +were formed on the backs of those messages. Without those messages, I probably +would not exist in the way that I currently do. Those messages have changed me +and likely have changed _countless_ other people too. + +So, now that we have everyone communicating so openly, freely and to mass +audiences, what are the societal consequences? A country divided. Left and +right, red and blue, messages of love twisted into messages of hate, divisions +across cultural and ideological boundaries. Has it all really been worth it? Is +the ability to communicate so quickly so far really a net benefit for us all? + +
+ +![](https://cdn.christine.website/file/christine-static/blog/rmdA6xJ.jpg) + +
+ +- [Duck or Rabbit?](https://www.newyorker.com/cartoon/a18662) - Paul Noth + +Has it really been worth destroying families in its wake? + +What about those with chronic anxiety disorders or other similar things? + +There's a good word for what happens as a result of this: +[doomscrolling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomscrolling). + +To put it lightly, 2020 has not been a year with much in the "good news" +department. A global pandemic separated people. Conventions were cancelled. +Travel became all but impossible. We had the ability and foresight to see it +coming but we still fucked it up. + +> come on brain make the happy chemical you lump of fuck + +- [housewive#1](https://twitter.com/heebiejeebis/status/1123236591755874304) + +Sex sells movies, but doom sells newspapers. And on social media, negative +articles perform better. Doom makes people afraid. Fear makes people angry. +Anger makes people react. Reactions drive engagement. Engagement makes the +algorithm put that article in front of more people so it can make the anger +happen all over again. + +> Fear is the path to the dark side.
+> Fear leads to anger.
+> Anger leads to hate.
+> Hate leads to suffering.
+> I sense much fear in you. + +- Yoda, The Phantom Menace + +Is The Algorithm to blame? People talk about The Algorithm like it's some kind +of benevolent god that gives them the happy chemical sometimes. How does what +The Algorithm optimizes for have effects on society at large? By putting posts +that are bound to cause engagement (basically reactions) in front of the largest +audience possible, how does this affect people? How does this affect their +worldviews? How does this affect how people percieve what is true and what is +false? + +One of the biggest hits that social media has done to our world is that it's +made truth become a relative thing instead of an objective thing. Take the +recent 2020 election for example. There are people who believe that Donald Trump +objectively won the election, despite all of the other correlating evidence that +leads others to conclude the exact opposite. This seems confusing at first. To +become the president you need to win the election. To win the election you need +more electoral votes. Joe Biden got more electoral votes, therefore Biden won +the election, therefore Joe Biden is the new president of the US. + +But these [alternative facts](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSrEEDQgFc8) +persist. Thanks to idiologies such as QAnon, these views flourish. Thanks to +social media, they have places to communicate, re-interpret and plan. Where does +the responsibility of individuals end and the responsibility of platforms begin? + +> Each individual must know them self to be free of all forms of external +> reliance. This is not to imply that one should not trust others or band +> together in alliances of friendship and community. It is simply a warning that +> relative truth is constantly shifting in the hands of those who desire to +> control, and even though their motives may be of good will, it is still a form +> of control. + +- [The Shifting Models of Existence](https://wingmakers.com/writings/philosophy/chambertwo/) (WingMakers) + +Are we really all that different? We're all human. We are all limited. What real +benefit do we reap by this separation? What do we gain by letting us get so +divided that we can't realistically see the chasm being bridged? + +Can this chasm be bridged? + +What of the ruined lives in the wake? + +Without social media though, my best friends would be unknown to me (if they +even ended up existing). My fiance would be a stranger to me. This blog likely +wouldn't exist in its current form. I would have never questioned my gender. I +would have never done all of the things that have lead me to be the person I am +today. I would not have the job I have today. I would not have the career I have +today (early in my career, networking over slack and IRC while delivering pizzas +is literally how I got my break into the industry). Social media is how I keep +in touch with my family. To put it simply, social media's proliferation is a +good part of how I managed to become the self-realized nonbinary person I am. +Without it existing I would be a vastly different person. + +It makes me wonder how others are affected like I have been. How many would come +out as transgender without knowing the concept exists? How many would feel safe +to speak out against taboos without spaces to explore what taboos even are? + +Is it the _implementation_ of social media that is flawed or is it the _concept_ +that is flawed? + +According to [this post by Boston University's College of +Communication](https://sites.bu.edu/cmcs/2017/11/16/printing-press-digital-age-and-social-movements/) +human communication has had three major phases of development: + +- Oral Tradition +- Literacy/Books/Print Media +- Electronic Communication/Social Media + +We are just on the cusp of the last phase beginning, from a grander history +scale that is. The age of literacy and print media lasted for at least +_thousands_ of years. Social media and the interet has existed for 50 years by +the most liberal estimates. Maybe this is one of those cases where large changes +in these models cause outright societal chaos _because_ it exposes the biases +that we've already had for so long. Are things chaotic because of the change or +is the change making things chaotic? + +
+ +![The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born: now is the +time of +monsters.](https://cdn.christine.website/file/christine-static/blog/tumblr_e2c8ae84bcc1e8489d9c429f64c26aab_a6117f36_500.jpg) + +
+ +Just because we can get Uncle Bob's hot takes on the geopolitical state of +affairs between the US and Canada, does that mean we _should_? How do we know +what's more accurate: memes shared in parenting groups or news articles behind +paywalls? Why is it easier to get junk food than it is to get healthy things? + +This [post on +/r/starslatecodex](https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9rvroo/most_of_what_you_read_on_the_internet_is_written/) +comes to mind. Its main thesis (that it does an admittedly poor job defending) +is that most of what you read on the internet is written by a tiny fraction of +people that don't represent the rest very well. If you've run communities in the +past I'm sure you are familiar with the power laws at play: + +- 90% of people lurk and contribute only spairingly +- 9% of people actively contribute to discussions or create new one +- 1% of people seemingly have no other social life outside that community + +Those top 10% of contributors are either somewhat sensible people (in rare +cases) or more than likely not representative of rest that just passively lurk. +We can see these patterns arise in other places too. Most people that read books +consume them without contributing to discussions about them. Even fewer people +are authors. Fewer are prolific authors. Politics (via voting rates), recipe +groups, even multi-level marketing scams fall into these power rules. + +Is this power rule something that is just natural for humans? + +Was social media a mistake or could it actually end up being a net benefit like +the printing press turned out to be? What societal changes will we need to make +as a result of everyone being able to contact everyone else with the touch of a +button? + +> This discovery of yours will create forgetfulness in the learners’ souls, +> because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external +> written characters and not remember of themselves. +> +> The specific which you have discovered is an aid not to memory, but to +> reminiscence, and you give your disciples not truth, but only the semblance of +> truth; they will be hearers of many things and will have learned nothing; they +> will appear to be omniscient and will generally know nothing; they will be +> tiresome company, having the show of wisdom without the reality. + +- Socrates, commenting on writing and literacy + +The printing press changed so much because it made books available to the +masses. Before the advent of the printing press, making a book could literally +take a trained scribe decades. As such they were so expensive that only the +elite could afford them. The printing press made it easy for the masses to be +able to have books of their own. Not to mention it also made it easy for authors +and writers to create books too. Without a lot of these stories, a good chunk of +our culture would not exist. However at the same time because it was so easy to +churn out print media (compared to hiring a scribe for years, etc) the printing +press had real societal consquences. The renaissance was spread on the back of +the printing press. Christianity spread as a result of the printing press making +it so easy to print out bibles. Public libraries came into existence, changing +how books were used as a fundamental resource. + +Is social media the new printing press? If so, what impact will it end up having +on us all? + +--- + +I don't know the answers to a lot of these questions. I don't know if they can +be answered today. I don't know if it is possible to answer these questions. But +damn if they don't make me think a lot. There is just so much ground to cover +when you're talking about something like this that encompasses just about +_everything_. These are complicated questions. There are a billion moving parts. + +However, I think that if our society survives long enough to see it, social +media will end up becoming central to our lives in ways that we can't even imagine.