Our most trenchant and persistent criticism of Facebook has been rooted in a skeptical view of its illusory component; one where illusory experience is scapegoated as our fatal flaw to be subsequently exploited by Facebook’s evil machinations. We view the net-worth of its board of directors as being directly proportional to their malign influence in our society, pulling the wool over our eyes with an addictive illusion while voraciously funneling our private information into vast data-centers where AI is trained to new heights of persuasiveness. In this view ‘The Filter Bubble’ and ‘Fake News’ can easily be seen to be be mere effects of the following feedback loop:
User engages with material that matches their base desires, they are seduced and enveloped by these illusions, and the illusory experience of having their internal life seemingly manifest in the real world, this feels important to them so they form groups on this basis, like the prisoners in Plato's allegory of the cave.
Facebook optimizes for engagement, presenting this user with more specialized material, eventually this material detaches from reality altogether.
However this results in a skeptical cul-de-sac where the meaningfulness of Facebook is ignored. Instead it is scapegoated so that we can largely avoid taking responsibility for our actions. To refute these claims Mark Zuckerberg has emphasised our agency in deciding what Facebook is for and does. Regarding Fake News he has said:
> “I do think there is a certain profound lack of empathy in asserting that the only reason someone could have voted the way they did is they saw some fake news … If you believe that, then I don’t think you have internalized the message the Trump supporters are trying to send in this election.”
And regarding the Filter Bubble:
> “The research also shows something that is a little bit less inspiring, which is that we study not only people’s exposure in Newsfeed to content from different points of view, but then what people click on and engage with. By far the biggest filter in the system is not that the content isn’t there, [or] they don’t have friends who support the other candidate or are of another religion, [it’s that] you just don’t click on it. You actually tune it out when you see it. You have your world view. You go through, and I think that we would all be surprised how many things that don’t conform to our world view that we just tune out.”
Usefully Winnicott’s transitional object helps us out of the skeptical cul-de-sac by foregrounding our agency in choosing our illusory experiences and thereby restoring their hopeful character. It also matches Mark Zuckerberg’s informed view on what happens on Facebook.
And this kind of scape-goating - throws the 'baby out with the bath-water' as it were. Basically we need illusions and they effect how we all live. Especially when we all agree on what illusions we want to share...
Permethrin is actually a more appropriate pesticide for bedbugs but unfortunately they are mostly resistant in the US at least. I have found literally 'baking' a room to 120F + for 30+ mins is the most effective way to eradicate bedbugs. Amazon search (360 propane heater), and don't die of CO poisoning or burn your place down. For a more tempered approach, you can try setting up 'safe zones' with boundaries of double-sided sticky tape, smeared vaseline, or diatomaceous earth. (you can kinda tell they've co-evolved with us ey!).
Please no, Belle isle is a state park, (formerly city) the grand prix is already too much. (Could you imagine a 'Central Park grand prix'? or 'Hyde Park Heavy Digger Convention' etc...) these are beautiful spaces because historically they have been reserved for peaceful and quiet enjoyment.
This is o-k. Seems to root it's critique, albeit obliquely, in a strong skepticism of images and illusion - itself originating (in western culture at least) with Plato's allegory of the cave. Also seems to route all this through Freud's notion of the uncanny and doppelgangers. Overall a slightly incoherent, generally pessimistic view.
For a psychiatrist with altogether more useful approach to Facebook I recommend Donald Winnicott.
Regarding the 'Opioid Crisis' ... while very real, the pain and suffering it is responsible for being very large - as a 'talking point' in a political context, it is very much a construct that has emerged only very recently (especially in the context of how long these drugs have been available and detrimental to communities)
In Canada for example, CBC radio which i listen to - covers the issue extensively and it is clear that the government is pushing it as an issue, directly and with long-form podcast type pieces about related issues.
It is clear that this is propaganda at the State level.
Reasoning for this approach is clear: One having citizens nodding off across the socio-economic spectrum is costly. Two: It is very easy to build consensus that addressing this is 'A good thing', in the same vein - prior recurrent talking points in the Canadian context are issues regarding native peoples. Three: The need to build consensus is a correction(carrot) for the failed 'the war on drugs'(stick) - itself a piece of political theater. Four: A successful approach to this problem will make the government look good.
Essentially, a solid 'problem' for 'government' to 'solve'. But perhaps other more systemic issues are being ignored ... and we are being distracted by the State's shallow performance of magnanimous and utilitarian care.
Examples of tackling more substantive and more divisive issues would be penalizing the pharma companies, doctors or the profit-driven market they operate in. In terms of the endless hand-wringing over the plight of native-peoples - addressing systemic racism with reparations...
So to re-iterate - the recent injection of the 'Opioid Crisis' in Zuckerberg's PR narrative is an action that is rooted in the State's performance of a 'duty-of-care' at the level of propaganda. It is hardly likely to have come from his cursory tour, and rather from careful study of Facebook's omnipotent data feed and its close relationship with the secret services and those responsible for Propaganda in this country. Basically it represents the capitulation of a very powerful private organization to the forces of state-hood. Something that Zuckerberg's clear ambition for political power might address. At the very least it represents how the State and Facebook are assimilating have already assimilated.
I grew up in South Africa from 87-92, I have lived in Detroit since 2011. In terms of this being an impossible situation, I think truth and reconciliation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_and_reconciliation_commi...) might be one way of addressing the racial segregation that persists here. (https://demographics.virginia.edu/DotMap/index.html). At the very least I was surprised and glad to see a comment about the racism that the article elucidates at the top here on HN.
Being trite - Wittgenstein also said 'The world is all that is the case' ... a precept that a mission to mars for example certainly flexes, of course as soon as it came to pass, the meaning of 'the world' would reconfigure itself.
To the point though ... another maxim that I often find myself employing is: 'The road to hell is paved with good intentions'.
I like to think of Thiel as someone who has access to Facebook, rather than a person. Besides - It's not clear how much of a person is left in the face of such a pool of legitimate signals.
The tendency of the signals to reach a resonant frequency is another matter...
Basically, follow Thiel, he wasn't wrong throwing down with Trump ... another way of saying it ... I don't think it was because of what he believes in.
I wonder too. Most likely can pull em from whatever front-end
is presenting the ledger but they stay in the blockchain, which makes the legality of hosting a node interesting ...
Not really how Steem handles this either ... but they would be a precedent...
