Here to fight ignorance, aren’t we?
Anyway, no to urban legend, yes to isolated incident.
DAMN. Now that’s fucked up. (Although I hate to say it – I’ve heard worse)
I can’t help but picture you with a paddle wheel, you know like those they use at Church Festival days, where you simply spin it and whatever inanity comes up, you type it in. Doorhinge’s Wheel of Non-Sequitors and Insults. Whether it makes sense or actually even remotely touches on anything someone says doesn’t matter at all. Just spin the wheel and get your reply!
I get that. You have 40 responses in this thread alone. Quite a bit of time and effort with the wheel spinning.
I did a quick search, so I can’t swear by the results, but the 40 responses in this thread are 40 more than your responses in the Mueller Investigation, Trump’s Shutdown, Trump Clusterfuck, and Stupid Republican threads combined. It speaks volumes about what is important to you. Some privileged white kid having a handheld drum beaten within his earshot while his friends chant racist comments gets your juices flowing. The indictment of Trump supporters, Russian collusion, the shutdown, and the myriad of idiocy from the Republican party however don’t even get your ire up. You’re exactly what the Republican party wants and needs in their base.
That is some quality quick searching!
I know this isn’t directly related but this controversy just reinforces my negative view of social media and Twitter in particular. Everyone is rushing into judge what happened and a lot of people are advocating violence. The people in charge of Twitter really need to adopt a no-tolerance policy for anyone who advocates any sort of violence and/or doxxing against a living person. Otherwise I’m afraid someone is actually going to end up dead in the future.
What Twitter should actually do is declare itself a common carrier, and therefore it would have no responsibility for policing content whatsoever. No one goes after the phone company if you get a harassing phone call.
As soon as an information service starts curating content, it becomes a publisher rather than a carrier, and it assumes responsibility for that content. And the volume on twitter, facebook etc is so great that they can’t hope to police it all. They have been putting their faith in bots, but AI is nowhere near the capability of detecting the kinds of nuance required.
Once one of these services gets successfully sued for libel because they allowed libelous content on their site, the floodgates will open, the lawyers will come out of the woodwork, and the lawsuits will fly fast and furious. I’m surprised it hasn’t happened already.
“Approval” is measured on a binary approve/disapprove scale. It indicates that someone has a generally positive view of a politician, but doesn’t necessarily mean that they might not have a MORE positive view of another politician, or of many other politicians. So a politican’s “approval rating” will often be much higher than the percentage of votes they could realistically expect to get in an actual election. (Not always; in 2016, both major party candidates got a percentage of the vote that significantly exceeded their approval ratings. This was because there was a large group of voters who didn’t “approve” of either candidate, but still had to pick one).
Even so, given that Trump’s approval rating is only 40% among ALL Americans, I have to conclude that the Rasmussen poll is either an outlier or not very recent.
The services should probably be more worried about a wrongful death suit if someone ends up getting killed do to a social media-induced lynch mob. Even if legally they aren’t found liable, the PR nightmare could easily put them out of business.
I am familiar with Google’s personalized search. I just didn’t expect it to heavily modify this type of search.
Personalized search most commonly influences results by location - if I search for a product it prioritizes products available closest to me. It also can modify search based on what web sites I routinely use, so if I do a search which includes one of my favorite web sites in the results, it will be elevated over the others. Of course, since Google doesn’t publish the algorithm none of us really know exactly what they are doing. They may be using a million different pieces of data they have on me to ‘tailor’ my search.
But what I wouldn’t expect is for that search to grossly change factual queries. If I search for ‘fastest car in the world’ and Google knows I search for Camaros a lot, I would not expect it to bring up a Camaro site if the Camaro is not, in fact, the fastest car in the world.
In this case, the search was ‘black people wearing Maga Hats’. And my search did roughly turn up images of black people wearing Maga hats, as you would expect. But other people here claim that when they do the same search, they see Kanye and all the rest are white people. So I guess if you really wanted or needed some pictures of black people wearing Maga hats, it appears Google is actively thwarting thst search.
Try turning personalized search off (easy enough to do), and let me know what the query results show in the image tab.
Sure. I actually spent money on this - I ran an information service for a few years, and we were worried about things like people posting child porn. So we consulted a lawyer, and the lawyer recommended thst we do nothing, and even better, remove any tools that would even theoretically look at our user’s content. As the lawyer said, once you deny one person’s content you are declaring your responsibility for content management, and the courts would hold me liable for any crimes of that sort committed on our service. Our only safety was to maintain a strict hands-off policy and claim common carrier status if sued.
I am surprised this hasn’t happened yet to facebook, Twitter or YouTube. All of them now have content policies and claim to police their content, and yet all have let plenty of content through that could be legally actionable.
The PR problem could actually be more damaging–Facebook,Twitter, and YouTube are all dependent on people having accounts. If there is an organized campaign for people start deleting accounts on one of the services that’s what would probably put them out of business. Myspace lost a lot of followers and they didn’t even have a campaign organized against them.
…you aren’t understanding how it all works. Twitter isn’t curating your content. Neither is google, or facebook, or whatever “information service” you have chosen to use.
**You **are curating your content. What you watch, who you follow, what you like, its all fed into an algorithm and the service feeds up to you what it considers what it thinks you want to see more of. It recommends you follow more people with similar views: and eventually you create your own personally curated feedback loop. You see and hear only people that you agree with.
Its these feedback loops that were exploited at the last US elections. People and organizations like Cambridge Analytica figured out how the algorithms worked. They had data they shouldn’t have had access too and they sold that data to people who used it to devastating effect. Its what pushed the margins of the Brexitvote from “Remain” to “Leave.” If you weren’t targeted by the algorithms you never saw the ads: so nearly everybody never knew there was an active disinformation propaganda campaign going on silently in the background. The only people who saw the ads were people who were susceptible to those ads. It was utterly brilliant in a terrifying, horrible way.
I went over to Pew to get an idea of what Trump’s approval rating among blacks was. It was 14% in June 2018. Their topline approval was 40% at the time, about what it is now.
Disapproval among African Americans was 80%.
Heh. When I do it, I get random black people, plus Jack Black in a MAGA hat.
The NY Times has a new article here.
…that’s not the fucking NY Times.
It’s not an “if” situation:
[Social media rumours in India: counting the dead
…a video clip shared on WhatsApp went viral in India in June 2018, with tragic consequences. In the clip, a man on a motorbike appears to be kidnapping a child from the street. The messages that accompanied the video as it was shared from phone to phone alleged that the incident had occurred in Bangalore and warned the community to be on the lookout for “potential child-lifters”. Vigilante mobs formed and killed an estimated 10 people.
The clip was in fact part of a safety video produced by a child welfare group in Pakistan.](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-e5043092-f7f0-42e9-9848-5274ac896e6d)
WhatsApp is still around.
Facebook based incitment was instrumental in creating the climate on which the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya population in Myanmar occurred a year or so ago
This thread is just a small part of something that began with a manipulative Twitter post from a suspicious account, it shows how easy it is to get the hate started when social media is used by people to whip each other into a frenzy.
Apparently the Kovington Katholic Kids were harassing people even before the Phillips incident. According to that woman, they were yelling “Build the wall”, “MAGA”, and “Slut”.
Also apparently the PR firm that the little asshole hired has a huge social media botnet, which is how the bullshit right-wing counter-narrative spread so quickly.
D’oh! You are, of course, correct. Mea culpa.
Just did a quick search on that opinion piece in the NY Post (as already noted), quite different than the NY Times.
A Snopes piece says that the question of whether Phillips lied about being a Vietnam vet is “unproven”. His words in the transcript seem to say that he says Vietnam era or Vietnam times vet. CNN and the NY TImes made corrections to their transcript because they claimed he was a Vietnam vet, which is not something he clearly said.
The college incident was in 2015.
I find it unsurprising that a person of color has faced two separate incidents involving their race.