!agree

The most recent one, maybe

I'm guessing Nine is talking about the older ones

Thne you'll just be framed as a alt-right dog-whistler

Really?

Zenimax lawyers relenting would be...unusual

Dunno; in LA most people drank some form of the kool-aid

It's not so much the number as the power wielded

It only takes a handful of people in key places to make it awful for everyone else

I just mean that the fact they're relative few (see: Tim's 8% Progressive figure) isn't the best indicator of the damage they can deal

Because it's not racist if it's about white people

!commands

Propaganda campaigns sometimes work

It can

It's not certain either way

It's basically a small nudge that will largely depend on external factors

Sounds like a strange situation

The more committed leftist I've known were always surprisingly elitist

Perhaps ironically so

That's interesting

I could see it happening

I think both Bernie and Trump attract people disaffected with the status quo

How's he a kook?

This is a novel line of Bernie criticism for me

@Scribblehatch Is there a date on that?

I am only finding clips

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbdW0HRkaO8 ?

*squirm*

I don't Discord a lot

But I've followed Tim's stuff for some time now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bapp45Vx0UE <-looks like a full video of the Sanders/Cruz debate

The fact this was troublesome to find, as opposed to 1-5 minute zinger clips, should tell you much about the kind of content people actually procure

TBH I am kind of part of the problem

I'll mostly leave them on as I e.g. cook

!list

!rank

!help

!subverse

!levels

!gamer

!minds

?

It's safe to assume that almost anything on the web is built as crazily as possible

I like to think of "Social" media as "anti-social" media

Pretty much all the incentives there directly oppose any usual notion of healthy discourse

No, it's been brewing for a long time

GG was the first time it spilled over anywhere remotely mainstream

But the seeds had been planted for a while

I'd say that was more like...a peak?

Was that still in 2014?

I only tangentially engaged with GG--it always seemed to me like an internet shitfight that idiot normies carried back into the real world

'cause they apparently think Twitter is real life

All of them

Reads like tribal propaganda to me, TBH

But Fish really did throw a kinda random fit, I do remember that

I don't really think it's the internet or phones or whatever that or bad; it's just that the business model currently incentivizes maximal engagement (for ad revenue), regardless of whether it's good or bad

Hence, clickbait headlines

Some of that it changing with e.g. Patreon and other, less centralized funding models

Would it be so unhealthy if it genuinely brought people more together, rather than further apart, via that validation economy?

I think if it was less...hostile? to normal interaction, people would regulate it more naturally

True, but I dunno; I don't recall dumb phones being this much of an issue, and that was a leap in connectivity

So I try and pinpoint some of the differences, and a major one I see is that it's harder to monetize your anger at your uncle's opinions through a dumb phone

I'm being a little facetious, but the fact people _didn't_ profit from it the same way, and normally profit this way now, I think accounts for a big part (though not all)

I think I see what you're saying

I'm less sure that's itself the problem, though

I think it's fine that people can post whatever and have the whole world see/comment

I think the bad thing is more that the incentive is to amplify the most divisive stuff (because it drives engagement)

From the platform's POV

That's what drives the validation and the social pressure and stuff

OH, a verified person says it, that means it's respectable, and everything they say is respectable, etc etc

I think at this point they've just drank their own Kool-Aid

I don't disagree

TBH I'm hypothesizing--I'm saying that's how people start to react to it

Hence why there was all that controversy over whether it's endorsement on Twitter's part or not

@Catallaxis Yeah, they eventually decided that's what it was

I remember a day before social networks, where people posted stupid opinions on forums and boards and mailing lists

Yet nobody's lives were ruined

Remember when "Someone's WRONG on the internet" was a meme?

lol

One thing I do see is that those day it was...narrower adoption, shall we say

Please tell me this is a real shirt

That video is beautiful

China has a great big F on religious tolerance generally

It's never been a great place to worship anything other than the party, or nothing at all

Is that a political act, Tim?

It's only stupid if you think it's symmetric or fair

It's only bad when the ruling class does it. The Oppressed can do it all they want

@moisterrific What happens is that the marketing guys are all in this far-left bubble, and they use how their stuff performs on social media as a metric of their success

Which is also a bubble

Like, the guy who wrote that Hulu tweet probably never got beyond "what can I say that people will applaud and make us look good to people"

And because you're a weebmuffin

They'll just pick new ones

All those words developed organically

They will continue to do so

No, they'd just form or choose different words

Like, in the time it takes for your ploy to work, they'll just move on

It's kind of like how "black" is more offensive than "African American" is especially sensitive circles

"Negro" was a neutral term in the mid 20th-century, IIRC

IT became vilified eventually