this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
812 points (85.1% liked)

Showerthoughts

29793 readers
925 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics
    • 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
    • 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
    • 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Yet.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Sooooo, there’s a lot of truth to it.

Once a site is big enough that they want to cash in on it, they develop tools and ai and make choices that are designed to keep you on the site longer.

These tools and ai quickly discover that the way to keep you engaged is to keep you enraged. Content that angers you will keep your engagement longer and keep you coming back.

This is well researched and I’ll cite sources if you need it.

So what happens is that the ai, while it isn’t designed explicitly to show right wing content, will end up learning that showing that content accomplished it’s actual goal. It’s original goal being “Keep people on the site longer”

Right wing content fits a nice niche where it engages a lot of people. Donald trump claiming that he lost the election will enraged the right because they believe in his horse shit and that the election was stolen, and the left gets enraged by it because it causes unnecessary violence like Jan 6th. The AI loves that because it’s fairly universally enraging, and engaging most people.

[–] DauntingFlamingo@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To build upon this, just getting into a petty online argument about nothing keeps users coming back. I enjoy reading the back and forth between two strangers

[–] dmmeyournudes@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

There is no truth to it. The vast majority of negative interactions and aberations on a social media site is brought about by the users, not by the operators of the site. These tools they have are not as powerful as you think they are. The only reason they have any power at all is because the users give them that power because that is what they want. You don't have a successful site by manipulating the user base to do what you want them to do, they will just leave. You simply give them what they want and they never leave. "The algorithm" is there to give the user what they want, and they're actually really bad at doing that.

[–] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The users create the content, the background ai decides which content to prioritize and promote to the front page, etc..

Which part of that is wrong?

[–] dmmeyournudes@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The fact that the user is the one imputing the data to determine the received content in some way. You're selecting the content you interact with, not a black box trying to take over the population. They just want you to stay on the site, look at the ads, and never leave. They don't care about your political allegiance or what movies you like, they will feed you whatever you want.

[–] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Agreed!!!

The user selects the content that they interact with, but because content that upsets you is so engaging, the AI will heartily promote it.

look at how engaged you are with these comments! Is it because they make you upset?

How interesting. ;-)

[–] Strangle@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I only really ever comment when I have something to say. This usually is only when I disagree with something.

That’s why my upvote ratio is terrible. I rarely comment when I agree with something someone has said. I bet my ratio would be a lot better if I did.

But that’s just human nature, I think. Some people crave acceptance and validation so they comment agreement and some people crave conflict and challenge, so they comment in disagreement.

[–] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Everyone is the hero of their own story, so I think they feel the need to “correct” perceived injustices.

I think your experience is common.

And I think AI exploits this, because it’s useful.

[–] Strangle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
[–] dmmeyournudes@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're attributing combative interaction to an algorithm on a site that has no algorithm. Congratulations you just proved the algorithm isnt needed to cause interaction. People do this with no computer forcing them to, but tons of people here are convinced that every other site is filled with bots manipulating content for people when the people are asking for the content, sometimes very directly.

[–] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I’m attributing combative interactions to “keeping your attention”

The ai just exploits this.

So while it’s not NEEDED, it does happen and it works.

Maybe your point is better worded as “the AI doesn’t overrule your own ability to choose”

Which while true, doesn’t change my point. Combative interactions happen without ai, the ai just learns and promotes them.

[–] antonim@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

So you understand the system very well, yet completely ignore the ethically dubious aspects of the system.

People are not born desiring harmful garbage. They are, at least in part, taught, conditioned to desire it.

When you say that a site "feeds you whatever you want", you're ignoring the chicken-or-the-egg pattern of desire and satisfaction on the market. The site teaches you want you want. Internet addiction and the ways in which contemporary media and tech affect your mind (most obviously by reducing people's attention spans) are fairly well known today.

Imagine a drug dealer who sells his garbage to the same person so much that they develop an addiction. With your logic, we can just blame the junkie who keeps returning to the dealer, while the dealer is pretty much innocent - surely it's not his responsibility if someone else develops an addiction and destroys their life!

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Purely anecdotal, but I have two Facebook profiles. I'm extremely left leaning, especially in the fake one, yet both have their feeds blowing up with articles from conservative pages and groups about this "small town" song, Donald Trump, and Ron DeSantis. Oh, and Fox News articles too, up until I hid them.

I don't engage with any of those communities or anything even tangentially related to them. I have discussed all of those concepts in groups lately, though.