|
Social Media (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| 72hrpartyanimal |
| so it sounds like the key to using WhatsApp (and probably any social media forum) is to keep it in small groups and avoid strangers. |
|
|
| planetaryplayer |
| subscribe to my only fans |
|
|
| JEO |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
And, Jeo, I'm actually happy for Finland because your deadpan remark is probably a sign that you guys have been successfully battling misinformation. I come from a country much more similar to the US when it comes to seeing hordes of protesters fuelled by misinformation storming public buildings. We're bracing ourselves for something along these lines next week, actually, as Bolsonaro is now threatening he will either be arrested or killed if he isn't reelected... and intelligence services are now scrambling to deal with the mobilisation via WhatsApp.
I'm aware Finnish democracy must have its problems, but if this isn't one of them, I guess it comes to show how solid it is :) |
It's like you said; WhatsApp groups are not public. Battling mis and disinformation on a platform that both enables larger-scale communication, and is supposed to be end-to-end encrypted, is quite a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" type of situation. How are you going to intervene effectively when you not knowing what people are talking about is an integral part of your platform?
I'm too drenched in infosec crap to have an objective view on whether the majority of WA users would just keep using WA if it all of a sudden wasn't E2E encrypted or came with some fine print that effectively nullified the promise of privacy, but I do think that backpedaling on privacy would have an unwanted effect on WA, and ultimately Facebook.
Though it doesn't feel totally out of the question that WhatsApp could introduce some sort of a limit to the size of end-to-end encrypted group chats, I just don't feel like they have any incentive to do it for now or any time in the foreseeable future. Even Twitter, where I'd say content-moderation should be relatively easy, is so limp-wristed at curbing disinformation that they might as well not do it at all. Banning Trump was a nice photo-op, but they haven't really done much about the problem on their platform itself. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by 72hrpartyanimal
so it sounds like the key to using WhatsApp (and probably any social media forum) is to keep it in small groups and avoid strangers. |
The key to WhatsApp, and life in general, is to not be a gullible ing moron who can't spot the difference between likely truth and specious bollocks.
I just didn't realise people used such big groups full of people they don't know. Sometimes I get added to a group with people I don't know, but it's invariably friends organising some kind of event or gathering. |
|
|
| planetaryplayer |
| Was on the way to the beach from my motel but had to turn back to . I’ve been on this toilet for almost an hour. I’m posting it to onlyfans |
|
|
| Lews |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
The key to WhatsApp, and life in general, is to not be a gullible ing moron who can't spot the difference between likely truth and specious bollocks. |
Come on, Jack, don't ask the impossible, now :( |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by JEO
It's like you said; WhatsApp groups are not public. Battling mis and disinformation on a platform that both enables larger-scale communication, and is supposed to be end-to-end encrypted, is quite a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" type of situation. How are you going to intervene effectively when you not knowing what people are talking about is an integral part of your platform? |
There are no panaceas, but there are some measures that could help mitigate the effects of fake news on WhatsApp.
For groups that reach a specific threshold, like 10 or more members, you could add machine-based adverts to news outlets known to adhere to basic standards of journalism (much like the adverts Gmail used to have for a while).
Privacy would not be sacrificed, as there would be no human moderation, and there would be an incentive against the formation of large groups (which would most likely slow down the spread of fake news as the recent limit to numbers one message can be forwarded at a time).
I've heard more complicated ideas being thrown around, such creating systems to scan for water marks and signatures in files that may contain illegal content and flag them. Needless to say, the problem with this sort of system is that it might be required by law to be misused in autocracies... and the solution would become a problem of its own.
| quote: | Originally posted by JEO
Though it doesn't feel totally out of the question that WhatsApp could introduce some sort of a limit to the size of end-to-end encrypted group chats, I just don't feel like they have any incentive to do it for now or any time in the foreseeable future. |
This has been the greatest problem, to the best of my knowledge. These companies have become too big to risk alienating part of its user base.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
The key to WhatsApp, and life in general, is to not be a gullible ing moron who can't spot the difference between likely truth and specious bollocks. |
I mean, humans aren't exactly famous for being paragons of rationality a hundred percent of the time :p |
|
|
| 72hrpartyanimal |
| quote: | Originally posted by planetaryplayer
Was on the way to the beach from my motel but had to turn back to . I’ve been on this toilet for almost an hour. I’m posting it to onlyfans |
why am I hard? |
|
|
| planetaryplayer |
| You didn’t know you wanted that content, now you do:eyespop: |
|
|
| 72hrpartyanimal |
| quote: | Originally posted by planetaryplayer
You didn’t know you wanted that content, now you do:eyespop: |
hahaha! |
|
|
| Swamper |
The Internet really changed soon after smart phones came around. So many idiots posting content who would never have been smart enough to figure out how to get online. I also use fb purity so my feed isn't as ridiculous as some ppl's.
As much as moderating TA in it's popular years was a pain in the ass, I am grateful I never had to deal with conspiracy bull. These days, it makes me chuckle when I see certain ppl on fb ranting daily about politics ...but when they were active on TA they NEVER posted in Political Discussion/Debate - despite it being super active in the Bush years. lol |
|
|
| Sykonee |
| Man, was it ever a hoot lurking in that Tab back then. The good ol' "RON PAUL!" brigade and all. Wasn't Lira the Mod for that one? |
|
|
|
|
