Read on Twitter
Currently mulling over, which would be better:
Social media platforms with total free speech on a public utility model (no bans)
OR
Segregated platforms for various groups.
Seems like the latter would only encourage echo chambers and support the age of disinformation.
Social media platforms with total free speech on a public utility model (no bans)
OR
Segregated platforms for various groups.
Seems like the latter would only encourage echo chambers and support the age of disinformation.
Personally, I think the age of information was great is it allowed a variety of voices who could post their perspectives in public. However, the loss of the "morning paper" that everyone read, that was the red thread of the common narrative is somewhat tragic.
Narratives form
Narratives form
a large part of what we are as groups, having a group with a ton of different "meta narratives" drives down social cohesion, as people can no longer adhere to and accept basic shared values on which the group is built.
Add to it change of incentives that continue to
Add to it change of incentives that continue to
create issues, for instance the main KPI of academia and news media being "the most trustworthy" to being "the most popular", this is like making the prom queen head of the math club.
