Technology

59457 readers

3225 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

1002

Judge rules YouTube, Facebook and Reddit must face lawsuits claiming they helped radicalize a mass shooter | CNN Business (www.cnn.com)

submitted 8 months ago by btaf45@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

273 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] RatBin@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Again, no such a thing as a neutral space or platform, case in point, reddit with its gated communities and the lack of control over what people does with the platform is in fact creating safe spaces for these kind of things. This may not be inentional, but it ultimately leads towards the radicalization of many people, it's a design choice followed by the internal policy of the admins who can decide to let these communities be on one of the mainstream websites. If you're unsure about what to think, delving deep into these subreddits has the effect of radicalising you, whereas in a normal space you wouldn't be able o do it as easily. Since this counts as engagement, reddit can suggest similar forums, leading via algorhitms to a path of radicalisation. This is why a site that claims to be neutra is't truly neutral.

This is an example of alt-right pipeline that reddit succesfully mastered:

The alt-right pipeline (also called the alt-right rabbit hole) is a proposed conceptual model regarding internet radicalization toward the alt-right movement. It describes a phenomenon in which consuming provocative right-wing political content, such as antifeminist or anti-SJW ideas, gradually increases exposure to the alt-right or similar far-right politics. It posits that this interaction takes place due to the interconnected nature of political commentators and online communities, allowing members of one audience or community to discover more extreme groups (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right_pipeline)

And yet you keep comparing cultural and media consumption to a physical infrastructure, which is regulated as to prevent what you mentioned, an unsafe management of the terrain for instace. So taking your examples as you wanted, you may just prove that regulations can in fact exist and private companies or citizens are supposed to follow them. Since social media started to use personalisation and predictive algorhitms, they also behave as editors, handling and selecting the content that users see. Why woul they not be partly responsible based on your argument?

[+] RealFknNito@lemmy.world -9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

No such thing as neutral space

it may not be intentional, but

They can suggest similar [communities] so it can't be neutral

My guy, what? If all you did was look at cat pictures you'd get communities to share fucking cat pictures. These sites aren't to blame for "radicalizing" people into sharing cat pictures any more than they are to actually harmful communities. By your logic, lemmy can also radicalize people. I see anarchist bullshit all the time, had to block those communities and curate my own experience. I took responsibility and instead of engaging with every post that pissed me off, removed that content or avoided it. Should the instance I'm on be responsible for not defederating radical instances? Should these communities be made to pay for radicalizing others?

Fuck no. People are not victims because of the content they're exposed to, they choose to allow themselves to become radical. This isn't a "I woke up and I really think Hitler had a point." situation, it's a gradual decline that isn't going to be fixed by censoring or obscuring extreme content. Companies already try to deal with the flagrant forms of it but holding them to account for all of it is truly and completely stupid.

Nobody should be responsible because cat pictures radicalized you into becoming a furry. That's on you. The content changed you and the platform suggesting that content is not malicious nor should it be held to account for that.

[–] cophater69@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This is an extremely childish way of looking at the world, IT infrastructure, social media content algorithms, and legal culpability.

[–] RealFknNito@lemmy.world -5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

As neutral platforms that will as readily push cat pictures as often it will far right extremism and the only difference is how much the user personally engages with it?

Whatever you say, CopHater69. You're definitely not extremely childish and radical.

[–] cophater69@lemm.ee 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Oh I'm most certainly a radical, but I understand what that means because I got a college degree, and now engineer the internet.