"Asocial media" and collective self images

Subtle Demise · Dec 16, 2018

notimp said:
The crucial difference is knowledge generation/sharing versus service arrangements. People in here dont want to learn anything, they want their problems to be fixed - and dont care what it takes.

If they are ignored the first time, because they havent shown any chops or even preliminary understanding of the matter they repost their query three times in different threads. Stuff like this is not moderated.

If they dont get any traction in the corresponding thread, they post their own mainline thread version, of "help me personally - I'm so confused, lol". Usually with a nonsensical title, so the thread cant even coincidentally help another person who finds it.

The Choixdujournx software thread is currently abused for "should I update or not, and to which version, and how" baselevel support.

The Switch emulation forum is frequently overrun by people reading "softwareprojects" in the title and thinking that every softwareissue they've ever experienced in their life would fit in there.

None of the just mentioned issues are issues of "information distribution" - every single one is expecting personalized support, from the baselevel up.

Information is free - support is not. As simple as that. If someone has a hard time understanding a somewhat new concept - I'd be the first one out of the box trying to assist him or her in their effort - if the 500th voice tries to trick people into assisting them in correctly updating to "most recent version" easily. Thats something different.

You see it in the posting frequencies of support requests on these forums, the target is not any longer, that people should have access to information (use search), the target is to serve every one with a service wish and a smartphone.
(More people being able to "participate", more traffic, more ad revenues.)

Because high quality service for free, doesnst scale (its the same ten people...) you are forced to choose between "do you let the overal information quality suffer by also having some wrong solutions, and made up memes circulate" or do you try to educate a generation of users that "visit this forum, there is where you get helped", isnt a concept that is economically supposed to be provided by forums at all.

No one gets paid, they are abusing the system. If their insisence on getting "personal support services longtime" doesnt stop, actual information quality suffers. Communities (some of which I have co managed in the past) are destroyed this way.
--

I initially mounted this as a distributed campaign, to at least get the Switch Homebrew forum to a point, where people could visit to read release postings, changelogs and converse with developers again -- without being interrupted by "fix my thing" solicitations five times a day.

I was under no illusion to be able to "fix" the rest of the forum.

A community never is and never was a place, where you get all this great free help, without being able to provide anything on your own. They only became that, once corporations started to popularize the concept of a "service community" ("this is where you get helped") which is an oxymoron. (People hunting for points to get a jpeg of a participation medal, as the underlying economy?)

People growing up on facebook never quite realized that, because to them, what ever they did, had no consequences - everything just scrolled away after a while -

Facebook never was about search or information distribution. It was about 800 "nice to meet you" on the street encounters a day. And wishing four people a day happy birthdays.

Thats was originally the "asocial" aspect in the titled of the thread.)

The type of people you describe usually don't last too long. They either get called out or ignored and eventually leave or end up changing their ways. Moderation is lax, yes, but I think that's a good thing. Unless you want this place to become another resetera or gamefaqs. I know I don't.

Again, I have to point out that the help provided is entirely voluntary, and only an insane person would try to charge for any of the advice given here.

ThoD · Dec 16, 2018

I don't even know why I'm bothering but oh well, here we go:

notimp said:
The crucial difference is knowledge generation/sharing versus service arrangements. People in here dont want to learn anything, they want their problems to be fixed - and dont care what it takes.

Altruism IS masochism, by human nature everyone first and foremost is looking for THEIR best interest, so of course they will by default want someone else to offer a solution, otherwise they wouldn't even make threads/topics and instead solve it themselves. Why do you think people make threads asking for help and whatnot to begin with? Everyone wants things simplified and asking other people for help with some of the hassle is part of that. For a beginner especially who couldn't care about anything past just having basic functionality, expecting them to go through the hurdles to learn is idiotic. I've been involved in the 3DS scene for pretty much 5 years for example and still hardly know half the things, learning so you can problem solve is not as simple as you think and expecting that out of every person who has a tiny little easy-to-fix issue makes no sense.

notimp said:
If they are ignored the first time, because they havent shown any chops or even preliminary understanding of the matter they repost their query three times in different threads. Stuff like this is not moderated.

If they dont get any traction in the corresponding thread, they post their own mainline thread version, of "help me personally - I'm so confused, lol". Usually with a nonsensical title, so the thread cant even coincidentally help another person who finds it.

Do you mean... EXACTLY what you have done here?:/ You made a topic, didn't get the traction you were looking for and the responses it gathered, so then started this pointless thread way back just to get more people to pay attention to your drivel and to throw tantrums or butthurtedly accuse staff just for moving your thread to where it was supposed to go... Want people to not do something? Start by setting an example for them to look after by not doing said thing, simple as that!

notimp said:
The Choixdujournx software thread is currently abused for "should I update or not, and to which version, and how" baselevel support.

The Switch emulation forum is frequently overrun by people reading "softwareprojects" in the title and thinking that every softwareissue they've ever experienced in their life would fit in there.

While not versed whatsoever in the Switch section and while that always happens on any system hacking scene, on top of the answer being relatively simple to find, you gotta remember one important thing, ongoing development on a regularly updated system is VOLATILE, so while one version may work with everything just fine, a single update could potentially mess everything up, that's why people are so afraid and keep asking about it. As systems get older, you see a lot fewer of those questions, as things stabilize of sorts. I do agree though that people should try searching at least a bit first...

notimp said:
None of the just mentioned issues are issues of "information distribution" - every single one is expecting personalized support, from the baselevel up.

Information is free - support is not. As simple as that. If someone has a hard time understanding a somewhat new concept - I'd be the first one out of the box trying to assist him or her in their effort - if the 500th voice tries to trick people into assisting them in correctly updating to "most recent version" easily. Thats something different.

You see it in the posting frequencies of support requests on these forums, the target is not any longer, that people should have access to information (use search), the target is to serve every one with a service wish and a smartphone.
(More people being able to "participate", more traffic, more ad revenues.)

Because high quality service for free, doesnst scale (its the same ten people...) you are forced to choose between "do you let the overal information quality suffer by also having some wrong solutions, and made up memes circulate" or do you try to educate a generation of users that "visit this forum, there is where you get helped", isnt a concept that is economically supposed to be provided by forums at all.

No one gets paid, they are abusing the system. If their insisence on getting "personal support services longtime" doesnt stop, actual information quality suffers. Communities (some of which I have co managed in the past) are destroyed this way.

Helping with troubleshooting IS a form of information distribution, just because it's meant to problem-solve instead of educate it doesn't mean it's any less informative, especially if properly written like I've seen most people reply to such topics with. Nothing is free though, that couldn't be any more idiotic... You go to the library for information for example and pay a fee or pay for internet in order to be able to access it. You sound too spoiled to even realize these things, besides the air you breathe, you pretty much have to pay for everything else in life in one way or another, information and support are the same in that matter. Why would someone write the same "piece" on something for example explaining how it works, which in turn explains how to solve issues on it and give it for free ONLY if not for support? Wouldn't that be weird? You think all guides and educational materials you find all over the place have been written for nothing? If you pay for them, then not and if they are free, it's because whoever wrote them wants to share the knowledge, in which case, what's wrong with them also helping to solve issues free of charge? Part of my job is repairing things, I get paid for it, yet sometimes if the issue is ridiculously minor I'll just decline and tell them what to do to fix it. Just for you though if you are ever my client I'll charge you premium for even a simple resistor replacement since you want that

You can't expect people asking for monetary incentive just to tell someone "you simply are missing X file, download and copy it to X directory, that's all" or "it's safe to update, go ahead". And of course, there are tons of guides, so the "service" you think should be paid is almost always just directing them to the proper guide, so there's that too...

Since I feel like I got out of point, gonna leave things here, hope you at least are starting to understand that people online have the freedom to choose whether they help for free or not and build a community around helping each other, while also having the freedom to simply leave such places if they are not to their liking, which I implore you to consider, better for everyone! Unless of course that's all a pile of bullshit and you are attention whoring, since there's no other reason for you to stay on here so insistently when you dislike this place so much...

notimp · Dec 16, 2018

ThoD said:
Helping with troubleshooting IS a form of information distribution, just because it's meant to problem-solve instead of educate it doesn't mean it's any less informative,

Thats a meager point though, if we are real. The overall argument is about that the "effort cost" rises into unlimited territory.

If you need it that simple:

Open source software development scales - because you write software once - then can freely distribute it to thousands. Recouping your cost, or attracting other developers, making the thing you are working on better.

Open source "information distribution" scales - because you write an article once, then through the power of search, and by Amazon abusing it, have wikipedia articles, that are read to people via their Alexas at request, or at least are findable and serve a public purpose.

Free and on the spot "support services" - still need service centers filling several football fields of space in either the Philippines or former eastern block countries, by whom people expect to be treated with respect and understandment, because they bought a thing.

The argument, that my support session with aunt Judy explaining to her how stuff works "scales" simply is defunct, because - once we reach that point, the next honcho also wants a free and personalized support service, and not extrapolate information out of my "intensive talk" with aunt Judy. (For information distribution purposes there are better formats than publizised support sessions.)

I mean its all fine and dandy to have to explain to people, that if you request personal support, someone has to individually attend your needs - and your lofty "thanks" in the end - isnt even worth getting that persons attention, if we talk about this being requested at scale - but, can we get real for a moment?

How do you think all those "free work" you are demanding gets sourced? I mean really? Just from the standpoint, of people being quite sure, that 90% of users in here never even possibly could return the favor. What "social accolades" do you have to offer to people for that to make sense in any society? "Work for me for free" never sounded that entising, or what?

This is good will farming, exploitation - however you want to call it - but personal support - never is free.

"Support communities" - if such a thing ever existed, only worked if people where somewhat on the same information level, and would help each other out "equaly" - which often is the case among early adopters. This radically changes, once the "support me longtime" folks enter the field later down the road - then its hoping, that you can get them educated enough so that the support base broadens. But to be honest - in a homebrew community, this barely possible with people who have only learned to swipe right s o far ("whats the most easy way, .."). When ever you read the sentiment in the bracket, you can replace it with "never has a chance to become a "supporter"" almost instatlly.

Which is why in the market economy support is still a paid occupation. Am I really telling you stuff there thats completely new to you?

I mean I appreciate people actually tackling my arguments here but "support also is information" is rather beside the point.

Information as long as it can be copied freely and accessed universally does "scale" (net positive effects), personalized support never does.

GhostLatte · Dec 16, 2018

Okay, Mr. Shapiro.

notimp · Dec 29, 2018

What does "the facebook bubble" mean, when it comes to political advertising?

Basically a sea change in how people get addressed by advertisers.

Backgorund: Facebook created a "transparency database" of election ads, that was partly scrapable - before they blocked scrapers, but now they allow US researchers only access via an APi that allows for limited queries a second.

Also facebook didn't include the actual targeting data. So which keywords advertisers used to reach you. Google and Twitter did, or at least partly did.

The researchers giving a talk here - https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9419-explaining_online_us_political_advertising - scraped that data, and similar data from google and twitter - and did some basic analysis on it.

Here are the most important (imho) findings on two slides:

81% of ads on facebook are microtargeted. With a spend of only up to 100 USD they are supposed to reach about 1000 people, and are only very short lived.

Looking at the disparity between political ads on facebook and google, facebook has 2x more advertisers than google, but about 10x more total ads commissioned, with total impressions not accounting for that difference, so what this means is - that you have people tailoring their ads on facebook to be microtargeted to an extreme. Probably to be more current, more short lived.

They also had listings of ad groupings per PAC (political action committee), and left with the notion that people who know what they are doing are almost exclusively using micro targeted ads to reach their potential voters. The Trump PAC, for example spent 95% of total money spent on micro targeted ads.

Still have questions, why there is no potential about a common discourse anymore? I've got one more question: What does this do to democracy exactly? Because we never had that discussion.

General statement: The overall landscape for advertisers changed like night and day, from the times where they would buy ads in a paper, or on the side of a building. And you can be sure, that if facebook has you down for interests: cats, that that will be used to affect your voting decision in the next elections.

FAST6191 · Dec 29, 2018

Does that mean ad blocking tech is going to see a new assault in years to come? Most of the ad market is fraud and money laundering so you get a few people making token gestures against it and not a lot else, but if the politicos are seeing something in it...

Am I going to be having my very useful for web development regex filter and have to visit dark corners of the internet and gain an appreciation for... poetry ( https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/decss-haiku.txt )? Would installing ad blocking tech via malware be a politically subversive act? Or worse if I DDOSed such a platform? What about if I added a whole load of fake users and rendered the database inaccurate?

More seriously "What does this do to democracy exactly?". Nothing you can realistically argue against, and nothing a lot of the already existing techniques did not brush up against (is micro targeting all that different to something like robo calling a conservative area saying your opponent, albeit in an nominally for them, is supportive of the gays?). I am good at two things in this world, maybe, and neither are country level economics* but apparently via the means of a vote I am still allowed to express an opinion which theoretically becomes the way it is done. We already knew it is a money game, and nobody really cares to limit it in the US (contrast to say the UK's various limits on spending in elections), and all this really does is change the theoretical effectiveness of certain things. I am about as curious as I ever get with politics to see the effects, experiments and more with this sort of thing, more so if I can be an arsehole and mess with it somehow (messing with TV, phones, newspaper, billboards and radio is difficult, the internet is my world though) just for giggles.

*though as we are still having a debate with regards to methods of control, top down, bottom up, trickle down... one might argue nobody has a clue else we would have something that demonstrably works, and the rather chaotic/unpredictable nature of things means there is a reasonable argument that nobody will ever know enough. At the same time pure laissez faire is also demonstrably fraught with difficulty. Guess we now have a bloody spectrum.

notimp · Dec 30, 2018

No - dont.

DDOSing is only used by extortion scammers these days, and is a frequent excuse high on the list of apparently german agencies, when they are trying to convince the legislative body, that they need partly offensive "cyber, cyber" capabilities.

(Because its the only "hack" they arguably have the time to mount a "counter offensive" against.

)

Also - the issue is being discussed in NGO cycles - even though the last time I set in such a presentation, people argued, that if we'd restrict facebooks ability to allow people to be microtargeted for political ad purposes, we would also have to do that for send outs over the postal system - because "where is the difference".

So ignorance is still at about 120% and thats the main issue you are up against.

I've also looked a bit into the local election campaign system in the US - and many candidates there actually "like" facebook - because its really made for clean cut politicians to fakerepresent values in picture form, and fake interact with their voters - so.. thats an issue you are up against as well. They love their targeting abilities.

But people are looking at the data (also at the ads that facebook "missed" in their transparency database

), and they are looking at the networks that are buying, and at the astroturfed (= fake grassroot movements) messages that get traction. And by people I mean maybe five gals and girls.

Concerning the issue, that people really get fed with what they want to hear (see: https://www.economist.com/united-st...eriments-tell-you-about-why-people-deny-facts ) thats a media competency issue. You tackle that with education.

Oh and may I suggest, that you build no more safe spaces? The opposite is needed right now.

Be polite though. (I know, pot calling the cattle black...)

Microtargeting isnt robo calling though, its psychologically exploiting your existing behavior patterns to integrate a desired action - but heavily customized. Cambridge Analyticas claim to fame was not that they had 87 mio datasets of americans, which facebook sold to them very willingly, it was that they had a new psychological classification method for people, that allowed for higher desired rates of response, and more important to them - faster classification, that previous models.

Its the "boy if you like dogs, do I have the political candidate for you" thing you do at local "go out and vote" drives (political "activists" with an I pad and a list of your interest, being sent to them, at your doorstep), but scalable - and with actually never seen before rates of response. (Researched with survey return rates f.e. increasing manyfold.)

Also you dont have to convince people to vote for the opposing candidate - you just have to convince them to be lazy and stay at home - because the race "has already been decided". For example. With microtargeting - no problem whatsoever.

(Convincing people not to set an action is much easier.)

There is only one argument that people use to indicate that this would be fine - and this is pointing back to an electoral tradition in the US, where it was normal for votes to be bought anyways - and really going for "exploiting people psychologically - in ways they will not be able to defend against" -is just "fair game", because "everyone can do it equally". Money being a limiting factor of course.

For me you dont have to proof fraud - though. Its enough, to prove that "informed decision making" has limited to no effect on opinion forming any longer - and we are talking serious damage towards the democratic principle.

FAST6191 · Dec 31, 2018

"These days"
Times change, even more so in hacker world. Just because DDOS has become the tool of scammers today does not mean it will not be back in the hands of someone with an even more fun use tomorrow.

Does potentially orders of magnitude more specificity really make enough of a difference to warrant a different approach in law? Laws will almost inevitably be poorly thought out and probably prevent things from reaching an equilibrium as quickly as they otherwise might.

As far as robo calling though I am not going to be so quick to draw the distinction you make. I have seen plenty do things along the nicely gerrymandered district lines.

notimp · Dec 31, 2018

Argument is, that people are actually willing to bring criminal cases against people that used it for political action. So you cant rectify encouraging people to do it in a distributed fashion any longer.

I almost added "sadly" - because the argument was possible to say, that those are just "virtual sit ins".

But then the people with the highest capability of those sitins today are actually bot net maintainers..

edit: District lines arent the same. They dont tell people, that I get your attention better by adhering to fear tactics, than your general sensibility as a caring mom/dad, for example. Think of the famous Lyndon B Johnson "Girl with Daisy and Atomic Bomb explosion" ad and think about that this, and probably 500 different other ads, will be run in every election, but only to the people psychologically susceptible to it, while the pro gun ads will only be run for the NRA sympathizers, and the ethnical support ads will only reach the ethnical minorities, and the animal activists amongst the old ladies get the "loved his dogs, and had puppies three weeks ago, which his children loved" ads...

Thats microtargeting. Targeting people by gerrymandered districts, is old school.

You'll have quite a few more instances, of people voting because of a "wall" - while four fifths of the country will be wondering, what the heck they are talking about - but to them, this was the concept that held their imaginations. Also they never got the chance to talk to someone that told them "hey its BS" - because their decision making structures, do not include to "talk to Bob at work about this" anymore - because they feel sufficiently informed by whatever bubble serves them - in a customized feed.

The question being, if this is a new quality of forming peoples opinions, and the answer is actually - yes. Am I especially afraid of election fraud? No - but I'm afraid, of only candidates having a chance any more that can be 500 different things to different people. And I dont mean what people are projecting into them, but what they are actually telling folks..

notimp · Dec 31, 2018

Ah, right around the 35C3, you get all info material delivered to you without any further research.

Konstanze Kurz and Ingo Dachwitz delivered a talk on Microtargeting in the political spectrum - and it is available in simultaneous translation in english.

https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-10037-microtargeting_und_manipulation

Simply download one of the video files, and use your video player to switch audio tracks to english.

So you can listen to a second opinion as well.

FAST6191 · Dec 31, 2018

notimp said:
Argument is, that people are actually willing to bring criminal cases against people that used it for political action. So you cant rectify encouraging people to do it in a distributed fashion any longer.

I almost added "sadly" - because the argument was possible to say, that those are just "virtual sit ins".

But then the people with the highest capability of those sitins today are actually bot net maintainers..

edit: District lines arent the same. They dont tell people, that I get your attention better by adhering to fear tactics, than your general sensibility as a caring mom/dad, for example. Think of the famous Lyndon B Johnson "Girl with Daisy and Atomic Bomb explosion" ad and think about that this, and probably 500 different other ads, will be run in every election, but only to the people psychologically susceptible to it, while the pro gun ads will only be run for the NRA sympathizers, and the ethnical support ads will only reach the ethnical minorities, and the animal activists amongst the old ladies get the "loved his dogs, and had puppies three weeks ago, which his children loved" ads...

Thats microtargeting. Targeting people by gerrymandered districts, is old school.

You'll have quite a few more instances, of people voting because of a "wall" - while four fifths of the country will be wondering, what the heck they are talking about - but to them, this was the concept that held their imaginations. Also they never got the chance to talk to someone that told them "hey its BS" - because their decision making structures, do not include to "talk to Bob at work about this" anymore - because they feel sufficiently informed by whatever bubble serves them - in a customized feed.

The question being, if this is a new quality of forming peoples opinions, and the answer is actually - yes. Am I especially afraid of election fraud? No - but I'm afraid, of only candidates having a chance any more that can be 500 different things to different people. And I dont mean what people are projecting into them, but what they are actually telling folks..

People are willing to bring cases for any number of things, and for any number of reasons. As a general principle I have no problem with it. All the notable cases I see have been more that the data was obtained by less than legit means, or some quirk where entities outside the boundaries of a place are not supposed to play or something.

I am still not prepared to dismiss district lines and the extensive nature of polling done by various groups, and some of the things they teach those canvassing to do (many of those doing low end cold reading). It might not be quite as fine grain as some things the modern world affords but it is not a massive leap forward from where I sit, and even if it was then so what?
I can't say that at some level I don't find it a bit disturbing, and not having to have such things come my way is why I never engage with such sites, block adverts for everything I own and everybody I meet and generally take measures to keep my data out of their hands or so corrupted/noisy as to be useless. At the same time though I can't think of a reason to shut it down by force of law.

"Asocial media" and collective self images

h

GBATemp Addict (apparently), but more like "bored"

Well-Known Member

GBAtemp's Official Van Master™

Well-Known Member

Techromancer

Well-Known Member

Techromancer

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Techromancer

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum