while creating a cyber-profile of you to a very deep extent, engaging in psychological manipulation and experimentation - you're the lab rat, and wasting your valuable time...
Yes, in that the crisis has been produced by the algorithms in all growth capital-dependent social media - the destruction of actual authentic community by a "virtual community" of atomized individual capital sources... the announced problem is that "someone said something wrong on the Internet" and the proposed, inauthentic, solution is to create new bureaucracies with rules, regulations, surveillance, censorship, and punitive powers - which of course will create more atomization, paranoia, anxiety, and depression - creating the need for new "solutions" with more bureaucracies and so forth and so on ad infinitum - or at least until the money runs out or people get sick of it all and check out or rebel. The only time-honored, authentic, and effective solution to "someone said something wrong on the Internet", a problem which started with USENET News in the 1980s, is to ignore what was said and not start or take part in a "flame war". But the inauthentic solution is always more lucrative, especially for those who desire power over others, and cannot provide any sort of service that people would voluntarily and freely pay for, without coercion by law or force of arms. And, of course, the death knell for all bureaucracies erected with the announced original intent to "solve a problem" is the near prospect - much more, the bringing about - of an effective solution to the announced problem. And announced problems must get worse and the victim class increase, year after year, so that bureaucratic power and funding must increase exponentially (see this, it's important: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZA9Hnp3aV4) The continued prosperity of the Corporation-State is dependent on exponential growth, and that growth must have no limit...
Actually, the announced problem is very rarely, if at all, the actual problem. The actual problem in social media is the algorithm-driven social engineering and psychological manipulation, created to maximize earnings growth, year after year, and this is an exponential process. Without the algorithmic psychological manipulation, neither the actual problem nor the announced problem would exist - but there would be no earnings growth sufficient to support an increase in equity value, resulting in a decrease in equity stock value to zero. The for-profit Internet is thus shown to be self-limiting - as is any other process dependent on exponential growth, given finite resources...
I like and agree with the way you think and express yourself.
You are one of the few I've found who acknowledge the salience of 'real' communities (small, emergent, and relatively egalitarian) vs 'faux' communities — top-down, rule-driven constructs artificially created to serve the interests of a few sociopaths and the hordes who either depend on them or are hypnotized by them. I can't count the times I was put in FB jail or shadow-banned for breaking FB's (or YouTube's) "community" standards. 😂.
Regarding those dependent on the system ... Just a couple of weeks ago after teaching a few kids' classes here in Japan, I had a short dinner and drink with the Austrian uncle (by marriage) of one the Japanese kids. He is maybe about 25 years my junior, but firmly believes there is a technological fix to every problem and that by questioning globalist solutions to health- economic-environmental problems, I am a tin-foil-hat wearing conspiracy theorist. Of course he sees no cognitive dissonance in the fact that he is an institutionally dependent high school STEM teacher.
That YouTube link is an excellent restatement of the Malthusian Dilemma ... our collective failure and impossibility to maintain exponential growth within limited resources. And though this may be a great post-hoc justification for many of the globalist policies and heuristics ... ike the Trolley Car problem, a purely mathematical 'solution' can range from an ammoral solution to something that is altogether inhumane an reprehensible.
Though the lecturer in that podcast does not mention Malthus by name, I agree that Malthus, though wrong in specific predictions, was right in principle. But you highlight something that does not appear to be part of Malthus's observation. As you imply, the problem of overpopulation is made worse by the kind of people attracted to power over others ... those Cluster B - dark triad types. A. Lobaczewski's "Political Ponerology", needs a serious update, but then it would most likely be banned and buried ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ponerology
On listening to the video and reading our exchange, I was reminded of a relevant passage I'd read a few years ago ...
"Thus, Norse society’s structure created a conflict between the short-term interests of those in power, and the long-term interests of the society as a whole. Much of what the chiefs and clergy valued proved eventually harmful to the society. Yet the society’s values were at the root of its strengths as well as of its weaknesses. The Greenland Norse did succeed in creating a unique form of European society, and in surviving for 450 years as Europe’s most remote outpost. We modern Americans should not be too quick to brand them as failures, when their society survived in Greenland for longer than our English-speaking society has survived so far in North America. Ultimately, though, the chiefs found themselves without followers. The last right that they obtained for themselves was the privilege of being the last to starve."
Diamond, Jared. Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed: Revised Edition (p. 276). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
On my better days, I go fishing. On my darker nights, I tend to agree with Ernst Mayr (first three paragraphs of Chomsky's 2010 Chapel Hill speech, https://chomsky.info/20100930/) ... human intelligence may be little more than a lethal mutation. Or as Stephen Hawking put it more bluntly ... "Greed and stupidity will mark the end of the human race."
On that, will grab a bite of an increasingly expensive dinner, and thank you for a stimulating exchange.
Hi Wendela.
Yeah, I tend to agree with you ... between intelligence and kindness, I tend to fall closer to one extreme at the expense of the other ... https://www.quora.com/If-you-had-to-choose-between-being-intelligent-and-being-kind-what-would-you-choose/answer/Steven-Steve-F-Martin
cheers.
Haven't listened to the videos yet, and time might prevent me. But a BIG fan of Hannah Arendt! Spot on quotes! Sad that so few are taking note.
Something I just listened to while browsing that dovetails well with your post ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOw0inF8TFg
Cheers
Yes, in that the crisis has been produced by the algorithms in all growth capital-dependent social media - the destruction of actual authentic community by a "virtual community" of atomized individual capital sources... the announced problem is that "someone said something wrong on the Internet" and the proposed, inauthentic, solution is to create new bureaucracies with rules, regulations, surveillance, censorship, and punitive powers - which of course will create more atomization, paranoia, anxiety, and depression - creating the need for new "solutions" with more bureaucracies and so forth and so on ad infinitum - or at least until the money runs out or people get sick of it all and check out or rebel. The only time-honored, authentic, and effective solution to "someone said something wrong on the Internet", a problem which started with USENET News in the 1980s, is to ignore what was said and not start or take part in a "flame war". But the inauthentic solution is always more lucrative, especially for those who desire power over others, and cannot provide any sort of service that people would voluntarily and freely pay for, without coercion by law or force of arms. And, of course, the death knell for all bureaucracies erected with the announced original intent to "solve a problem" is the near prospect - much more, the bringing about - of an effective solution to the announced problem. And announced problems must get worse and the victim class increase, year after year, so that bureaucratic power and funding must increase exponentially (see this, it's important: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZA9Hnp3aV4) The continued prosperity of the Corporation-State is dependent on exponential growth, and that growth must have no limit...
Actually, the announced problem is very rarely, if at all, the actual problem. The actual problem in social media is the algorithm-driven social engineering and psychological manipulation, created to maximize earnings growth, year after year, and this is an exponential process. Without the algorithmic psychological manipulation, neither the actual problem nor the announced problem would exist - but there would be no earnings growth sufficient to support an increase in equity value, resulting in a decrease in equity stock value to zero. The for-profit Internet is thus shown to be self-limiting - as is any other process dependent on exponential growth, given finite resources...
I like and agree with the way you think and express yourself.
You are one of the few I've found who acknowledge the salience of 'real' communities (small, emergent, and relatively egalitarian) vs 'faux' communities — top-down, rule-driven constructs artificially created to serve the interests of a few sociopaths and the hordes who either depend on them or are hypnotized by them. I can't count the times I was put in FB jail or shadow-banned for breaking FB's (or YouTube's) "community" standards. 😂.
Regarding those dependent on the system ... Just a couple of weeks ago after teaching a few kids' classes here in Japan, I had a short dinner and drink with the Austrian uncle (by marriage) of one the Japanese kids. He is maybe about 25 years my junior, but firmly believes there is a technological fix to every problem and that by questioning globalist solutions to health- economic-environmental problems, I am a tin-foil-hat wearing conspiracy theorist. Of course he sees no cognitive dissonance in the fact that he is an institutionally dependent high school STEM teacher.
That YouTube link is an excellent restatement of the Malthusian Dilemma ... our collective failure and impossibility to maintain exponential growth within limited resources. And though this may be a great post-hoc justification for many of the globalist policies and heuristics ... ike the Trolley Car problem, a purely mathematical 'solution' can range from an ammoral solution to something that is altogether inhumane an reprehensible.
Though the lecturer in that podcast does not mention Malthus by name, I agree that Malthus, though wrong in specific predictions, was right in principle. But you highlight something that does not appear to be part of Malthus's observation. As you imply, the problem of overpopulation is made worse by the kind of people attracted to power over others ... those Cluster B - dark triad types. A. Lobaczewski's "Political Ponerology", needs a serious update, but then it would most likely be banned and buried ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_ponerology
On listening to the video and reading our exchange, I was reminded of a relevant passage I'd read a few years ago ...
"Thus, Norse society’s structure created a conflict between the short-term interests of those in power, and the long-term interests of the society as a whole. Much of what the chiefs and clergy valued proved eventually harmful to the society. Yet the society’s values were at the root of its strengths as well as of its weaknesses. The Greenland Norse did succeed in creating a unique form of European society, and in surviving for 450 years as Europe’s most remote outpost. We modern Americans should not be too quick to brand them as failures, when their society survived in Greenland for longer than our English-speaking society has survived so far in North America. Ultimately, though, the chiefs found themselves without followers. The last right that they obtained for themselves was the privilege of being the last to starve."
Diamond, Jared. Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed: Revised Edition (p. 276). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
On my better days, I go fishing. On my darker nights, I tend to agree with Ernst Mayr (first three paragraphs of Chomsky's 2010 Chapel Hill speech, https://chomsky.info/20100930/) ... human intelligence may be little more than a lethal mutation. Or as Stephen Hawking put it more bluntly ... "Greed and stupidity will mark the end of the human race."
On that, will grab a bite of an increasingly expensive dinner, and thank you for a stimulating exchange.
Cheers from a pre-typhoon Tokyo.