If you could magically change anything about how people behave on social media, what would it be?
I would want people to be less judgmental and more understanding. I try my best to live by Hanlon's Razor and I think others should too!
If you could magically change anything about how people behave on social media, what would it be?
I would want people to be less judgmental and more understanding. I try my best to live by Hanlon's Razor and I think others should too!
As a social media user, we hope you are informed about things like: how social media works, how they influence your emotions and mental state, how your data gets used or abused, strategies in how people use social media, and how harassment and spam bots operate.
The main thing I have taken away from this class is that social media in general is more complex than I originally thought. People often lie and act in ways that they would never IRL. It makes me rethink my heavy use of these sites.
Most programming languages are based in English, and there are very few non-English programming languages, and those that exist are rarely used. The reason few non-English programming languages exist is due to the network effect, which we mentioned last chapter. Once English became the standard language for programming, people who learn programming learn English (or enough to program with it). Attempts to create a non-English programming language face an uphill battle, since even those that know that language would still have to re-learn all their programming terms in the non-English language. Now, since many people do speak other languages, you can often find comments, variable names, and even sometimes coding libraries which use non-English languages, but the core coding terms (e.g., for, if, etc.), are still almost always in English.
I don't think that switching is strictly necessary whatsoever. Having a unified programming language is actually a plus since the knowledge of programming can be disseminated easier, and I think this actually outweighs the equity problem of it being in English.
The history of women in the workplace always tells the same story: women enter a male-dominated profession, only to find that it’s no longer a respectable field. Because they’re a part of it, so men leave in droves. Because women do it, and therefore it must not be important. Because society would rather discredit an entire profession than acknowledge that a female-dominated field might be doing something that actually matters.
This is a really interesting comment. I never thought of this being a phenomenon but it makes sense. Microaggressions I have seen kind of back this up.
Shame is the feeling that “I am bad,” and the natural response to shame is for the individual to hide, or the community to ostracize the person. Guilt is the feeling that “This specific action I did was bad.” The natural response to feeling guilt is for the guilty person to want to repair the harm of their action.
Shame and guilt are powerful motivators and can encourage good behavior if used well. I do think there is a negative connotation about these things: People on the internet are expected to be perfect and are shamed for little things with very little room for error. This is why I don't have twitter.
So now, it’s your turn to think about how you would want a retraction feature to work on a social media site like Twitter:
My retract feature would be quite simple. If a user posts a retraction, there will be a red box under the tweet that contains the original tweet that has "RETRACTED" written at the top. This would bring the focus towards the apology rather than the original tweet. Tweeters can edit retractions just like normal tweets. People who replied or engaged with the tweet for a significant amount of time will get a notification about the retraction.
For example, you can test a resume filter and find that it isn’t biased against Black people, and it isn’t biased against women. But it might turn out that it is still biased against Black women. This could happen because the filter “fixed” the gender and race bias by over-selecting white women and Black men while under-selecting Black women.
This is a really interesting section to me. I think this is actually a comment on how we need to work towards better benchmarks in terms of how we evaluate the bias of a model. It would be really hard to detect if people had not dug deeper. Is there a standard for this?
In addition, fake crowds (e.g., bots or people paid to post) can participate in crowd harassment. For example: “The majority of the hate and misinformation about [Meghan Markle and Prince Henry] originated from a small group of accounts whose primary, if not sole, purpose appears to be to tweet negatively about them. […] 83 accounts are responsible for 70% of the negative hate content targeting the couple on Twitter.” Twitter Data Has Revealed A Coordinated Campaign Of Hate Against Meghan Markle
This section talks about something concerning that happens online, where fake groups of people or bots work together to harass others. It gives an example of how Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been targeted with hate and lies on Twitter. It shows that a small number of accounts are responsible for most of the negative content. It's worrisome because it shows how people can use tricks to spread negativity and make things up on the internet.
When looking at who contributes in crowdsourcing systems, or with social media in generally, we almost always find that we can split the users into a small group of power users who do the majority of the contributions, and a very large group of lurkers who contribute little to nothing. For example, Nearly All of Wikipedia Is Written By Just 1 Percent of Its Editors, and on StackOverflow “A 2013 study has found that 75% of users only ask one question, 65% only answer one question, and only 8% of users answer more than 5 questions..” We see the same phenomenon on Twitter:
While I think the phenomenon of Power Users is a problem, I don't think it is the fault of the power users themselves. They contribute to the platform and are being helpful. However their implicit biases may play a heavy part into how information is disseminated. A solution to this would be more funding to becoming a power user is more attractive to a wider audience.
In the case of Canucks’ staffer uses social media to find fan who saved his life, the “problem” was “Who is the fan who saved the Canucks’ staffer’s life?” and the solution was basically to try to identify and dox the fan (though hopefully in a positive way). In the case of Twitter tracks down mystery couple in viral proposal photos, the problem was “Who is the couple in the photo?” and the solution was again to basically dox them, though in the article they seemed ok with it.
The use of the word "dox" here is interesting to me. In my mind, "dox" was always a harmful thing. I know of twitter users that get doxxed and as a result receive death threats from simply disagreeing with someone online. I guess the word has a wider meaning than I originally thought!
, like we see in the Ubuntu principle of some African Philosophies or in the care-based ecological ethics of many American Indigenous Philosophies?
Part of my final paper is on Ubuntu ethics, and the idea that "a person is made a person through other people" is really interesting to me. It combines the ideas of democracy in a way and ties it to social ideals. If people are being rude to others, protections don't apply to them so in this framework you can keep them away from society. however, those who contribute to the greater good are the ones met with success.
exploring the question of what if everything, even morality, could be derived from looking at rationality in the abstract.
I am really curious as to what Kant wrote about deriving morality from logic. There must be some sound basis to it (because the philosophy he operates under is rationalism). I wonder also if there were holes in his argument, where they came from?
Social media can make trauma dumping easier. For example, with parasocial relationships, you might feel like the celebrity is your friend who wants to hear your trauma. And with context collapse, where audiences are combined, how would you share your trauma with an appropriate audience and not an inappropriate one (e.g., if you re-post something and talk about how it reminds you of your trauma, are you dumping it on the original poster?).
I have very strong feelings about this topic. I feel that people forget that the internet is like a public forum: like a town square. if your feelings are vulnerable and you cannot handle randoms (trolls) attacking you, then dont shout it!
Tendency to continue to surf or scroll through bad news, even though that news is saddening, disheartening, or depressing. Many people are finding themselves reading continuously bad news about COVID-19 without the ability to stop or step back.”
I actually thought of doomscrolling as something else, or at least had a different definition. I thought of doomscrolling as "the inability to pull yourself away from addictive, enjoyable content". I never got sad while "doomscrolling". I was just unproductive.
Sometimes content goes viral in a way that is against the intended purpose of the original content. For example, this TikTok started as a slightly awkward video of a TikToker introducing his girlfriend. Other TikTokers then used the duet feature to add an out-of-frame gun pointed at the girlfriend’s head, and her out-of-frame hands tied together, being held hostage. TikTokers continued to build on this with hostage negotiators, press conferences and news sources. All of this is almost certainly not the impression the original TikToker was trying to convey.
I actually remember seeing videos from this popping up on my TikTok feed. In the moment I found it funny, but I realize now that it could have been harmful. As the book said " All of this is almost certainly not the impression the original TikToker was trying to convey."..
The spread of these letters meant that people were putting in effort to spread them (presumably believing making copies would make them rich or help them avoid bad luck). To make copies, people had to manually write or type up their own copies of the letters (or later with photocopiers, find a machine and pay to make copies). Then they had to pay for envelopes and stamps to send it in the mail. As these letters spread we could consider what factors made some chain letters (and modified versions) spread more than others, and how the letters got modified as they spread.
Its incredible that chain mail was a physical thing before e-mail came along. What is even the point of physical chain male? There seems to be no benefit to the "scammer".
[As I follow YouTube recommendations] It’s far more likely that my biases will be confirmed and possibly even enhanced than they are to be challenged and re-evaluated. And it’s likely for a lot of consumers of YouTube that they will be segregated by political cultural and ethnic lines.
It is very true that recommendation algorithms create an echo chamber of ideas that can be unhealthy. However, as shown before, inflammatory content is also not good to push onto peoples feeds. Therefore what is left?
at least tried to figure out how to make Twitter’s algorithm support healthier conversation.
I am unsure if this is something Twitter did, but in general, engagement drives ad revenue and therefore even if posts are inflammatory they can be carried and pushed onto many peoples feeds due to the high engagement. No matter what companies claim, it is the money that motivates them.
Universal Design has taken some criticism. Some have updated it, such as in acknowledging that different people’s needs may be contradictory, and others have replaced it with frameworks like Inclusive Design..
This to me is a very interesting footnote. How can two peoples needs be contradictory, so much so that they cannot coexist in the same building? It seems that there will always be someone at a disadvantage if this criticism is valid (I personally have doubts). How can this be reconciled?
If tall grocery store shelves were made with the assumption that people would be able to reach them, then people who are short, or who can’t lift their arms up, or who can’t stand up, all would have a disability in that situation.
This is an interesting way to think about disabilities. I always thought of disabilities as something crippling. However, when it comes to design, a disability can be something like this. The wording here makes it hard to understand, as "dis"ability makes it seem like the action is impossible when in reality it may just be very difficult. I need to keep this definition in mind when considering design projects.
Social engineering, where they try to gain access to information or locations by tricking people. For example: Phishing attacks, where they make a fake version of a website or app and try to get you to enter your information or password into it. Some people have made malicious QR codes to take you to a phishing site. Many of the actions done by the con-man Frank Abagnale, which were portrayed in the movie Catch Me If You Can
I believe these are the most notorious hacker attacks, because they can technically bypass any rock solid security. If the person themselves are fooled, their data is gone!
Deanonymizing Data: Sometimes companies or researchers release datasets that have been “anonymized,” meaning that things like names have been removed, so you can’t directly see who the data is about. But sometimes people can still deduce who the anonymized data is about. This happened when Netflix released anonymized movie ratings data sets, but at least some users’ data could be traced back to them.
This is especially worrying. Data is inherently linked and dependent on the user that generated it. There may be laws allowing for the distribution of anonymized data but if that can just be traced back, what's the point? This is something that lawmakers should consider, especially with the rise of Deep learning.
Feeling Powerful: Trolling sometimes gives trolls a feeling of empowerment when they successfully cause disruption or cause pain.**
This is definitely why most people troll IMO. A power trip can cause people to berate others on the internet which falls under "trolling".
Ask anyone who has dealt with persistent harassment online, especially women: [trolls stopping because they are ignored] is not usually what happens. Instead, the harasser keeps pushing and pushing to get the reaction they want with even more tenacity and intensity. It’s the same pattern on display in the litany of abusers and stalkers, both online and off, who escalate to more dangerous and threatening behavior when they feel like they are being ignored.
I agree wholeheartedly with this statement. Trolls that have a goal and are persistent will not give up if left alone. They should be stomped out if their online actions hurt real people. The internet isn't an anonymity blanket. People need to be held accountable
But one 4Chan user found 4chan to be too authoritarian and restrictive and set out to create a new “free-speech-friendly” image-sharing bulletin board, which he called 8chan.
The cycle of needing "more free speech!" Seems to happen often. As a site gets more popular there will be restrictions placed on the content. The people posting bannable content will simply migrate.
Let’s look at some examples where forms show problems with data entry and representation:
I actually had a section of a seminar on a topic very similar to this one. Not only is it enough to allow for freeform entry of long names, some names cannot be represented in ASCII and perhaps some cannot be represented in Unicode! When shipping products around the world, it is important to keep these things in mind.
Think for a minute about consequentialism. On this view, we should do whatever results in the best outcomes for the most people. One of the classic forms of this approach is utilitarianism, which says we should do whatever maximizes ‘utility’ for most people. Confusingly, ‘utility’ in this case does not refer to usefulness, but to a sort of combo of happiness and wellbeing. When a utilitarian tries to decide how to act, they take stock of all the probable outcomes, and what sort of ‘utility’ or happiness will be brought about for all parties involved. This process is sometimes referred to by philosophers as ‘utility calculus’. When I am trying to calculate the expected net utility gain from a projected set of actions, I am engaging in ‘utility calculus’ (or, in normal words, utility calculations).
I was actually unaware that utilitarianism was an approach to consequentialism. I had left a comment on an earlier chapter asking for the distinction between the two. It does not seem to be that they exist in the same domain, but rather that consequentialism is a superset of utilitarianism.
If we download information about a set of tweets (text, user, time, etc.) to analyze later, we might consider that set of information as the main data, and our metadata might be information about our download process, such as when we collected the tweet information, which search term we used to find it, etc.
I did not realize that metadata is one "abstraction" up from the data in consideration and that it can be changed depending on what you set as your "data". I always thought metadata was just timestamp, etc.
In this example, some clever protesters have made a donkey perform the act of protest: walking through the streets displaying a political message. But, since the donkey does not understand the act of protest it is performing, it can’t be rightly punished for protesting. The protesters have managed to separate the intention of protest (the political message inscribed on the donkey) and the act of protest (the donkey wandering through the streets). This allows the protesters to remain anonymous and the donkey unaware of it’s political mission.
I like this idea quite a lot. It puts into perspective how bots can be used to push a political agenda for better or for worse. I wonder what ways there are to catch botmakers or if there are ways to do so at all if people are careful enough.
such as in a click farm:
I am actually incredibly surprised that this exists. This looks so dystopian I had to do a double take. I wonder how widespread the use of click farms are to promote large influencers in the U.S
Actions are judged on the sum total of their consequences (utility calculus)
How is this different from utilitarianism? It seems to me that utilitarianism and consequentialism are two birds of the same feather. How do we maximize # of people happy as a function of actions?
Being and becoming an exemplary person (e.g., benevolent; sincere; honoring and sacrificing to ancestors; respectful to parents, elders and authorities, taking care of children and the young; generous to family and others). These traits are often performed and achieved through ceremonies and rituals (including sacrificing to ancestors, music, and tea drinking), resulting in a harmonious society.
When I learned about Confucianism, I remember there being emphasis on how woman are put under different ethical standards and told to act a certain way. While this is a very short summary and I don't expect all nuances to be considered, I was just curious how the remnants of this ethical framework affect women today.