Uniquemind
February 16th, 2018, 01:45 AM
Hi all.
I want to create an open forum discussion, and there will be a lot of questions I will ask all of you about internet culture in general and what you think it's flaws and weaknesses have been over the past 2 decades.
Specific questions regarding ALL various websites/app services like youtube, vine, instagram, snapchat, pinterest and the do's/don't's of how we as humans communicate.
Naturally this will also lead to a sub-discussion of topics that involve these mediums, so topics about social-bullying are going to come up.
Feel free to share personal experiences and personal views of where the system of site-moderation and law enforcement communication have broken down.
What do you think needs to happen with federal, state, and city laws to address
many problems like we've seen happen to prominant Youtubers, such as SWATTING.
Is internet gaming culture to blame for the toxicity of internet meme sharing and general meanness.
Should the behavior now be criminalized by law? Thoughts and debate on this point alone are welcome.
-----
My view:
I think the internet has been a tool, a tool in which both good and bad information has been shared and magnified to a degree that has encroached on what used to be (for my parent's generation) a personal and more private life.
It's added to the human tendency to be dramatic and also to get immediate results for various things:
1. Shopping
2. Information sharing to a positive degree (Like VT for example)
3. Convenience
4. Traveling tools like GPS map apps.
The bad being:
5. Sense of entitlement
6. Ideological echo-chamberment bias whether it be personal or news media echo-chambers.
7. A larger reach for criminals to exploit victims (i.e. children, elderly) for $ or sex or violent impulses.
8. Bullying and spreading misinformation
9. Inability for recipients of information online to dissociate and be skeptical of what they watch. This has contributed to a myth that because you see it online and didn't get it from mainstream media, you are more "woke" than those who still rely or listen to mainstream media.
10. The cyber security flaws of computers have left tons vulnerable to compound the issues above, especially fraud or identity theft which can affect you for the rest of your life.
These are just a handful of things that I think are just wrong and almost can't be fixed because the infrastructure of the internet and computers and culture's reliance on the internet and then combined with capitalistic intent to make profit, people throw away empathy and compassion, if they can justify it with the excuse "it's just business".
Case in point: Reality TV and also The Paul Brothers of youtube.
The internet seems to have pushed this view or myth that clicks and views and likes are all that matter, and you get those to get $ which you need to live.
But nothing in our culture ever teaches us when enough $ is enough in comparison to what we need to do to earn those views or clicks....at some point there's a social cost and damage that's being done to society towards your monetary gain.
Websites and dozens of Human Resources business ethics departments are struggling with this issue because it crosses over into what is and isn't censorship vs free speech and the epistemic benefit of leaving something up for historical purposes VS taking it down to avoid the triggering harm it can have on viewers.
Case in point: twitter's decision to not ban a certain twitter account for that persons incendiary remarks no matter how offensive, where the standard of any non-world leader would've already envoked a ban.
In some cases all social media Owners and Moderators have this moral dilemma to make here. In theory sites operate on rules, but rules are dogmatic.
So I want to ask mods here and owner, about where that grey line is, and where they think the line should be drawn in the policy of other websites like reddit and youtube.
Where do you draw that line and what is the thought process?
Is it a good process or does it need to be better?
If the process has flaws how do you make a new policy that can be more dynamic and transparent with viewers and producers of such content?
Do you acknowledge the positive loss of controversial discussions that are graphic but technically violate the dogmatic rules of a website, but objectively add valid discussion points?
Should the internet adopt a standard of ethical behavior on the internet across ALL websites to the point where it is backed by legislation an the enforcement of law, and the technical ability to destroy and rid the world of the sense of anonymity on the internet.
----
I want to create an open forum discussion, and there will be a lot of questions I will ask all of you about internet culture in general and what you think it's flaws and weaknesses have been over the past 2 decades.
Specific questions regarding ALL various websites/app services like youtube, vine, instagram, snapchat, pinterest and the do's/don't's of how we as humans communicate.
Naturally this will also lead to a sub-discussion of topics that involve these mediums, so topics about social-bullying are going to come up.
Feel free to share personal experiences and personal views of where the system of site-moderation and law enforcement communication have broken down.
What do you think needs to happen with federal, state, and city laws to address
many problems like we've seen happen to prominant Youtubers, such as SWATTING.
Is internet gaming culture to blame for the toxicity of internet meme sharing and general meanness.
Should the behavior now be criminalized by law? Thoughts and debate on this point alone are welcome.
-----
My view:
I think the internet has been a tool, a tool in which both good and bad information has been shared and magnified to a degree that has encroached on what used to be (for my parent's generation) a personal and more private life.
It's added to the human tendency to be dramatic and also to get immediate results for various things:
1. Shopping
2. Information sharing to a positive degree (Like VT for example)
3. Convenience
4. Traveling tools like GPS map apps.
The bad being:
5. Sense of entitlement
6. Ideological echo-chamberment bias whether it be personal or news media echo-chambers.
7. A larger reach for criminals to exploit victims (i.e. children, elderly) for $ or sex or violent impulses.
8. Bullying and spreading misinformation
9. Inability for recipients of information online to dissociate and be skeptical of what they watch. This has contributed to a myth that because you see it online and didn't get it from mainstream media, you are more "woke" than those who still rely or listen to mainstream media.
10. The cyber security flaws of computers have left tons vulnerable to compound the issues above, especially fraud or identity theft which can affect you for the rest of your life.
These are just a handful of things that I think are just wrong and almost can't be fixed because the infrastructure of the internet and computers and culture's reliance on the internet and then combined with capitalistic intent to make profit, people throw away empathy and compassion, if they can justify it with the excuse "it's just business".
Case in point: Reality TV and also The Paul Brothers of youtube.
The internet seems to have pushed this view or myth that clicks and views and likes are all that matter, and you get those to get $ which you need to live.
But nothing in our culture ever teaches us when enough $ is enough in comparison to what we need to do to earn those views or clicks....at some point there's a social cost and damage that's being done to society towards your monetary gain.
Websites and dozens of Human Resources business ethics departments are struggling with this issue because it crosses over into what is and isn't censorship vs free speech and the epistemic benefit of leaving something up for historical purposes VS taking it down to avoid the triggering harm it can have on viewers.
Case in point: twitter's decision to not ban a certain twitter account for that persons incendiary remarks no matter how offensive, where the standard of any non-world leader would've already envoked a ban.
In some cases all social media Owners and Moderators have this moral dilemma to make here. In theory sites operate on rules, but rules are dogmatic.
So I want to ask mods here and owner, about where that grey line is, and where they think the line should be drawn in the policy of other websites like reddit and youtube.
Where do you draw that line and what is the thought process?
Is it a good process or does it need to be better?
If the process has flaws how do you make a new policy that can be more dynamic and transparent with viewers and producers of such content?
Do you acknowledge the positive loss of controversial discussions that are graphic but technically violate the dogmatic rules of a website, but objectively add valid discussion points?
Should the internet adopt a standard of ethical behavior on the internet across ALL websites to the point where it is backed by legislation an the enforcement of law, and the technical ability to destroy and rid the world of the sense of anonymity on the internet.
----