MisInformation: The AI Issue

Maybe, its hard to argue fuill on 1984 (aka NK)

but let it sink in that our politicians can't get together to help our veterans (which is odd because they seem to salivate at the thought of war) but someho came together to ban ticktok and given foreign countries aid to the order of 100 billions the day we all paid taxes (to show how little they seem to care)

There is no democracy tbh, just the illusion of it. For all people hate on trump for, the fact they are taking him to the cleaners this bad means he was probably doing something right

 

I've argued before that Trump's rise through the R primaries and his nomination is evidence that the election system can still work. The Never Trumpers really didn't want him in that spot and went with Bush, Rubio, even Ted ****in Cruz before reince priebus bent the knee.

Libs faith in the establishment took a hit with Obama's corporate and moneyed entanglements, and then later with Bernie Bros learning how rigged primaries can be before you even get your name out.

MAGA wasnt the first populist movement after the Great Recession we never truly shook off. Nor was it the Tea Party. Occupy Wall Street was left leaning and purpose driven moreso than the crazy **** happening after George Floyd.

Obama never addressed them seriously. They were portrayed as homeless vagrants in the media, and local, state, and federal law enforcement infiltrated encampments to turn public opinion against them.

The parallels in government response between OWS and George floyd protests are striking.

Democracy has always been something people had to fight for. Hippies didn't change the world, they just ****ed around and tripped their early adulthood while expecting everyone else to take notice then "Change." With the 70s being a shitshow, maybe thats when they started being the "hard working" boomers they pretend to be now, but there sure as hell were a lot of failing upward due to their strength in numbers.

If they were better stewards, maybe there would be less ills on society to complain about.

Anyhow, the system can still work, but like BNW, the ruling class are mostly fearful and clueless. They want more Alphas to run society, though their blindspot to maga, minorities, immigrants or any other class they distance and self-segregate from ups the control and gaslighting, which then reinforces the vicious cycle of social and governmental disillusionment we're now in.

 

Or it means a rich old white man who lazily commits crimes in plain sight finally has done enough criming that his lawyers can’t get him off.

 

So should the people who spout antisemitic and violent rhetoric towards Jews also be protected by anonymity?

 

Or would this be that we have democracy but as a society we can’t agree upon what we want as a society. Our democracy is more of a reflection of our division rather than some top down manipulation?

For characters like Trump this has long been known as a potential outcome of democracy going back to Ancient Greece. That a charismatic individual could use the tools of democracy to gain power and then use it to seek personal power.

 

Depending on how they spout it, they are.

Have you noticed that a lot of these people mask their faces?

 

I’ve long felt we live in an Aldous Huxley World far more than an Orwell world as with things like privacy we’ve largely surrendered that out of convenience and comfort. I was thinking that in this thread:
https://bbs.clutchfans.net/threads/i-don’t-have-to-post-about-my-outrage-neither-do-you.323022/
that Soma might not just be things like online gambling, p*rn, fast food or other things that provide us empty pleasures as a distraction from deeper though but also social media outrage.

Feeling morally superior and self righteous is itself a drug that provides a sense of pleasure and reading and reposting social media is a very quick and easy way to make yourself feel righteous. The shorter and less nuance the message is the better. The easier it is also to manipulate public opinion through short and simple messages.

Most issues though aren’t simple and many the morality is relative and complex. Yet even with access to more information than we’ve ever had we see more one sided and simple messages of outrage than actual discussion or debate.

 

Yes I do. Wouldn’t that be then because they want to protect their anonymity?

 

There can be different reasons why someone wants to protect their anonymity. It can be because of legitimate concerns about becoming a target of violence or "getting canceled".

In their case, however, it's because they know full well that what they are doing is hateful (and often violent) and that it can lead to legal repercussions for them.

 

Thought experiment:

Would you feel comfortable if suddenly all your posts you have ever made here would have your real name next to them?

Personally, I know I have ruffled some feathers here, and you can sense the hate flowing through some people responding to me.

You never know what kind of nutcases you are dealing with, and I would definitely not want these nutcases to know my real name and address, etc. For instance, there are actually Hamas supporters on this site.

To me, the key thing is whether you gave informed consent to not being anonymous. If someone is comfortable with that, great. But on a forum like this, there is a reasonable expectation of anonymity, and while some would say that that leads to some trolling, it also allows people to discuss things in a way they would maybe not dare to face to face, for whatever reason (fear of repercussion, etc.). There are still (in theory, at least) standards of moderation the site owner sets, but I actually think it's a great outlet to be able to discuss sensitive political topics while being relatively anonymous.

 

So you prefer economies that are controlled and managed by the state as is done in fascist and socialist nations. Why are you opposed to economic freedom?

 

I like your post except that corporations didn't create an inbalance between the haves and have not, the U.S. Congresses did.

 

The good news is that these three issues can be relatively easy to solve, at least from a technical standpoint.

AI-generated visual and audio content will most likely include an "AI" identifier. Human-generated visual and audio content can also include identifiers. However, there will be content that chooses to include neither, leaving people to judge for themselves. Misinformation will continue to be a significant issue, but I don't think AI will make it much worse overall. If there are indeed these three groups of generated content—AI-identified content, human-identified content, and unidentified content—we will fall back on what we trust. The majority will trust actively identified content, while there will be individuals, as there are today, who will trust unidentified content as long as it aligns with their narrative or political views.

On a side note, where it gets interesting, IMO, is when content is easily generated on-the-fly. You know it's AI-generated, but you don't care because it's what you want. In that reality, which isn't far-fetched, people will choose an "AI content generator" that can potentially push them into some truly weird reality or for them to become well-informed. Imagine a conservative "AI", a liberal "AI", a theorist "AI", a terrorist "AI", a _insert religion_ "AI", ... This level of influence by these AIs and self-isolation might completely break the social fabric.

 

Leftists are infamous for attacking those in real life who disagree with them online. Leftists want to ban anonymous speech because then they will use unscrupulous means to silence all speech with which they disagree.

 

As with any tool, AI can be used to help one another or to hurt one another. AI isn't inherently bad but we are.