i like this idea of a consumer coop or worker coop but how does this work? what is driving the excess in this case and how is it redistributed fairly? do they mail checks or cash? Ive never heard of this before.

This sounds an awful lot like Elon musks situation. its crazy how the fiduciary repsonsibility is to serve an option that requires the most amount of money to be paid to pay investors. The investment of companies are inherently linked with financial debts then essentially

I think theres a fine line between accountability and harrasment that internet vigilantes walk. the violence of a doxxing of a kkk member or poacher is different than their actions in the first place so you could argue justice is valid? Its. fine line and I think is really contextualized by the reasoning. I think there is always a highroad to take but if the internet has taught us anything, Its that we have a rather confusing and overloaded set of data to look from. This blurs th lines

the idea of deep fakes and Ai scares me as the world becomes increaslingly digitized. Social media in my younger years was awful and while Im glad I didn't do so, I know many who were victims of revenge porn or something along the lines. Now with revenge porn being possible without naked pictures taken of the individuals, I fear the power some bad people may have

the detatchment from reality that incels have is concerning because how they become an echo chamber in their own community. Their misapplied theories that twist biological "fact" with their own adgendas make for incredibly damaging narratives that blur lines of fact and fiction. The base in factual principle loosely props up their reality and arguments while luring in vulnerable and uneducated people to their cause which is really damaging.

I agree that trauma dumping on the internet is a bad thing to do. It doesnt really serve anyone because the dumper doesnt have anything resolved by dumping and the dumpee is exposed to negativity unprompted. It often enables an unhealthy coping strategy reliance on means that are not socially postive or real interaction. Seems to be fueling the social problems arising with social media.

This is all so real. Doomers as gen z people is super on par as our generation can doom scroll endlessly. the algorithm has the posssibility of amplifying these senses as we continue the habit. I wonder the linakge between doomscrolling and adhd as i have been diagnosed with it and find it being a common habit related.

Its still insane to me how much elon musk has power over social media and how much that affects the public and their access to information. No individual should have that much power, equivalent to that of an entire government. Especially not an egotist of that degree, its scary and dystopian.

Bo burnham said it best. We are unsure of the repurcussions of social media as it is relatively new and changing social dynamics as we speak. The flood gates are open and there needs to be resources to combat this.

The comparison of evolution and sourdough to social media is wild. Its crazy how things work like this and how ideas can folow similar patterns to natural world phenomena. Applying ethics and bio to tech and automation is a cool concept. Like how an original video could be genuine but a repost on a meme page could be making fun.

This is so similar to playing telephone, which is concerning because people post way before they understand what they are saying. Objective information such as words, images or in this case memes have the potential to be interpreted without nuance of tone of voice, background or anything to contextualize the message.

I hate Elon Musk. But he has a point. Its like battling 2 forces of crazy at this point. social influence can only take us so far in the individual level but at some point the momentum of masses overtake individual action. Its not the blame of one person or group at this point, users must be concious of the things they do but at the same time when people like musk control the sites, some people truly can be to blame for their interference.

The data transparaency act should cover this and that is eviedence of the capitalistic systems flaws when dictating social media platform creation. If the incentive is money, ethics are left behind. If an optimal algorithm both funcitonally and ethically are found, it wouldnt be shared due to attempts to monopolize on the innovation rather than collectively benefit the public

Human nature and humanity confused me. The majority always seems to win the narrative and disregards the needs of others. This herd mentality really harms people and leaves alot of people behind which is really unfair. The concept of design justice is incredibly interesting and I want to learn more.

The social definition of disabilites is a concept I have been curious about for awhile alongside the perspective in which we diagnose mental illness. The subjectivity of it is so nuanced that I wonder if theres a way to start more conversations initating this topic. Its hard to make changes when people dont know why we need to change.

is there any ethical framework that works with the amount of power these companies hold? under the assumption these companies are trying to connect people and provide a service that is good but the capitalization and tricking of people is very bad. Which out weighs the other?

the idea that some of these rights need to be written and explained kinda scares and confuses me but its good to at least have a legal framework. Its even more scary that the laws came after things were released and developed, it kind of feels like trying to shove things back into Pandoras box. Too little too late but important to try and establish nonetheless.

This is an interesting ethical debate on trolling. Is this an ethical usage of automation? I think it is in a sense because of how its a counter action to kellogs lack of workers rights but trolling in its self is inauthentic and harmful in its own way. While it targets the injustice, workers are often the collateral of such a thing, making it less ethical.

I think its interesting how data manipulation can be so decieving. Theres an element of reliance on science that is often manipulated for the benefit of some agenda at the expense of real science. This really impacts the credibility of science and what it really means, which is frustrating because it misplaces the blame on the validity of science which is an incredibly important tool for humanity.

Parasocial relations are not exclusive to celebrities. As publicity and notoriety are no longer reserved for the hollywood elite, the space from social media has created a new layer of those parasocial relationships. It can happen among peers now.

I expereinced what is context collapse unkowingly recently and learning about the dramaturgical analysis it made me feel alot better about it. I hosted a birthday party and decided I wanted who I wanted around me for my birthday and without much thought, invited a bunch of people. To my surprise I hadn't thought about how all these people wold mesh together and had a mini identity crisis because of it. The code switching the room was crazy.

I had no idea email was possible in the 60s/70s. One thing that I question is what/how different perspectives of the world are depending on what the earliest stage of the internet one was introduced to. For example technology introduced at an earlier stage may remove some of the mystifying ascpects of the internet in that it used to operate in a clunkier manner. Tech is alot more sleek now making it seem like this separate entity versus the obvious limiations of web 1.

the disparity of power crossed with extremely immature leaders and a control over the main sources of press really set up for some terrible misinformation. This is exactly why I remain sceptical of many historical narratives. Its insane to me how entire poplations let alone the trajectory of history were influnced by such careless actions. Really goes to show how you must remain critical of power in a concious way.

I find it so interesting that curt skeleton was a a real person dubbed as AI. I wonder what the belief in the tech is already sophisticated means about public attitudes towards it.

I had no idea this was a thing and this is honestly quite scary. In terms of ethical debt, Im sure creators would not have intended for people to become human computers and earn livings off of hacking the social media systems. Its so removed from the humanity of things which I always thought had to do with an actual bot running it but knowing it was potentially people doing that to is kind of concerning where society is headed.

response to ethical debt article: Mentions that tech came at the age of speed and growth. It came swiftly with progress in mind, hand in hand with historical capitalsitic values. The consquence of this is technology being designed around these principles creating a lasting echo if its intentions. In other words the reason why there are so many adverse affects or vulnerabilities like zoom bombing is because ethics werent a part of the conversation originally because that wouldnt allow a programmer or engineer to finish their work faster. Ethics and other questions complicate a binary question of how to code a specific program with an element that is subjective like ethics. I wonder if any theories have comments on if a computer can practice ethics.

The role of culture as a factor of ethical reasoning is quite tricky to apply as our perpectives inherently bias us. Our perspective determines our response and understanding of another perspective unless the person has learned more of other cultural perspectives and philosophies. Basically this seems like views can get really complicated and misunderstood quickly with out more expasive framework for understanding eachother holistically. The nature of truth is confusing as everyone has a truth to subjective situations in which the truth for the best option may differ from person to person. Can it be argued that the truth is flexible or is the nature of truth that it is inflexible and does that change from truth to truth?