this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
814 points (85.1% liked)

Showerthoughts

30037 readers
481 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics
    • 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
    • 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
    • 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Yet.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dmmeyournudes@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The fact that the user is the one imputing the data to determine the received content in some way. You're selecting the content you interact with, not a black box trying to take over the population. They just want you to stay on the site, look at the ads, and never leave. They don't care about your political allegiance or what movies you like, they will feed you whatever you want.

[–] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Agreed!!!

The user selects the content that they interact with, but because content that upsets you is so engaging, the AI will heartily promote it.

look at how engaged you are with these comments! Is it because they make you upset?

How interesting. ;-)

[–] Strangle@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I only really ever comment when I have something to say. This usually is only when I disagree with something.

That’s why my upvote ratio is terrible. I rarely comment when I agree with something someone has said. I bet my ratio would be a lot better if I did.

But that’s just human nature, I think. Some people crave acceptance and validation so they comment agreement and some people crave conflict and challenge, so they comment in disagreement.

[–] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Everyone is the hero of their own story, so I think they feel the need to “correct” perceived injustices.

I think your experience is common.

And I think AI exploits this, because it’s useful.

[–] Strangle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
[–] dmmeyournudes@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're attributing combative interaction to an algorithm on a site that has no algorithm. Congratulations you just proved the algorithm isnt needed to cause interaction. People do this with no computer forcing them to, but tons of people here are convinced that every other site is filled with bots manipulating content for people when the people are asking for the content, sometimes very directly.

[–] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I’m attributing combative interactions to “keeping your attention”

The ai just exploits this.

So while it’s not NEEDED, it does happen and it works.

Maybe your point is better worded as “the AI doesn’t overrule your own ability to choose”

Which while true, doesn’t change my point. Combative interactions happen without ai, the ai just learns and promotes them.

[–] antonim@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

So you understand the system very well, yet completely ignore the ethically dubious aspects of the system.

People are not born desiring harmful garbage. They are, at least in part, taught, conditioned to desire it.

When you say that a site "feeds you whatever you want", you're ignoring the chicken-or-the-egg pattern of desire and satisfaction on the market. The site teaches you want you want. Internet addiction and the ways in which contemporary media and tech affect your mind (most obviously by reducing people's attention spans) are fairly well known today.

Imagine a drug dealer who sells his garbage to the same person so much that they develop an addiction. With your logic, we can just blame the junkie who keeps returning to the dealer, while the dealer is pretty much innocent - surely it's not his responsibility if someone else develops an addiction and destroys their life!