Posts Tagged ‘facebook’
Saturday, January 28th, 2017
Apple sent this message to a developer. It essentially states Silicon Valley policy: if enough people complain about something, the user who posted it must be destroyed.
This is typical Leftist crowd-oriented thinking. It enables any group that can muster a handful of complainers to destroy someone else, no matter how much time and effort they put into their content, and how much of it previous to that time was inoffensive.
Soft totalitarianism of this nature occurs whenever human individuals become too powerful as a mass, instead of being regulated by a hierarchy and values system.
The FANG companies — Facebook, Apple/Amazon, Netflix and Google — control most of the internet because they regulate its traffic. Sites not listed in Google disappear. Companies whose apps are rejected by Apple die out. Keywords and hashtags filtered by Facebook vanish.
The age of government censorship may not be over, but with “virtual spaces,” our public areas are owned by companies who have no obligation toward “free speech” under the law. As such, as they get more powerful, they will remove anything that threatens them by making their properties less valuable.
An obvious solution is to decentralize: go back to a web of RSS, blogs, independent sites and open protocols like USENET and IRC. Get away from big sites who hope to make money off of us as content providers, and then delete that content when someone whines.
Tuesday, January 17th, 2017
It was Kant who introduced us to the philosophical concept of public vs private beliefs. Our public beliefs were what we told other people for the sake of social appearances. Our private beliefs are what we talk about when the kimono gets opened to the detriment of the viewing public. The difference between what a person espouses to the rubes and what they really feel can become a problem if these two sets of beliefs are pretty much antepodal.
Perhaps the presence of Faceberg on 24-7 Wall Street Blog‘s list of America’s most hated companies can be attributed to this phenomenon. Gloat-fodder follows below.
In recent years, the company has drawn significant criticism over its privacy policies and the mass data collection of its users. According the company’s statements, Facebook collects data on nearly anything it can, including who its users communicate with, users’ financial transactions, and the types of devices users are connecting with. Recently, the company faced sharp criticism for not doing enough to curb the spread of fake news leading up to the U.S. presidential election. Since then, in an apparent attempt to mend public relations, the company announced a series of new policies aimed at identifying and flagging fake news stories on its site.
Yet this only encompasses the extent to which we know Captain Zuckersperg is a hypocrite. It turns out the whole public/private moral dichotomy extended to many other things as well. The public Captain Zuckersperg is a diversity fetishist. The private one is less prone to singing “We Are The World” at the local Karaoke Bar. The public Captain Zuckersperg welcomes all immigration over a perpetual open border. The private Captain Zuckersperg has built that wall – encompassing his own palatial estate.
The dichotomy extends further. Captain Zuckerberg wants a ¡DIVERSE! workforce. He publicly pays bounties to recruiters who bring them in. It’s like he collects them and trades them with his Silicon Valley friends. The corporate Ministry of Truth sent Baghdad Bob out to tell Bloomberg the following.
“Facebook recruits from hundreds of schools and employers from all over the world, and most people hired at Facebook do not come through referrals from anyone at the company,” a company spokeswoman wrote in a statement. “Once people begin interviewing at Facebook, we seek to ensure that our hiring teams are diverse. Our interviewers and those making hiring decisions go through our managing bias course and we remain acutely focused on improving our ability to hire people with different backgrounds and perspectives.”
But then a funny thing happened to the swirly-cone aspirations of the cultural diversity cult. Facebook’s inner circle then intervened, by treacherously evaluating potential hires on a basis of indicators of professional competence. They expected things like degrees from prestigious engineering schools and solid resume blocks.
…the decision-makers were risk-averse, often declining the minority candidates. The engineering leaders making the ultimate choices, almost all white or Asian men, often assessed candidates on traditional metrics like where they attended college, whether they had worked at a top tech firm, or whether current Facebook employees could vouch for them…
When it comes to taking care of Zuckersperg, diversity is last in that corksucker’s line. He wants managed predictability. He wants forseeable results. He wants to be able to guarantee a positive result to the share holders. Diversity brings variation. Engineers hate that. Engineers don’t hire diversity for diversity’s sake unless they get the quota-gun held to their heads.
This brings home a fundamental truth about diversity. It does not coexist well with a low time preference. A low time preference is necessary for intelligent long-term planning. This is how diversity destroys social capitol. This is how diversity ruins social cooperation. This is why the private Captain Zuckersperg will not tolerate it in the engine room of his own personal Starship Enterprise. Formalize this knowledge and preach these facts. Then ¡DIVERSITY! can truly be over.
Friday, January 13th, 2017
Meet the new media, same as the old media. You will notice that government, celebrities, social pressures and consumerism advance the same agenda as if it came from the same source:
Facebook removes hate speech, which includes content that directly attacks people based on their:
- National origin,
- Religious affiliation,
- Sexual orientation,
- Sex, gender, or gender identity, or
- Serious disabilities or diseases.
Organizations and people dedicated to promoting hatred against these protected groups are not allowed a presence on Facebook. As with all of our standards, we rely on our community to report this content to us.
Did you think They were really a “they,” or just people responding to the market created by many democratically-empowered people doing what people in groups do, which is fearfully pick stupid easy answers over useful ones?
In fact, the problem is “we” — or in other words, what happens when a group of humans get together and start behaving like scared monkeys who are more interested in pacifying each other Bonobo-style than finding any hard or realistic answers to any relevant question.
Notice that the above community guideline seems clear, until you realize how ambiguous it is. What does “attacks” mean? Who are “people”? Is stating a fact about an ethnic group, caste/class, race or religion an “attack” on “people,” or a comment in abstraction? Never mind: the point is to create the broadest possible standards so that you, in your quest to be popular and get famous, will not even come close to the murky edges of these amorphous guidelines.
In the meantime, we see the truth of political manipulation, which is that it is used as a means to control you and is not a serious policy the controllers apply to themselves:
In 2014, Facebook for the first time released its demographic data, and by the following year, it hadn’t shown much progress in increasing the number of women, black or Latino workers. The following year, the company decided to do something more. Publicly, executives talked about expanding programs that wooed college students from a wide variety of backgrounds to intern at Facebook.
Behind the scenes, the company dangled a carrot for recruiters: double points. Recruiters usually got one point for each candidate of theirs that took a job at Facebook. With the new incentive, they’d receive two points if that person was a “diversity hire” — someone who was a woman, or who was not white or Asian, according to two former recruiters.
Do as I say, not as I do, because that way I can remain functional and still punish you, subjugating you and humiliating your will and forcing you to be dependent on me.
Sunday, January 1st, 2017
Humans destroy everything they touch. Something new is invented, and most people are afraid, so natural leaders take up its cause and make it great. Others see that this is a good thing and worth participating in, so they flock to it, but they do not alter their thinking, which fits the old way more than the new. In this way, these entryists bring the old into the new and bloat it while widening (destroying) its focus.
The old way involves what failed before, which is what humans always try because we are wired for individualism, which requires us to demand guaranteed social inclusion from any group. However, since our individualism makes us blind to the fact that other people are different from us, this includes the aggregate lot of incompetents, grifters and mental health cases that accumulate over time. Without the wisdom of Darwin to cut these people free, the human social group then submerges the new thing in the same patterns of failure that have been with us since the dawn of time.
Silicon Valley is such a case. A few engineers and managers invented the internet, but once it became commercialized, in came the fools. They wanted to do to it what they do to everything: dumb it down, remove what makes it unique, and by so doing, make it “accessible” to everyone and anyone, resulting in its genericization and thus, reduction to the same broken patterns that we see everywhere.
As a result, we are now witnessing as an oversold industry collapses from its own internal weight. The managers looked out there and saw a sea of hopeful faces belonging to those who depend on Silicon Valley for their own dreams of wealth, and so instead of contracting operations and keeping quality high, they expanded inclusiveness — becoming social heroes in the process — but adulterated quality, ensuring doom. This is what always happens with prole rule.
We know that Silicon Valley is doomed because it essentially follows the television model, where advertising pays for free services, and Silicon Valley advertising is based on a lie:
The updated results based on March 2009 comScore data…indicated that the number of people who click on display ads in a month has fallen from 32 percent of Internet users in July 2007 to only 16 percent in March 2009, with an even smaller core of people (representing 8 percent of the Internet user base) accounting for the vast majority (85 percent) of all clicks.
The news gets worse: most of those who click frequently are from the “daytime TV audience” of those living on invariant incomes of under $40,000 a year:
While many online media companies use click-through rate as an ad negotiation currency, the study shows that heavy clickers are not representative of the general public. In fact, heavy clickers skew towards Internet users between the ages of 25-44 and households with an income under $40,000. Heavy clickers behave very differently online than the typical Internet user, and while they spend four times more time online than non-clickers, their spending does not proportionately reflect this very heavy Internet usage.
In other words, a small part of the consumer base accounts for most of the internet activity, and this group represents not healthy profit from the middle classes, but the buying habits of those who have little and will achieve little. This same type of bad measurement afflicts the entertainment industry and many consumer goods and services industries, who have calibrated their content toward the lowest common denominator without realizing the limited purchasing power of this group, and consequently find themselves in slow but steady decline.
We might even see this as a design flaw of democracy. When everyone is equal, what matter is the count of warm bodies, not who these warm bodies are. Through that metric, governments and businesses attract what is seen as a large group, but is really a small group compared to the Silent Majority, and by doing this, misses actual events in favor of symbolic events that do not represent the wider, more nuanced answer.
This decline is manifesting in reduced internet advertising and the exhaustion of social media, once viewed as the future of the Western economies, which are now presumed to be “services based” instead of oriented toward the production of goods.
As these industries fade away, it makes sense to reflect on the consequences of equality which causes us to ignore the variation in our current audience. Back in the glory days of business, the buying public was a middle class comprised of relatively similar individuals. Now it is a mix of classes, races, sexes, and lifestyles/philosophies who have nothing in common, meaning that the only statistical hits we get for popularity are in these un-representative aggregates who are not the desired consumer.
Much of the dot-com censorship we see floating about now arises from the recognition by companies that their audience has shifted, and an attempt to make “safe spaces” so even more of these zombie daytime TV watchers show up, in a vain hope to produce more profit from the people who are left over once everyone else bails out.
We are already seeing this phenomenon break into the public view as both Twitter and Facebook have admitted that they mistakenly calculated more ad impressions than they delivered. The next step is for them to reveal that these ads are being seen by non-buyers.
That phenomenon has manifested itself in a loss of the blind and blithe confidence that Americans have had in the dot-com miracle, and for that reason, an increasing skepticism has led to discovery of the fraudulent nature of many dot-com businesses:
The drama has some investors predicting more disasters. “What if Theranos is the canary in the coal mine?” says Roger McNamee, a 40-year VC veteran and managing director at Elevation Partners. “Everyone is looking at Theranos as an outlier. We may discover it’s not an outlier at all.”
Part of the problem lies in our tendency to mistake ideology for reality. We see a mental image that comports to what ideology tells us “should” be true, and then purchase accordingly, which because others follow us works for a short while. The circular Ponzi scheme allows industry to invent fake money, government to tax it heavily, and then empowers government to dump that money onto citizens through entitlements and social welfare, which they then spend on tangible goods. This keeps the economy afloat for a short while, but inevitably, a market correct begins and panic sets in as the herd searches for “the next big thing” to invest in so that we can all keep enjoying the fake value of our money.
As these different threads of the dysfunction knit together, the over-valued dot-com economy will begin its death cycle. As with earlier dot-com collapses, this will begin with a slow withdrawal by the smart money and the smarter users, then a rapidly accelerating fight over the remaining users, following by lapsing into irrelevance and being sold at low cost like MySpace.
If this hits during the first years of a Trump presidency, America will face an economic recession of massive size as the economy readjusts to cover for the fake wealth that was created by the dot-coms, especially social media. This will have rippled effects in Europe and Asia, and could result in a currency crash as it becomes clear that the economy backing those currencies was grossly over-valued and its government administrators ignored this reality.
Thursday, December 22nd, 2016
The cabal of media companies that now control the web are hated because they replaced an open standard with a closed one and are using that to manipulate us. Google, Apple, Twitter, Amazon, Facebook and Reddit have all come under fire for censorship, which has caused some people to speak the sophomoric maxim that they are not censoring anything, because they are private companies.
A more accurate analysis is that these companies, by replacing an open net, have taken it over and now want to “curate” the experience to both (1) remove controversial ideas and (2) turn us into good media sheep like the legacy media empire they replaced. As one writer observes:
In 2014, I was pardoned and released from a prison in Tehran where I spent six years over my web activism. Before I was imprisoned in 2008, all the hype and rage on the internet was found on blogs.
Blogs were the best thing that had ever happened on the internet. They democratized writing and publishing — at least in many parts of the world…All that was made possible because of a brilliant and powerful, but simple and modest innovation: hyperlinks.
The World Wide Web was founded on the links, and without links, there won’t be a web. Without links the experience of being on the internet will become one of a centralized, linear, passive, inward-looking and homogeneous kind. This is happening already, and despite Zuckerberg’s sermon, it is largely Facebook and Instagram who are to be blame for the demise of links, and thereby the death of the open web and all its potentials for a more peaceful world.
Zuckerberg killed links (and the web) because he has created a space that is more like the future of television rather than the internet. Unlike what he preaches, Facebook has divided us into small personal bubbles of comfort.
This is the difference between the open web and the corporate web. On the open web, there are many information providers and you go visit them. The downside is that these sites are not uniform and may not all load quickly. On the corporate web, Google and Facebook show you what they want you to see, ideally while remaining on one of their sites like YouTube or Instagram.
What this means is that these companies are no longer private entities, but have taken over a public space, and are now censoring it for their own benefit. This includes removal of controversial ideas, often by sneaky methods:
Why is this important? The forces that be have realized that government is too easily criticized, and are aiming for another form of opinion control. When they talk about “fake news,” they mean any information outside of this approved arena. When they shadowban accounts, they mean that deviating information threatens their bottom line and cannot be tolerated.
They do all of this while promising to beat back big corporations and liberate you from horrible conservatives.
Perhaps the lasting lesson is that salespeople lie, and that this tendency couples with the eternal human tendency toward attention fixation that causes us to, when made aware of our bad behavior, accuse those who have noticed this bad behavior of the same behavior. This is why the anti-censors are censors and the liberators are enslavers, every time.
As a long-term strategy, this will not work among the people who have any experience of life. This is why the high-end consumers and natural leaders of society have mostly abandoned these platforms. That means that they are left with the audience of people with little purpose in life, minimal influence, and low income.
That in turn might explain this:
Friday, November 25th, 2016
As the mainstream media (MSM) struggles with its complete irrelevance because its predictions failed in all areas of the political process, most have overlooked the manipulative nature of social media which strikingly resembles the MSM in its opinions.
Alternative social media site Reddit has become the latest to reveal its inner void. Leaked mod chat logs reveal that Reddit admins control the moderators of its top “subs” or channels through a private Slack chat.
This includes telling these moderators what posts to delete, and the admission that Reddit has altered its algorithm to avoid favoring right-wing content. Like Facebook and Twitter, both of whom have been featured on these pages many times for their own censorious tendencies, Reddit is a controlled media voice that purports to be an independent one. That makes it a propaganda organ in addition to being a social media site. The propaganda aspects are now more important than the “social” aspects, at least to those who control the site.
As one Voat user said:
I’m not judging them here because they’re liberals; I’m judging them because I read their conversation and saw how flippant, dismissive, and manipulative they all were. That was a group of straight up bad human beings chatting.
The freaky part is just how manipulative it all was. Spez talking about algorithms to disenfranchise and silence part of the user base he deemed undesirable. Those people are rotten to the core.
This comes after the CEO of the company admitted changing user content in the database back-end, suggesting that this is not the first time that activity has occurred:
Reddit’s chief executive Steve Huffman has admitted editing posts made about him by Donald Trump fans on the site.
…He said colleagues were angry with his actions and he “most assuredly won’t do this again”.
Many Reddit members were furious that the website’s chief executive had edited messages, and accused him of censorship.
This is not exactly surprising since other social media sites also follow a pro-Leftist censorship policy. Facebook blocked conservative news from its trending list. Twitter bans and blocks conservatives on a regular basis. Wikipedia not only censors right-wing ideas, but openly promotes Leftist ones. These are some of the biggest sites on the internet who in theory are “open” and “collaborative,” but in fact are controlled by shadow cabals.
Saturday, May 21st, 2016
Virginia Postrel carved an intellectual niche for herself by examining the power of glamour to shape events independently of money and force alone. She defined glamour as a calculated image crafted to impress and persuade. But in order to accomplish this task, glamour must be visible and audible. It must be amplified and prominently displayed. It needs a nudge. In the case of Black Lives Matter, it received a Google Nudge from the Zuckerberg Facebook Empire.
Facezucker made sure #BLM trended as Baltimore and Ferguson burned. Zuckerbook gave it the good old Google Nudge while Missouri University lost $32 Million dollars, had to close two dorms, saw new enrollment drop by %25 and lost the loyalty of multiple, wealthy lifetime donor alumni. But none of this was Faceberg’s fault you see.
They are blameless in their swell and terrific virtue signaling. You can never hold a champion of equality accountable for the negative externalities inflicted upon the rest of us. You also can’t really judge them by the company they trend. They got a lot of pressure. They had no choice. Poor little billionaires.
Well, ok, I’m fibbing a bit. You can judge the crap out of these people. In the face of weaponized glamour in the service of knaves, judgement and discrimination are the honest man’s defense against rampant and cynical iniquity. We’ll start with hunger strike hero, Jonathan Butler. As he rides himself over the fields on his speaking tour across the nation, he is held up as icon amongst the SJW virtue-signalers. But more and more truth comes to light as to what sort of person Faceberg and others are nudging to the top amongst the current trends.
Now just how glamorous is crack? I’d say no more so than meth or heroin, but Jonathan Butler would dare to differ. He composed a nine-minute rap song about how he pays his bills cooking it up with his girlfriend. It’s his ticket up from slavery. The slavery of having an intact family with a net worth over $20 Million (almost as much as he cost the school he attends through his thuggish behavior).
And Sweet Little Johnnie is an absolute prize of a human being compared to his BLM Wingman from Prince George’s County, MD; Charles Wade. Charles is a regular Jack-of-all-Trades. He has worked as a hairstylist for Solange Knowles, an activist for BLM, and he even seems to have larped the video game Grand Theft Auto down in Miami, FL (But only in the Third Degree — he was just kidding). But it was his roughest trade of them all that may well earn him free room, board and victuals in a US Gubbermint Motel for a nice, long, comfy stretch. He seems to cater to those who have a fetish for the spring chickens.
On April 25, he really got himself in a fix. He was arrested and charged with human trafficking and several prostitution-related charges. The police report notes, that as part of the charges, he is accused of allegedly pimping out a 17 year old girl in Prince George’s County, Maryland.
So that brings us back to even bigger pimp. The glamour pimp. The guy who controls who trends and who doesn’t get to trend. Perhaps a guy that controls a star-maker machine like Zuckerface could show a little better discretion on who hits the trending news section. Is it too much to ask for these people to perform some basic fvcking due diligence before they virtue signal on behalf of human traffickers? Maybe the Cuck Pilgrimage led by The Right Reverend Beck could take a whiff of the wind that comes out of the butt they are all kissing.
Yet Silicon Valley has shown us its true colors. When Google honors a blithering Maoist who once took time out of one of her busy days to tell us of her admiration for Osama Bin Laden, those colors all involve mostly red pigments. You may want to Google just how much her political idol did to help with the awful overpopulation problems faced in post-revolutionary China.
We know who these people are. We know what they’ve done after successfully effecting their own Upward Exit. It’s at altitude and distance that they tells us about the virtues of Black Lives Matter. They do so safe in the knowledge that no Charles Wades or Jonathan Butlers would ever make it within ten miles of their palatial estates. Lending glamour to the sorts of people who traffic in underage prostitutes and salute the entrepreneurial virtues of crack cocaine is their joke on the rest of us. I predict the trend will be for these Silicon Valley Oligarchical Collectivists to continue to piss on the rest of Amerika. It’s what the glamorous people do these days.
Sunday, May 15th, 2016
Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. Meet the new media; same as the old one. I suggested the probability of social media conglomerates joining the SJW convergence and thereby attempting to steer the direction of Amerikan politics to the favored direction in which Cthulhu insists upon swimming. Some days I hate it when I turn out to be absolutely correct in my negativity.
I first opined the following:
Perhaps the terms Google Nudge, Google Auction or even worse; Google Veto need to be added to the lexicon. This new anti-democratic influence on political decision-making is emerging because of a confluence of technology, ideology and material means to effect said dominance. The technology is the internet search engine, the ideology is Progressive Liberaltarianism* and the material means is the obvious wellspring of vast wealth that has been accumulated in Silicon Valley.
So, no, you are not paranoid if you believe that Facebook is just another boring, predictable font of leftist propaganda. It, like every other so-called news outlet, perceives a mission to push political discourse (even) further towards leftist memes. Former contractors for Facebook describe the exercise below.
Facebook workers routinely suppressed news stories of interest to conservative readers from the social network’s influential “trending” news section, according to a former journalist who worked on the project. This individual says that workers prevented stories about the right-wing CPAC gathering, Mitt Romney, Rand Paul, and other conservative topics from appearing in the highly-influential section, even though they were organically trending among the site’s users.
Alrighty then, you Alt-Right-Delete Paranoid. How could the good, shiny-happy people at Facebook possibly empower a Google Nudge as described in your previous histrionic screed? I mean Facebook Pinkie-Swears that this is how it works in Zuckerberg’s Magical Kingdom of Equestria.
How does Facebook determine what topics are trending? Trending shows you topics that have recently become popular on Facebook. The topics you see are based on a number of factors including engagement, timeliness, Pages you’ve liked and your location.
It starts with a certain non-political corporate goal. Mark Zuckerberg wanted to dominate the primary news market via the Facebook platform. Again, in and of itself, this isn’t SJW Entryism. Here’s how the corporation described its aims according to Gizmodo.
An estimated 600 million people see a news story on Facebook every week, and the social network’s founder Mark Zuckerberg has been transparent about his goal to monopolize digital news distribution. “When news is as fast as everything else on Facebook, people will naturally read a lot more news,” he said in a Q&A last year, adding that he wants Facebook Instant Articles to be the “primary news experience people have.” This would be accomplished via the trending news subjects of Facebook.
Facebook, however, did not think highly of journalists and treated them like galley slaves.
According to five former members of Facebook’s trending news team—“news curators” as they’re known internally—Zuckerberg & Co. take a downright dim view of the industry and its talent. In interviews with Gizmodo, these former curators described grueling work conditions, humiliating treatment, and a secretive, imperious culture in which they were treated as disposable outsiders.
And yet these were disposable outsiders with considerable power and a politically overdetermined view of what should constitute “trending news”. Here’s how they were left to their own considerable devices.
The trending news section is run by people in their 20s and early 30s, most of whom graduated from Ivy League and private East Coast schools like Columbia University and NYU. They’ve previously worked at outlets like the New York Daily News, Bloomberg, MSNBC, and the Guardian…According to former team members interviewed by Gizmodo, this small group has the power to choose what stories make it onto the trending bar and, more importantly, what news sites each topic links out to. “We choose what’s trending,” said one. “There was no real standard for measuring what qualified as news and what didn’t. It was up to the news curator to decide.”
But there was one black sheep amongst the Ivy League Lefty herd. Gizmodo describes his effective subversion below.
The former curator was so troubled by the omissions that they kept a running log of them at the time; this individual provided the notes to Gizmodo. Among the deep-sixed or suppressed topics on the list: former IRS official Lois Lerner, who was accused by Republicans of inappropriately scrutinizing conservative groups; Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker; popular conservative news aggregator the Drudge Report; Chris Kyle, the former Navy SEAL who was murdered in 2013; and former Fox News contributor Steven Crowder. “I believe it had a chilling effect on conservative news,” the former curator said.
None of this surprises. The media consists of trained Cathedral functionaries who function in accordance with their training. Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook may or may not have selected these people for the purpose they served. It really doesn’t matter. Nor does Facebook matter as a platform. It’s not the platform, it’s the individuals that stand on it.