[thickened]

Miika-

This article is a dog whistle for right-wing behaviour and is quite frankly problematic, starting with this quip in the first paragraph which sets the stage: "[...] instead of letting algorithms and machine learning decide what is good for you."

We've spent a good twenty years now, and longer really, building the infrastructure to ensure that when it comes to the World Wide Web, FAAMNG+ companies - not just restricted to US-centric ones but globally really - can make sure that the things you see, and the way the algorithms work, are done in a way that is good for you.

I used to be against mass surveillance, logging everything, but seeing this kind of an article in 2021 sends shivers up my spine. I'm quite worried. Is this what we should look into next?

[bee_rider]

I don't think anyone on the Left wants to give the Right ownership of the idea that algorithmic advertisements and social media are mostly bad.

> We've spent a good twenty years now, and longer really, building the infrastructure to ensure that when it comes to the World Wide Web, FAAMNG+ companies - not just restricted to US-centric ones but globally really - can make sure that the things you see, and the way the algorithms work, are done in a way that is good for you.

Wait, maybe I'm being hit by Poe's law here -- is your post actually sarcasm?

[claytongulick]

> This article is a dog whistle for right-wing behaviour and is quite frankly problematic

Every time I see a sentence like this, I interpret it as the first step of an attempt to reduce speech.

Step 1: Identify 'problematic' content.

Step 2: Create rules to limit the distribution of 'problematic' content.

Step 3: Broaden the definition of 'problematic' content to include anything that disagrees with a specific point of view.

Step 4: Dystopian hell straight from Orwell.

> can make sure that the things you see, and the way the algorithms work, are done in a way that is good for you.

Is this a 'woosh' moment? Is this intended to be satire?

> I used to be against mass surveillance, logging everything

> Is this what we should look into next?

If this is satire, can you please clarify?