|
|
|
|
|
by debrice
1290 days ago
|
|
I think that’s a real threat to all remote social experience we have. It could very well take down the whole internet experience as we know it today. It’s strangely exciting but what we thought could exist for centuries might be like so many other trends and only last a few decades. |
|
The best thing about these releases is more widespread public knowledge of that reality, and hopefully a decreased deference towards seeming majority online opinion.
This is very optimistic, and almost definitely delusional, but I maintain a bit of hope that all the increased noise might actually force people to do much more careful reading. People may attempt to get much more context about the writer they’re conversing with in order to verify whether they are talking to a human, and in doing so, be forced to actually expose themselves to a larger context.
Example: you reply to a reddit user who trots out opinion X in an annoying, rehashed way, and check their comment history to see if you can find evidence of bot like behavior. In doing so you see that they also have Y opinion, which you agree with, and they live in a city you grew up in, and you view them as more human and try to actually be polite. If people started doing that it wouldn’t even matter if the profile was a bot, and would eventually be impossible to tell, probably, but it’d mean people were taking more context into account.
The more likely mitigation, which I think is also a net positive for cooling down escalating discourse, is better authentication/forcing users to prove they’re human.
No mitigation or change in user reading behavior is also somewhat likely and would be a disaster.