undefined | Better HN

0 pointsvladms7mo ago0 comments

My view is that they are just exposing issues with the people in the said societies and now is harder to ignore them. Much of the hate and the fear and the envy that I see on social networks have other reasons, but people are having difficulties to address those.

With or without social networks this anger will go somewhere, don't think regulation alone can fix that. Let's hope it will be something transformative not in the world ending direction but in the constructive direction.

0 comments

5 comments · 3 top-level

carlosjobim7mo ago· 1 in thread

Is hate, fear, or envy by themselves wrong, or only wrong when misdirected?

What if social media and the internet at large is now exposing people to things which before ha been kept hidden from them, or distorted? Are people wrong to feel hate?

I know the time before the internet, when a very select few decided what the public should know and not know, what they should feel, what they should do and how they should behave. The internet is not the first mass communications, neither are social media or LLMs. The public has been manipulated and mind primed by mass media for over a century now.

The largest bloodshed events World War I and II were orchestrated by lunatics screaming in the radio or screaming behind a pulpit, and the public eagerly being herded by them to the bloodshed.

This comment isn't in opposition to yours, it's just riffing on what you said.

vladmsOP7mo ago

> Is hate, fear, or envy by themselves wrong, or only wrong when misdirected?

I think they are natural feelings that appear due to various reason. People struggle for centuries to control their impulses and this was used for millennia in the advantage of whom could manipulate them.

The second world war did not appear in a "happy world". It might even have started due to the great depression. For other conflicts, similarly - I don't think situation was great before them for most people.

I am afraid that social networks just expose better what happens in people's heads (which would be worrying as it could predict larger scale conflicts) rather than making normal people angry (which would be solved by just reducing social media). Things are never black and white, so probably is something in between. Time will tell if closer to first or second.

lxgr7mo ago· 1 in thread

> Much of the hate and the fear and the envy that I see on social networks have other reasons

Maybe so, but do you really think actively amplifying or even rewarding them has no effect on people whatsoever?

vladmsOP7mo ago

During history, people did lots of horrible things and/or felt miserable without social networks. Yes, amplifying or rewarding does not have a positive effect, but I would like to see further analysis over the magnitude.

Think of slavery or burning of witches or genocides - those were considered perfectly normal not that long ago (on historical scale). I feel that focusing on social networks prevents some people to think "is that the root cause?". I personally think there other reasons of this generic "anger" that have a larger impact and that have different solutions than "less AI/less social networks", but that would be too off-topic.

Lapel27427mo ago

They seem to artificially create filter bubbles, echo chambers and rage. They do that just for the money. They divide societies.

For example:

(Trap of Social Media Algorithms: A Systematic Review of Research on Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Their Impact on Youth)

> First, there is a consistent observation across computational audits and simulation studies that platform curation systems amplify ideologically homogeneous content, reinforcing confirmation bias and limiting incidental exposure to diverse viewpoints [1,4,37]. These structural dynamics provide the “default” informational environment in which youth engagement unfolds. Simulation models highlight how small initial biases are magnified by recommender systems, producing polarization cascades at the network level [2,10,38]. Evidence from YouTube demonstrates how personalization drifts toward sensationalist and radical material [14,41,49]. Such findings underscore that algorithmic bias is not a marginal technical quirk but a structural driver shaping everyday media diets. For youth, this environment is especially influential: platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube are central not only for entertainment but also for identity work and civic socialization [17]. The narrowing of exposure may thus have longer-term consequences for political learning and civic participation.

https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/15/11/301

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

5 comments · 3 top-level

carlosjobim7mo ago· 1 in thread

Is hate, fear, or envy by themselves wrong, or only wrong when misdirected?

What if social media and the internet at large is now exposing people to things which before ha been kept hidden from them, or distorted? Are people wrong to feel hate?

The largest bloodshed events World War I and II were orchestrated by lunatics screaming in the radio or screaming behind a pulpit, and the public eagerly being herded by them to the bloodshed.

This comment isn't in opposition to yours, it's just riffing on what you said.

vladmsOP7mo ago

> Is hate, fear, or envy by themselves wrong, or only wrong when misdirected?

lxgr7mo ago· 1 in thread

> Much of the hate and the fear and the envy that I see on social networks have other reasons

Maybe so, but do you really think actively amplifying or even rewarding them has no effect on people whatsoever?

vladmsOP7mo ago

Lapel27427mo ago

They seem to artificially create filter bubbles, echo chambers and rage. They do that just for the money. They divide societies.

For example:

(Trap of Social Media Algorithms: A Systematic Review of Research on Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Their Impact on Youth)

https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/15/11/301

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse