No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
So they must have a database entry specifically for you and be able to recognize you. Otherwise they couldn't recommend you anything after you closed the app.
No, my phone ID and random data snippets are not "me." If I have another device and sign in under a different email, I get totally different content while still being me.
Well i think you underestimate what algorithms can piece together. And i don't think it is necessary to know everything about someone. Even if you're missing half of the picture... A few key facts may be enough to manipulate someone or gently push them into a direction that is more aligned to your goals as a company (for example). Information can be linked after the fact. And - we're getting a bit philosophical here - You're kind of the sum of your parts, your history, behaviours and different interests. No single part defines you but still they're part of you and of what you are. If I can get access to some part of you like your literacy, what kind of media you consume to make up your mind. What kind of people you're going to meet on social media. I'm starting to affect a part of what is 'You' and it also affects you as an entity.
I'm glad you value privacy. I'm not exactly sure what those algorithms do. But there are cookies and there is browser fingerprinting. And it works pretty well. If you use two accounts and use the same device, they can most likely tell by your browser fingerprint and they already know they both belong to you. And even if you're using seperate devices. If you're using a residential internet connection, it's the same IP address for both devices. This is probably also evaluated, because they store that information for the advertisers, because being in close geographical proximity is important for some metrics.
Seems weird to have a passionate stance on this, then.
What do you want from me? Those algorithms are proprietary. A few select people in the world know what exactly they're doing and which data gets stored how in the databases. We can make assumptions by their behaviour. From time to time something gets leaked and we learn some details. We used to learn how the google pagerank algorithm works in university. Now google suggests me what to read and i just swallow that. And you keep making apologies and deny you can be / are being manipulated...?! or harm you 'reliably'?
I think it's a pretty huge logical stretch to assume I am manipulated because I know algorithms don't have a profile on me you can just look up. That's not how data science works at all.
A good sign you're in conspiracy theory territory is that your entire model breaks down if the algorithm designers aren't specifically supervillains.
what exactly do you think (for example) targeted advertising is? and by looking at the revenue of big tech, do you think it succeeds at that? do you know cambridge analytica and the country of great britain?
we already established they do.
Watch something like "the social dilemma". why do YOU think silicon valley hires psychologists for app design? Do you think it's ethical to try and get people addicted to your product?
I'm sure it succeeds at times. There's a lot of dumb people. However, I don't see how that's an algorithm's fault and not the dumb person's fault.
"The social dilemma" is absurd conspiracy shit lmao. C'mon man don't tell me you believed that shit. Wait til you discover "A Funny Thing Happened On The Way to the Moon"
I'm not gonna debunk the whole show (I'll link one instead) but they hire psychologists because they're pursuing engagement. I have no issue with that. Psychologists work a lot of jobs you wouldn't expect. Psychology (and Philosophy) are actually strong undergrads for people who want Finance careers too.
Debunk: https://daniellenewnham.medium.com/why-the-social-dilemma-is-wrong-17d8b2952187
And another if you can't get past the above paywall: https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/netflix-social-dilemma-tech-1.5740351
Talk about being manipulated, my dude.
I'm not sure what kind of background you have. Sure that movie is complex things 'dumbed down'. It's a movie. Them framing the story to make it thrilling and whatever, doesn't automatically debunk the facts i just told. I should stop with the examples.
What's the difference between your "pursuing engagement" and my "get people addicted". Fact is they carefully design apps to make them engaging. Play a tiktok video just in the right moment to keep you scrolling. sometimes even videos you dislike to invoke feelings. invent karma to keep you invested in your account. fine tune gameification to give rewards to your brain in exactly the right moments to keep you either engaged or buy in-game currency.
You're allowed to submit to that.
And lots of the psychological tricks and methods are designed to be subtle enough to go unnoticed and not interfere.
And what about all the other arguments?
Habits and addictions are not the same thing, which is clearly discussed in the articles I linked that I am now very aware you didn't read.
Perhaps instead of asking me for arguments, read the shit I posted?
I'm sorry. I'm more interested in a debate based on facts, not accusations. You keep dropping two thirds of the argument, debunking one thing with something that's besides the point, and then calling me things that aren't true either. Have a nice day.
(Edit: Thanks for the article on the social dilemma, though. i genuinely was unaware people hold that view on that movie. it's been some time and i don't recall all of the story, maybe i didn't take things face value and thought everyone knew where they stretched the facts. i think i'm going to reconsider and stop recommending that one. I'm not saying i agree 100% to those articles, but there is some merit to this.)