
Sick of Myself – Algorithmic identity is a means of control and consolation - campbellmorgan
http://reallifemag.com/sick-of-myself/
======
slededit
This was not quite what I'd thought. I find these new "tailored" experiences
cause boredom for me. I watched a WWII documentary once and now almost half of
my netflix recommendations are more WWII films. I like other things too!

Google has a similar problem, it returns what it thought I meant - the
keywords seems to have only minor importance to the results. Searching for a
non-tech term when it has a tech meaning is near impossible because google
knows I'm a nerd.

~~~
tmaly
This reminds me of that whole group think talk that was going on in the news a
number of years ago.

People who are only exposed to the same things tend not come up with ideas
outside of the group.

~~~
slededit
Fortunately the major newspapers aren't doing that to their front pages just
yet - but I'm sure it will come at some point.

But I really disagree with the premise that its enjoyable to always be exposed
to the same things. Serendipity really seems to be underappreciated.

------
aphinity
There's also the premise of global superpowers locked into a theater of
permanent economic conflict and the implicit balance of power perpetually
threatening to break open and destabilize into massive full-spectrum conflict.

Given the state of nature that exists between large industrialized nations,
each in incentivized to foment dysfunction in their rivals to slow them down
economically. The more infighting in any given country, the more headaches
present among citizens, the slower and more reluctant their economy becomes.

There's a slow, glacial, permanent grind that never goes away, because the
world at large is trying to make you call in sick to work, so that they can
gain some breathing room, and pump up their own economy.

Meanwhile, uncompetitive personality flaws get classified as mental illness,
so that there's medical justification to ply you with productivity drugs. Take
prescribed speed to perform for the economy. Take mood stabilizers so you
don't snap at your co-workers. Take anti-anxiety meds for your impostor
syndrome, and stop worrying about whether everyone hates you. They're all just
cranky from the speed and psychological operations of global superpowers
trying to slow us down.

~~~
rhizome
I appreciate the concise description of your worldview, but what of it? People
still have to survive, and inescapable despair is really not a good tool for
that.

It's one thing to state a premise, but they're usually expected to be
accompanied by conclusions.

~~~
hl5
One conclusion could be that inescapable despair is an indicator of globalized
psyops. Depressed individuals will rationalize overspending.

~~~
ShabbosGoy
It isn't so much psyops as it is the consequence of the very specific brand of
Asian capitalism that dominates the world today. One need only look to South
Korea or Japan in order to realize that the United States is on the very same
trajectory.

------
supernumerary
I think that Facebook is almost the opposite of what the author describes. Not
so much a "“ontological insecurity.”, more like a place for reassurance and
security, i've written about it here:
[https://iainmait.land/posts/20170201-transitional-
object.htm...](https://iainmait.land/posts/20170201-transitional-object.html)

Regarding algorithmic doppelgangers and how we govern them (Zuckerberg 2020)
this is a good place to start:

[https://iainmait.land/posts/20170418-algorithmic-
governmenta...](https://iainmait.land/posts/20170418-algorithmic-
governmentality.html)

~~~
panic
Would you say that networks like Twitter fall into the same category? People
are also able to build comfortable "filter bubble" spaces there without the
help of algorithms.

~~~
supernumerary
I think that the general characteristic isn't so much the algorithmic control
inherent in social networks, rather it's our approach to it - the general
characteristic of a transitional object is that we don't ask of it ...

'Is this part of me, or external to me? Did I come up with this, or was it
presented to me?'

As long as a user avoids or suppresses those kinds of questions then yes it's
a transitional object, and whatever algorithmic control is in effect is not so
important to us. To a certain extent, the algorithms, just reflect our desire
for a space where there is an illusion that the outer-world accords with our
inner-worlds.

Meanwhile - in terms of differentiating Facebook from the other social
networks ...

Unlike Twitter (word limits, textual), and Snapchat (ephemeral, visual)
Facebook is gunning for limitlessness (VR, Everything) ... in this sense, in
giving its users a sense of omnipotence and omnipresence it's in a different
league, one where the fundamental question of where we end and our algorithmic
doppelgangers begin is elided altogether in favor of an algorithmic state ...
with it's own reality, and truth.

------
cousin_it
Yeah. The dreams of going to heaven or building a perfect society have been
outcompeted by the dream of being genuine, which benefits mostly marketers and
causes tons of misery otherwise. I think the only solution is learning to
recognize and resist dreams that promise too much. Maybe that should be taught
in schools.

------
chillingeffect
This is a set of brilliant observations... Humans have always had a social
identity around ourselves, formed through memories by others, our appearances
and the surroundings we create for ourselves...both for us and for others to
see.

Until the digital ages, (cameras, print, now bits), these external
representations decayed somewhat organically. With perfect copies, these
images persist for others and for ourselves. It makes it harder to escape.

As others noted, yes, we have more potential to escape our self-created
representations, but there's also a higher escape velocity.

------
mmiliauskas
The magazine is funded by Snapchat. Just a fun fact.

------
pmoriarty
You read my mind. I was just reading about social media and identity here:
[1]. A very interesting read.

[1] -
[https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachm...](https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/275752/13-505-social-
media-and-identity.pdf)

------
panic
There are some good points here, but I think this article buys too much into
the fantasy of magical algorithms -- that the systems for ranking and
filtering that are tuned for maximizing engagement and trying to get people to
click on ads actually change people's concept of identity in a noticeable way.
People identified with stuff on Facebook just as much when it was an
unfiltered feed of wall posts.

If anything, Facebook has sacrificed some of its identity-shaping power in
exchange for more engagement and ad sales. People are moving more of their
real social interaction to other places, leaving Facebook to be mostly a
source of news and updates from casual acquaintances.

~~~
nerdponx
What about the subconscious suggestive effects of your feed as it evolves over
time?

~~~
panic
I think the effect of social media in general is way bigger than the effect of
the ranking algorithms specifically. The "serial pleasures of checking for
likes and other forms of micro-recognition made suddenly meaningful by the
acute insecurity" (as the article so eloquently puts it) have a much bigger
impact on how we choose to present ourselves than the news articles and ads we
are shown, for example.

~~~
sesqu
I potentially disagree. I think the impact of social media's reward cycle is
major, but not directly on the user's identity - rather, I believe it causes
significant feedback into non-algorithmic filtering (and from there to the
algorithmic component, as the organic part is presumably valued by
predictors). World-view, then, is shaped by the algorithmic filters and
detailed by the performances of others on social media, but the effect on
identity is circumspect.

So I would say that the algorithms are more important, because they define the
environment that parameterizes normalcy. Identity forms mostly asocially, and
it is not interactive.

------
Pxtl
> “Depression began its ascent when the disciplinary model for behaviors, the
> rules of authority and observance of taboos that gave social classes as well
> as both sexes a specific destiny, broke against norms that invited us to
> undertake personal initiative by enjoining us to be ourselves … The
> depressed individual is unable to measure up; he is tired of having to
> become himself.”

I think I just threw up in my mouth a little. Are they actually blaming
clinical depression on personal freedom and social mobility?

~~~
ccvannorman
There is research done on depression vs free choice - the "Paradox of choice"
being the canonical reason that more freedom is not always better. I'll leave
you to google the topic on your own if you're truly interested --
"happiness/depression correlation with freedom and choice".

I'm not trying to take a stand here, but your gut reaction (and my initial
one) was based in emotion, not on research and facts -- get the facts (or as
best you can) before throwing up any more.

