Any mention of solutions such as automated content moderation (Eg: detecting “fake” news) or optimizing slightly different metrics, reminds me of that quote. Social media platforms are so enamored with algorithms running at scale, and high platform-engagement being to the user’s benefit that they perceive every problem through the lens of such solutions.
For a succinct explanation of the fundamental brokenness of automated fact checking, see https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2020/09/03/wittgensteins-revenge/
For some, the natural drive towards reconciling inconsistencies would be helped by them being exposed that way.
For others, I might accept the inconsistency, and it would be fascinating to see which ones I made a choice to accept that way. I don't regard that as fundamental inconsistency anyway, because all statements are approximations, and apparent inconsistency can be a valid (and healthy) holding state while figuring out nuances, which can take a long time.
For yet others, I suspect I would conclude they aren't inconsistencies in my own thinking, they are inconsistencies in how others / the system interprets my thinking, and then I'd have to refine how I describe them.
If the system didn't allow me to express the necessary nuances so it always regarded my thinking as inconsistent despite not really being so, that would be frustrating. After all, that's how it is with other people already: Invariably they believe I believe something that I don't, and no amount of explanation sorts that out because, by and large, they aren't interested in the necessary nuance.
The one key feature that would make a system pointing out my inconsistencies pleasant to use is: If it were private advice, between me and the system.
The moment it becomes social pressure, public knowledge, pronouncements about me, that's when it would stop being something I'd want to engage with.
If it ever works at all, that is.
To be fair many of the common arguments to counter are really just assinine drivel like the history retconning "fake news began with the internet" and in the same breath demanding that they fix it and stating that technology can never fix social problems. Which is wrong on so many levels.
Saying to operate based on values instead of metrics? Metrics often are bad and epistimologically incoherent in practice but done right they have real power. Values are fuzzy things often clung to as tautologies - we are free because we say so and the king protects us while he sends us to war.
Look at the fashionable cliched practically indistinguishable from markov chain generator output about "involvement of the community and minorities" and low key calling experimentalists racist by claiming without evidence "minorities often bare the brunt of move fast and break things". There is no intellectual substance there - just using the downtrodden as sword and shield. The demand for "examination" and ethics are laughably stupid.
Yes just go ahead of time and understand the entire ill defined community and minority experience. That will be really useful when creating a new encrypted messaging service.
Yes more ethics committees that have proven worthless at promoting ethics - cynically it looks like their entire field is a shakedown of "hire us for bullshit jobs or else we will continually defame you with logically incoherent rhetoric that says nothing remotely disprovable!"
The whole thing infurates me that so much mental effort is wasted on more complex incoherent bullshit and that it is widely believed.
Are they saying that it’s a myth, just because it hasn’t been rigorously studied yet?
Not to mention tech is a stupidly broad conflation for the question. Worse than saying throwing dice is addictive.
For example, in my case, my technology addiction for the last few years has been hacker news, which I consider to be in the “social media” sub-category of tech addiction. After procrastinating work with an hours long session on hacker news, it is often annoyingly apparent that nothing of value was gained (at the cost of my job) and if I wasn’t going to work anyway, that there were actually much more enjoyable ways I could have spent those hours, like maybe doing a hobby, talking to friends, or even playing a quality video game.
I know it might seem contradictory to play a video game if I’m claiming to be a “tech addict”, but in my case, I don’t count that as part of my addiction because I don’t have a huge compulsion to play video games, and when I do, it usually feels like enjoyable time well spent afterwords (unless the game is shitty, but I avoid those).
However I do know people with video game addictions (which I also categorize under “tech addiction”) that play games even though it doesn’t feel like time well spent for them afterwords and they know they should be doing something else.
(sorry I can't actually copy the link from pdf reader in mobile. why they couldn't publish in html is beyond me. Should I hire a graphic designer to give my own research more weight? )
My own cautious discussion of optimizing different metrics:
Like this: http://www.threepanelsoul.com/comic/organization