Paul Cantrell
Moderation:
- is absolutely necessary
- cannot be automated
- doesn’t scale if done by humans
- is rife with ridiculous failure modes
- is philosophically intractible
I’m increasingly of the mind that content moderation is •the• central problem of the social Internet right now, and I’m not sure we have anything like a solution in sight.
From @sandofsky: https://mastodon.social/@sandofsky/113181384256449181
Paul Cantrell
A lot of people — and a lot of money — want humans to interact at scales we’ve never interacted with each other before. There’s no historical precedent, none, for “anybody on the planet can send you a message at any time.”
Moderation of speech and behavior is an age-old problem, but we’ve at least had locality to keep in manageable up until the last 2-3 decades. We’re in completely uncharted territory here as a species.
Khionu S :trans_furr_white:
@inthehands @sandofsky to be a little pedantic: automation is 100% possible and should be used. End to end automation is the issue. Destructive or severe actions (banning, permanent deletion, revoking privileges, etc) should always require a human to hit, at minimum, a confirmation button
Paul Cantrell
This from @mathling is a good metaphor. And for some perspective on our current situation: consider how utterly out of reach a 20th-century water treatment plant would be for a medieval city. That’s how far away we are from really figuring this out — if not in centuries, then at least in technology and human process distance.
https://mastodon.social/@mathling/113182720688542148
Paul Cantrell
@khionu
Fine, s/automated/fully automated/
Paul Cantrell
@mighty_orbot
Yes, I did.
Mighty Orbot
@inthehands Did you quote the right post?
Paul Cantrell
@mighty_orbot
And what do you think app reviews are?
Mighty Orbot
@inthehands Only it’s talking about app reviews, not social media moderation.
Paul Cantrell
@Dseitz
Pretty sure the problem is people more than places. There’s an alarming quantity of fashiness marbled through just about every place on Earth.
Dan Seitz
The biggest problem is cultural issues. A lot of places are vastly behind on LGBT issues, feminism, etc.
Paul Cantrell
@eviloatmeal
The problem is self-inflicted, certainly.
Consider the sewage analogy downthread. I actually really like living in a city; I think it’s a good thing. And I love modern water treatment. I’m glad that people tried to form cities, and I don’t think we’d have figured out the thing we have without failing first.
In short: I appreciate the attempt. But I agree that we’re scaling things up in a way that is grossly irresponsible. Try, but almost maybe pace ourselves?
eviloatmeal, resident Death Stranding 2 apologist (arch, btw)
Paul Cantrell
@mighty_orbot
I did not say “social media.” You may have heard that, but I didn’t say it. (What phrase did I use? It was not an accident.)
This is about Apple accepting or rejecting user-submitted content to be shared with other users based on (1) how it affects those other users and (2) how it affects the company. That is the •definition• of moderation.
Mighty Orbot
@inthehands Well, they’re definitely not social media here. This is about Apple refusing to authorize an app for sale/download because it (supposedly) doesn’t meet their requirements.
Chris Dickinson
@inthehands yes to all of this. it’s also never been so easy to put a number to how “popular” the sentiment you’re sharing with others is — stuff like favorites, follower counts, and trending topics really changes the goals of communication from what we’re used to as a species
Paul Cantrell
@mighty_orbot
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ This conversation has reached my personal limit for aggressively missing the point.
Mighty Orbot
@inthehands “Moderation” and “social internet” usually imply social media. A storefront isn’t “social internet”. And it has nothing to do with this: https://hachyderm.io/@inthehands/113182678876034236
I’m not sure what you’re complaining about otherwise; surely we all know it’s a bad idea for Apple NOT to screen apps before making them available for download.
Paul Cantrell
There’s a counter-point here, and a strong one, about the value of not isolating people. I think of all the queer kids out there who suffered thinking they’re the only ones, and found hope and community online. I think of how, despite caring my whole life about racial justice, I completely missed huge swaths of the reality of racism in the US until I heard Black people discussing their lived experiences online. All that I want.
Scarer Joy :happy_pepper:
@mainec @inthehands Huh. Right.
The way I see it right now is that we can still only really handle so many meaningful social connections - and trying to do more means something has to give.
Either we end up with hundreds of connections but struggle to deepen any of them into true friendships (hi, it me) and/or we find a narrow social niche online that makes us feel at home (also me).
The real problem here is that some people feel at home in very dangerous company, and can find it easily now.
MaineC
@inthehands “… it should be clear that improvements in communication tend to divide mankind …” by Harold Innis in Changing Concepts of Time
Someone with a degree in communication science gave me that quote years ago when I was wondering what was wrong with people on social media.
Remember what happened when the printing press was invented, or radio became a commodity?
Paul Cantrell
@sarajw @mainec
Yeah. Human connection and organizing cut both ways.
I do not have answers here.
Scarer Joy :happy_pepper:
@inthehands @mainec oh totally agreeeeee
I have learned so much social good from the internet, and I think the younger generations are also more open minded and free of a lot of traditional societal bullshit because of it.
But while I love that I have been able to find *my* people, those of like mind, we have similar feelings and problems and loves and values - well, everyone else gets to do that too. And some of those people have very different values - some even harmful "values" - to mine.
Paul Cantrell
@datarama
Fair, but also: https://hachyderm.io/@inthehands/113182972198853236
Paul Cantrell
@datarama
Yup.
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.