Censorship 2.0 How what you read on disqus is likely to be from a sockpuppet
-
-
While reading this I couldn't stop thinking about blakey.
-
Interesting. But thats more message control and propaganda than censorship.
-
Did someone ask for @sockbot
-
@accalia has summoned me, and so I appear.
-
That is not censorship.
-
I live in the US. Here we don't need sockpuppets. We just brainwash the public to parrot party lines and accept them with no thought.
-
Maybe you should make your bot reply to political adverse comments with some made up script. Like:
Me: guns are bad. Right sockbot?
Sockbot: guns aren't bad. People are.
-
now there's an idea....
-
The point was that you could easily suppress other people's threads/comments with many of the same techniques described for promoting threads/comments. The idea was that this form of speech suppression was in fact more dangerous than traditional censorship because people browsing the internet are under the false assumption that they are participating in a free exchange of ideas when in reality the speech they are reading is being vetted by the bots.
edit: just realized you were talking about sockbot lol
-
@Intercourse said:
That is not censorship.
Read the article
Explain to me how this
"Articles that are downvoted enough times are removed from the page for Reddit admins to investigate – but that act in itself is a victory, because, as noted, the article is knocked off the page.
“You can also try ‘trickle downvoting’ – only downvote as many times as new articles have upvotes. It keeps the score even, and while you do this, upvote the article you want people to see,” Azhar said.
When Thinkst did some mass downvoting on the WorldNews subreddit, downvoting all new articles as they appeared, the admins suspected something was up, but all they did was to put up a notice telling their users not to panic."
isn't censorship?
Straight from wikipedia
-
people browsing the internet are under the false assumption that they are participating in a free exchange of ideas
Fools. Those are probably the kinds of people who also blindly believe in what the newspapers and TV say.
-
Fools. Those are probably the kinds of people who also blindly believe in what the newspapers and TV say.
I've mentally divided media into the following two categories:
- bias, and
- stuff I can easily integrate into my existing
worldview.
a free exchange of ideas
This involves shouting the loudest, or the use of CAPS LOCK, doesn't it?
-
I've mentally divided media into the following two categories:
bias, and
stuff I can easily integrate into my existingworldview.
That's awfully close to a "things I agree with" and "blatant lies and propaganda" division.
-
That's awfully close to a "things I agree with" and "blatant lies and propaganda" division.
It is, isn't it? ;<nbsp>)
Resolving as WONTFIX.
-
"Don't believe everything you read in the papers."
"Don't believe everything you see on the TV."
And now, with added Webbiness:
"Don't believe everything you see on the Internet."
-
I've mentally divided media into the following two categories:
bias, and
stuff I can easily integrate into my existingworldview.
At least you're honest about it.
-
-
Explain to me how this...isn't censorship?
Possibly it is, just with a novel venue. I'm not convinced at the magnitude of the effect from government or other coordinated actors vs lots of people reacting in similar ways. There are obviously problems with gatekeepers, and it wouldn't surprise me at all to know that astroturf happens.
-
Don't believe everything you see on the Internet.
If it wasn’t true, they wouldn’t be allowed to put it on a web page!
-
If it wasn’t true, they wouldn’t be allowed to put it on a web page!
“They” are happy with untruths so long as they untruths are their untruths. It's the other lot's untruths that they don't like.
-
“They” are happy with untruths so long as they untruths are their untruths. It's the other lot's untruths that they don't like.
Like, that's what they want you to think, man...
-