Tämä twiitti ei ole saatavilla.
-
Come on though
. 17 years into social media we can thoughtfully differentiate small group communication from mass distribution. If we can’t critically think about the consequences of that, we really don’t understand what tech unleashes on the world.
separately from the thoughtful parsing of whether or not mass censorship is good, just want to quickly note that “what tech unleashes on the world” is a frankly bizarre framing on what this industry does from a famous, wealthy tech founder
-
-
Never said mass censorship
. Said mass distribution has consequences. I think plenty of innovation starts out great and then we see the follow on effects of it, so it’s worth being critical and introspective of this. Also, FWIW I have no solution to offer, just complaints -
The negative follow on effects of innovation are always less severe than follow on effects of stagnation / lack of innovation. By definition, innovation won't exist if there was no problems to be solved. Being introspective is not the same as being critical
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Is it that bizarre? I think it sounds reasonable. All sufficiently important technologies bring power. That power upends societal behaviors and existing power structures. Not always for the best, but perhaps inevitable. I think it’s good to think critically on downside risk.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.