Nope. Centraliation enables cheap scale for attackers. Decentralization is stronger as a system. I mean you know why TCP/IP was built that way. You know why email is more resistant to attacks like this.
-
-
-
Decentralization would make the network stronger if people were randomly assigned to the smaller networks, but they wouldn't be. An attacker who wanted to target union members in Wisconsin would know exactly which subnetworks to go for.
- Još 3 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
The problem is that FB is polarising grandmothers looking for family photos and people looking for cat gifs. The people already at the fringes will find their tribes either way, the ones in the middle are being pushed to a side for no reason.
-
If that grandmother would be useful to an attacker (e.g. is a likely voter in a swing state), surely she can be found and polarized as easily on a small social network as a big one, no?
- Još 4 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Part of the problem with Facebook was that by having their algorithms reward engagement, they also rewarded polarization and fake news. The solution is to be more mindful of the incentives such algorithms create, not necessarily to break up Facebook.
-
That is true. But smaller social networks would also optimize for engagement. The algorithms aren't hard. And some of them might be a lot less scrupulous about how they did it.
- Još 3 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
No. Why would you think otherwise? This is how things were before the big social networks.
-
That was so long ago that you can't really compare. Before Facebook, social networks worked differently, and far fewer person-hours were spent on them.
- Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
If everyone watched news from a local cable channel, they wouldn't have the same effect on a country as when they either watch Fox or CNN. FB being so large is part of what makes fake news a problem it adds credibility when you see an article liked by N,000s of people.
-
If there were 1000 smaller social networks, people would choose theirs by affinity, not location. So it would be worse than switching from local to Fox News, not better. There would be 500 different Fox Newses, many of which made Fox seem unbiased by comparison.
- Još 3 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.