While I was drawn to her initial idealism in the book, I don’t think any of the events seemed terribly surprising given that Zuckerberg is a human who was in the position to make monstrous wealth in a system that overwhelmingly and increasingly prioritizes financial success / power over everything else.
To that end, they chose to use algorithms that reward outrage engagement, or easy metrics like “likes” and shares and purchases, rather than metrics that reward, say, content that connects people from different demographics or translates values like empathy or fact-based education. They could change that. They could easily create those algorithms. But the dopamine and thus the money flows from the easier metric of stirring outrage inside self-renewing feedback loops.
When the technology first came about—going back to stuff like MySpace – it was thought of as a great way to connect people. It had, and still has, the potential to be used in more ethical ways (remembering her moment in the airport getting live updates of a tragedy) rather than being designed primarily to benefit shareholders. It wasn’t until the corporate drive to monetize everything at the expense of many other values took over that it became the beast it has become. ***Please notice here how that emphasis, and those values, dramatically grew and coincided with the rise of the MAGA values: me-first, insiders over outsiders, valorization of perceived strength [cruelty] over empathy and social collaboration*** One hopes these things are cyclical.
I remember when all of the tech / social media /AI giants, including Zuckerberg, grotesquely stood on the dais at the second Trump inauguration. For me, though we were already living in the effects of some of the worst uses of social media, their unification with Trumpers portended a dark future for the next tech wave, AI – which, similar to social media in its infancy seems so full of positive potential. If we follow the same narrative, though, (the same values), it’s going to be a struggle to weave – prioritize – altruism, social safety nets, collaboration, respect and empathy into it in a system that profoundly favors making money. However, I love that there are individuals who WILL risk moral engagement in these systems. We need them. We need them to be loud and take smart risks. I think you are one of them! Even if human nature in this system is to seek money and power at all ugly costs (?), those who can mitigate the damage, if not overhaul the whole system, are so very important.
I read Sarah’s book too a while back. I couldn’t finish it, not because it wasn’t good, but probably because it was too relatable. Not in all the ways, but many. Bummed me out and made me feel sorta sad. Ideally the systems we work for are also a work “with” and can evolve, particularly when they’ve sought us out to help do so. Folks are stubborn, territorial and resistant to change by nature though, so maybe success here depends on leadership. That’s a crap shoot too, as alignment is layered and priority mutable. Anyway! Thx for the read Steph, always a pleasure.
While I was drawn to her initial idealism in the book, I don’t think any of the events seemed terribly surprising given that Zuckerberg is a human who was in the position to make monstrous wealth in a system that overwhelmingly and increasingly prioritizes financial success / power over everything else.
To that end, they chose to use algorithms that reward outrage engagement, or easy metrics like “likes” and shares and purchases, rather than metrics that reward, say, content that connects people from different demographics or translates values like empathy or fact-based education. They could change that. They could easily create those algorithms. But the dopamine and thus the money flows from the easier metric of stirring outrage inside self-renewing feedback loops.
When the technology first came about—going back to stuff like MySpace – it was thought of as a great way to connect people. It had, and still has, the potential to be used in more ethical ways (remembering her moment in the airport getting live updates of a tragedy) rather than being designed primarily to benefit shareholders. It wasn’t until the corporate drive to monetize everything at the expense of many other values took over that it became the beast it has become. ***Please notice here how that emphasis, and those values, dramatically grew and coincided with the rise of the MAGA values: me-first, insiders over outsiders, valorization of perceived strength [cruelty] over empathy and social collaboration*** One hopes these things are cyclical.
I remember when all of the tech / social media /AI giants, including Zuckerberg, grotesquely stood on the dais at the second Trump inauguration. For me, though we were already living in the effects of some of the worst uses of social media, their unification with Trumpers portended a dark future for the next tech wave, AI – which, similar to social media in its infancy seems so full of positive potential. If we follow the same narrative, though, (the same values), it’s going to be a struggle to weave – prioritize – altruism, social safety nets, collaboration, respect and empathy into it in a system that profoundly favors making money. However, I love that there are individuals who WILL risk moral engagement in these systems. We need them. We need them to be loud and take smart risks. I think you are one of them! Even if human nature in this system is to seek money and power at all ugly costs (?), those who can mitigate the damage, if not overhaul the whole system, are so very important.
I read Sarah’s book too a while back. I couldn’t finish it, not because it wasn’t good, but probably because it was too relatable. Not in all the ways, but many. Bummed me out and made me feel sorta sad. Ideally the systems we work for are also a work “with” and can evolve, particularly when they’ve sought us out to help do so. Folks are stubborn, territorial and resistant to change by nature though, so maybe success here depends on leadership. That’s a crap shoot too, as alignment is layered and priority mutable. Anyway! Thx for the read Steph, always a pleasure.
Thank you, thank you .... yes, as you said, inertia, stubbornness, resistance to change .... can't wait to discuss more ....