People in general I find are confused about what a "millenial" is. It's generally agreed upon that millenials were born between ~1981 and 1996. Gen Y and millenial are the same thing. A lot of people say millenial when they actually mean Gen Z, which is people born 1997 or later. There are some varying year ranges that you may find, but that's a pretty commonly agreed upon range.

Millenials, for the most part, are just regular adults working day jobs and paying bills, but people from Gen X and before have been conditioned to think of "millenials" as those lazy kids and so, to them, all kids are millenials.

For the record, I'm from the tail end of Gen X. Old enough to remember before the internet was in every home (or pocket), young enough to have not been typing on a typewriter in high school.

Every generation has their lazy ones. I knew of a few in the boomer ranks.

The thing about the Millenials or Y or whatever is the sense of entitlement.
 
Phet I am glad things are looking up for you.

Andrew I have watched all of your videos and I am astonished but not surprised.

Tufnel I love the way you think bro keep
It coming.

Senator Fucking Pancake over and out.
 
read up on Cambridge Analytica, if you'd like a real-world example

(and no, i'm not anything even resembling an expert on the topic, but you don't have to be an expert to realize the arguably-Orwellian scope of what's going on here)

Now that Phet's shit is packed up tight and shipped ...

Thank goodness I didn't have to read it but watched this on netflix the other night.

 
Man.... you guys went to some progressive high schools. Ours didn't allow males in Typing class. That shit was for "girls who wanted to become secretaries". (Yes, I was told this)

People in general I find are confused about what a "millenial" is. It's generally agreed upon that millenials were born between ~1981 and 1996. Gen Y and millenial are the same thing. A lot of people say millenial when they actually mean Gen Z, which is people born 1997 or later. There are some varying year ranges that you may find, but that's a pretty commonly agreed upon range.

Millenials, for the most part, are just regular adults working day jobs and paying bills, but people from Gen X and before have been conditioned to think of "millenials" as those lazy kids and so, to them, all kids are millenials.

For the record, I'm from the tail end of Gen X. Old enough to remember before the internet was in every home (or pocket), young enough to have not been typing on a typewriter in high school.

All kids are Millennials is actually incorrect... all young adults are Millennials. Not all of them are lazy entitled little shits, though. As with all words, it depends on the usage. Using "Millennial" as an insult denotes the lazy/entitled portion of their generation. Just remember something, Xers... those are OUR kids. If they are fucked up... it's YOUR fault.

The ones snorting condoms.... those are the early Millennial's kids....

Do derail this thread even further, when I was in school early on we had typewriters and Apple 2's. They were rad. Outdated at the time, but what more do you need?

"Nobody needs more than 640k" - Bill Gates
 
Man.... you guys went to some progressive high schools. Ours didn't allow males in Typing class. That shit was for "girls who wanted to become secretaries". (Yes, I was told this)

yikes..........
 
so assuming that the cambridge analytical scandal and ambiguous fears of the "orwellian scope" of this issue are the only examples anyone is willing to provide, i'd still be interested in hearing about anything specific you guys are afraid of happening as a result of you being on facebook, or using the arcade facebook groups.

other than privacy concerns, these examples don't actually demonstrate any kind of real world impact to you. data was leaked, algorithms were run, but other than that, how do you think this effected you? or how do you think a similar situation like this could effect you in the future? do you actually believe cambridge analytica was responsible for getting trump elected? because studies assessing the actual impact of the leak state otherwise. as far as the "orwellian scope," i'm not sure what area of paranoid, irrational fear this is speaking to, but if anyone wants to state something more specific, maybe we can talk about it. i want to have a grounded conversation about specific things people are worried about in an effort to mitigate some of the old man paranoia going on here.
 
ugh. i've been a software engineer for 20 years. my degree is in computer science. i understand how sorting works and that companies characterize the data they receive. and i'm not going to watch your videos. but i'll ask again, what do you think they are going to use this data for? tell me specifically what you are afraid of?

"advance company interests?"

what does this mean? to make money? to advertise? that was the first thing i stated before you insisted there's more to it. what more to it is there? world domination? discrimination? political gerrymandering? i'm asking you to tell me specifically what you think facebook is doing with it's data so we can have a grounded conversation about those fears, instead of an ambiguous argument based on irrationalism. and if everything you know about this subject comes from a youtube video instead of critical thinking, then i wouldn't consider yourselves educated.



Any and all of the above. (Up to and including killing people, if you happen to live in the wrong country). Anything involving characterizing an individual or group, and gaining a statistical advantage in any market or competitive situation. Pick your favorite area.

Cambridge Analytica is an excellent place to start (in addition to the other examples I've already given), but even that is the tip of the iceberg. Just extrapolate the Cambridge example forward another 5/10/20 years, with increases in computing power and communication.

It isn't based on 'irrationalism' or fear (as I'm not 'worried' about what could happen to 'me'). And it isn't just Facebook. And it isn't just what FB knows about (in terms of their own activity, as much an be done by others without them even knowing). And it isn't just for the things you've mentioned. And it isn't limited to the things that are happening today.

If you were online in the late 90's, remember how email was a great thing at first, and then spam happened? Major technologial advancements often have unexpected ramifications that aren't anticipated at the time of development. But it isn't hard to see where things are going here, if you're looking at the right indicators, and have any long-term experience working with new technology. But we don't even have to get that far into it, as there are plenty of instances of things happening today.

If you're a software guy, are you up on the latest in neural network and machine learning advancements? Are you aware of what's being done now, that wasn't possible 20, 10, 5, or even 3 years ago? I'm far from an expert in these areas, but I am an EE with 25 years experience in the storage and data communications spaces, who has just kept up with what's been going on, as much of the research is out there, freely available to anyone to read and absorb.

Take the Cambridge Analytica example. Start there, then add to that the fact that that was 3-4 years ago. Then look up Yann LeCun (a legendary researcher in the machine learning space, and currently Chief AI Scientist at Facebook), and look up the kinds of info Facebook is extracting today from image and video data (which they weren't doing 4 years ago), which he has many lectures on, all on youtube. It isn't just about collecting raw data and sorting it anymore.

With newer machine-learning techniques, it's about interpreting and *understanding* higher-level information contained in that data (people/faces, locations, objects, activities, etc), and using that to statistically infer additional information that isn't directly there (and then making business and other decisions based on that information). And when you're at that level, people can be targeted and manipulated (which there are also examples of, e.g., Cambridge). It's essentially the same as the spam problem, but orders of magnituide more intelligent, and with greater consequences.

And if you want to take it a step even further, couple that with the fact that data leaks happen to even the biggest and supposedly most secure companies today (just look up any of the major data breaches in the last 10 years). It isn't hard to put the pieces together. And that's just from malicious actors, let alone what the companies themselves are voluntarily and knowingly doing with the info they are collecting.

And if you aren't willing to watch a single video that comes from *Google itself* (i.e., not 'my video'), then there isn't any hope of getting into a deeper conversation. You have to want to learn and understand what's being done today in the worlds of AI and privacy, and where they intersect. I can lead you to water, but I can't make you drink.
 
so assuming that the cambridge analytical scandal and ambiguous fears of the "orwellian scope" of this issue are the only examples anyone is willing to provide, i'd still be interested in hearing about anything specific you guys are afraid of happening as a result of you being on facebook, or using the arcade facebook groups.

other than privacy concerns, these examples don't actually demonstrate any kind of real world impact to you. data was leaked, algorithms were run, but other than that, how do you think this effected you? or how do you think a similar situation like this could effect you in the future? do you actually believe cambridge analytica was responsible for getting trump elected? because studies assessing the actual impact of the leak state otherwise. as far as the "orwellian scope," i'm not sure what area of paranoid, irrational fear this is speaking to, but if anyone wants to state something more specific, maybe we can talk about it. i want to have a grounded conversation about specific things people are worried about in an effort to mitigate some of the old man paranoia going on here.



You're missing the forest for the trees. You're looking for specific examples of small things that can happen to you right now. And while examples have been given (which you don't seem to want to acknowledge, as 'privacy concerns' alone is a pretty big bucket), the issue is larger scale than 'a guy using an arcade group'. The issue is systemic, and the fact that it's only begun, and is literally getting broader and deeper in scope as we speak. One cigarette won't give you cancer. But decades of smoking can.

To put it a different way, I don't need to tell you specifically *which* car is going to be involved, in order to say that kids playing in traffic is a bad idea.
 
Last edited:
For the record, the original subject of this thread was about whether or not Facebook could be used as a useful tool in the arcade hobby. And the general sentiment seemed to be: no, because Facebook can't be trusted to protect your privacy (and also because the people on there are idiot millennials). What you are stating now is that the privacy concerns people have lie far outside of whether any one specific person can use a social media platform safely. I just want to make this explicitly clear. Because yes, you guys on KLOV, you can use Facebook and no one is going to hurt you. This isn't a good reason for anyone here to not give it a try.

This being said, I don't mind talking about the larger implications of social media platforms, and what your broader concerns are. Specifically that, I guess… (and correct me if I'm wrong here), if you use a social platform, you are contributing to the data repository of the platform holder which can then be used by some nefarious entity to impact society in some way. While I don't disagree with you that there are concerns in this area, I'd like to tease out specifically what your concerns are, because you, like a lot of people, sound a little tin hat on this subject, and your overreaction of: the platform can't be used as a tool without harm being done, is pretty unwarranted.

And no I'm not going to watch any of your YouTube videos. On subjects like this, the pervasiveness of agenda an exploitation of paranoia is difficult sit through. I already have a strongly vetted understanding of this stuff based on my own study in the area, and my knowledge of the law and how software works, and how businesses use this sort of data, and it's extremely difficult to listen to content creators who aren't very well informed. I'd rather have a direct conversation with someone who believes this stuff so I can respond to their concerns instead of trying to infer them from a flawed video. And if you can't at least digest and regurgitate these ideas you're getting from Youtube in a competent way, then how much can you actually be thinking about these subjects for yourself?

Ok, so to try and glean what your concerns are (which you stated as "all of the above" to my earlier remark), let's try to look at each one I stated for you. 1. That companies use this data to make money. Yes. They use the information to target you with advertisements. I stated this as the core reason they gather this information. We agree. 2. World domination. Ok. Corporations often use their profits to gain influence over their own government through lobbying and contributions, and by buying off politicians, or even to sway political elections. But the purpose of this usually is to lower regulation and get tax breaks that enable these corporations to make more money. World domination is kind of an ambiguous thing with foggy characteristics. Does Jeff Bezos rule the world right now? Sorta. I guess. Does this mean you can't safely use Facebook to sell your Asteroids? No, it does not mean that. Settle down. 3. To discriminate against people. I don't know exactly what your concern here is. You can't discriminate against people in America. It's illegal. And whether companies like Facebook or Cambridge Analytica know if someone is gay isn't going to make it legal for them to discriminate. And anyway, companies don't want to discriminate against people. They want to sell them shit. If you're worry is that other countries aren't as safe as ours, and if someone is outed on social media they could be killed, that's not a problem with the social media platform. That's a problem with the fact that it's ok to kill people for lifestyle reasons in other countries. This shit is going to happen in those countries regardless of the social media that exists there. Getting rid of social media isn't going to make gay people safe in Brunei. If our government devolves into a fascist state where this sort of stuff starts happening here, it won't be the fault of the social media platform. It will be because the people here willfully accepted fascism. Which… granted. 4. Political gerrymandering. Political parties don't need social media to gerrymander. They already have the party affiliation of every registered voter at their fingertips. This one is not a concern.

So, basically, companies use this data to make money and gain power, which is what I originally stated. I think we can agree on this. What we don't agree on is what the ramifications of this are. Companies have been doing this since the dawn of capitalism. It's all they ever do. They will use whatever means they have available to do this. If our technology becomes more advanced, they will use advanced technology to do this. It is inevitable. The only way to avoid it is to actively destroy technology, because you can't make people ethical, and therefore you can't make companies ethical. Facebook wasn't started by a nefarious entity. It was started by kids in a dorm room. The same is true for all the other social media platforms. The fact that these platforms get subsumed and harnessed by more powerful entities is the way our society has always operated and it's what we've come to accept for hundreds of years. This is nothing new. Your grandma posting pictures of her cat on Facebook isn't going to contribute or take away from how this has always been. And companies who are using social media to harvest data are going to get this information whether anyone is on Facebook or not. Your face is on camera wherever you go now. Your credit card number is in every website you've ever bought anything from. Once a company has a tidbit of information about you, whether it was gleaned from Facebook or somewhere else, they have it forever, and it's only a matter of time before they compile everything there is to know about you. This is just the state of our society. Is it good? Obviously, it is concerning. Can you prevent it by staying off Facebook? No. If social media didn't exist would it still be happening? Yes. So Jesus, guys. I get that you don't like Facebook. It's different than KLOV. And it's harder to find information on there. People are flakier. But you aren't killing society when you try to use it, not any more than it's already dying, and you aren't putting yourself in any personal risk when you log on there. Society is crumbling. It has been for a while now. We aren't going to make it too many more centuries regardless. Hallelujah. Holy shit.
 
And no I'm not going to watch any of your YouTube videos.

...

And if you can't at least digest and regurgitate these ideas you're getting from Youtube in a competent way, then how much can you actually be thinking about these subjects for yourself?


I am digesting and assimilating the information I'm getting from educating myself about the facts, the latest advancements and activities, and what's actually being done. And if you aren't willing to do that, we cannot be on the same page fact-wise, and trying to have a conversation with you is pointless.

And the reason I'm referring you to the videos is because I cannot successfully represent the content of a 1-hour lecture on a given topic in a single forum post here. I understand the concepts and content, as I've put in the work to seek it out, digest it, reflect on it, and assimilate it into my knowledge. But you've got to do that work yourself if we want to have a grounded discussion on a level playing field here.


Ok, so to try and glean what your concerns are (which you stated as "all of the above" to my earlier remark), let's try to look at each one I stated for you. 1. That companies use this data to make money. Yes. They use the information to target you with advertisements. I stated this as the core reason they gather this information. We agree.

As stated before, it's more than showing you ads. This is a view from 5 years ago, and is not what we are talking about today. We are talking about affecting your ability to get a mortgage, insurance, medical care, and participating in other major aspects of society, where corporations can gain an advantage by knowing statistical (and other) information about you as a person.

I'm assuming you understand how the insurance market works. The amount you pay isn't the same as everyone else. It's statistically determined, factoring in any risks that are known about you (age, lifestyle, medical history, existing conditions, etc). Therefore the more that is known about you that could increase risk in the insurance company's eyes, the more you pay. And that concept applies to many other things in society, as many markets are statistically determined or influenced, and where information is power. The more structured information they have, the more powerful they are, and the less good that is for the individual.



2. World domination. Ok. Corporations often use their profits to gain influence over their own government through lobbying and contributions, and by buying off politicians, or even to sway political elections. But the purpose of this usually is to lower regulation and get tax breaks that enable these corporations to make more money. World domination is kind of an ambiguous thing with foggy characteristics. Does Jeff Bezos rule the world right now? Sorta. I guess. Does this mean you can't safely use Facebook to sell your Asteroids? No, it does not mean that. Settle down.


The more you type or click into Facebook, the more Facebook knows about you. Every comment, every click. Every piece of info identifies you a tiny bit more, in ways most people are not thinking about as they're blindly typing and posting away. Even if you just sell an Asteroids cab. Just think about that one simple case. They know your hobbies, your lifestyle, and perhaps most importantly the people you connect with, and can infer MANY other things from that. All from one post. And when they sell that information to other companies (which they do), that exposes your privacy, in ways that you have no awareness or control over, and which can be used in ways that are not in your best interests (per the examples already given).

I also don't know how informed you are on exactly how much Facebook is trading info on you with other sites. It wasn't until about 8 years ago, when FB started recommending me to people who I'd only ever had contact with through a dating site (Match.com) that I knew something was up, and I looked into it. Match was freely exchanging my info with FB, about who I was interacting with on a private dating site, without my knowledge. Sorry, no bueno.


3. To discriminate against people. I don't know exactly what your concern here is. You can't discriminate against people in America. It's illegal.


So that must be why discrimination never happens, and why there is no racial or social tension in this country.

Not sure if you've been paying attention for the last 5 years or so, being illegal doesn't stop people (or companies, or governments) from doing things.

You seem to have a very narrow idea that the only thing companies use personal info for is to 'show you ads'. And that's incredibly misinformed (which you'd be more aware of if you weren't unwilling to read up on the current state of things, and learn about what's actually being done today).


Getting rid of social media isn't going to make gay people safe in Brunei. If our government devolves into a fascist state where this sort of stuff starts happening here, it won't be the fault of the social media platform. It will be because the people here willfully accepted fascism.


Yes, by using and supporting things that allow large corporations and government entities to easily gather, exchange, and track information about them.

There's a HUGE difference between an entity like the government trying to accumulate decentralized information about you, that is spread out all over the web, and a company like Facebook, which has you inside a walled garden, and can much more easily see and collect/process/track every single action you make. (Especially when their systems are DESIGNED to keep you on the site, and interact only with other things on the site, which is something they very publicly state as one of their goals.) The difference there is enormous, and you can't compare the two, or just gloss over that difference.


Which… granted. 4. Political gerrymandering. Political parties don't need social media to gerrymander. They already have the party affiliation of every registered voter at their fingertips. This one is not a concern.


And again, your idea of gerrymandering is dated (as is your idea of 'just showing you ads' above). Gerrymandering is not what happened with Cambridge Analytica. It was a completely different political activity.

With all respect, your ideas here are about 10 years behind the times, and in order to have any kind of meaningful or informed conversation with you, you need to understand what's being done TODAY, and how things have *changed* in the last 3-4 years (as that's part of the crux of it). I can't have a 2019 conversation with someone whose ideas are from the 2000's, and who actively refuses to understand the CURRENT state of things. I might as well have this conversation with my grandmother. And she's been dead 20 years.


The fact that these platforms get subsumed and harnessed by more powerful entities is the way our society has always operated and it's what we've come to accept for hundreds of years. This is nothing new. Your grandma posting pictures of her cat on Facebook isn't going to contribute or take away from how this has always been. And companies who are using social media to harvest data are going to get this information whether anyone is on Facebook or not. Your face is on camera wherever you go now. Your credit card number is in every website you've ever bought anything from.


So your argument is basically 'that's the way it's always been, and the way it always will be, and people are going to get your information regardless.'

1) That's classic fallacious logic, otherwise known as an 'Appeal to Tradition'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition

2) Again, you're missing and/or glossing over a ridiculous amount of detail and nuance, stemming from the fact that you refuse to educate yourself on the details of what's current. This has nothing to do with your grandmother posting cat pics. (But you can't appreciate what that statement even means, as you're willfully unaware of the current state of tech.)


I get why you're arguing as you are, and I see your reasoning, but I also see what you aren't aware of. (And I've tried to give you the ability to inform yourself, but you aren't willing to get up to speed.)

As a result, I'm not really interested in continuing this discussion, as it won't be productive. We will just keep talking past each other.
 
i'm not going to say i have an infallible incite into these issues, or precognition into what's going to happen in the future of our society. no one does. but i'm more interested in the way people perceive how these issues directly impact them, and what their reasoning is for refusing to make use of the tools that exist through social media. i understand your concerns, i just don't think they are relevant to what the original topic of this thread is about. and just because i stated that the current status quo is how it's always been, it doesn't mean i think it's good. it's a separate issue that has nothing to do with whether anyone should actually use facebook, or whether facebook is better or worse than klov for your arcade needs.

you kind of do that thing that a lot of guys do. like ben shapiro or jordan peterson, where you try to make a claim on fact or truth for yourself, when in reality these things are far more complicated with many more inputs and variables than you're willing to acknowledge. you don't know that the practices these companies are engaging in couldn't be used for good, or that someone won't be able to reign them in. you can't even state any real world consequences that have taken place as a result of what's going on. you insist that you have and i'm just not listening, but all that means is you are failing to argue your point in a convincing way. and that i'm a lost cause and a waste of your time because i won't listen to you or your videos. but i think what really bothers you is that someone has a dissenting opinion, and they continue to dissent in the face of your impenetrable logic. i don't agree with you? i must be uneducated (i'm not) or my knowledge must be 20 years behind (lol it isn't). i'm not trying to attack you here, just giving you some feedback. insisting you are right and that people aren't comprehending you doesn't make you right. it just means you aren't very good at convincing people who don't already agree with you.
 
you kind of do that thing that a lot of guys do. like ben shapiro or jordan peterson, where you try to make a claim on fact or truth for yourself, when in reality these things are far more complicated with many more inputs and variables than you're willing to acknowledge.


That's exactly my point. These things are more complicated, and if you aren't willing to familiarize yourself with and about that complexity, I have no hope of conversing meaningfully with you about it. We will be speaking two different languages. I can't talk circuits with you if you aren't willing to learn what Ohm's Law is.

Also note that complex doesn't mean impossible to understand. However you have to have an appreciation for that complexity, in order to understand the inputs, outputs, states, variables, forces, and outcomes that effect how systems work. Everything is a system, and systems can be understood.

You've demonstrated an unwillingness to educate yourself about the scope of the abilities of the latest tech (which is not covered by mainstream media, and as a result you have to seek it out). And you say I haven't mentioned real world consequences, when I've stated several, which you've brushed off (e.g., Cambridge), and actively do not seek to be more informed about the details thereof. You're choosing to stay on the surface, however with this topic, the devil is in the details.

Your counter to the Cambridge example is, 'Well, studies show it didn't affect the outcome of the election'. And that completely misses the point, and glosses over a football field of detail about that event. And you won't understand any of that if you don't spend the time learning about it (and I'm not going to teach you here). The same goes with your handwaving comment of 'aside from privacy issues...'. Aside from privacy issues? That's like saying this cancer thing is great, except for the whole getting sick and dying part.

The details of those things (and an apprecation for them) are key to understanding where I'm coming from. I've spent considerable time exposing myself to the details and nuances thereof. And from what you've said here it appears that you haven't, but more importantly are unwilling to do so, even with shortcuts.

And note that I'm not saying that as an ad hominem, but rather just a fact of this conversation. If you choose to stay unfamiliar with the details, that's fine. But as Jordan Peterson says, that's where we part ways. I see why you believe what you do, and why you are not going to change your mind. And I'm fine just leaving it at that.
 
Last edited:
There's this guy on "Ancient Aliens" who has spent years and years educating himself on the "facts" and he now knows the truth and is trying to enlighten the rest of the world.

Cool stuff.
 
There's this guy on "Ancient Aliens" who has spent years and years educating himself on the "facts" and he now knows the truth and is trying to enlighten the rest of the world.

Cool stuff.

And now that the Pentagon has come out and declared they have been monitoring UFO events for sometime and the Navy reversing coarse on the way their officers make reports of UFO craft sightings perhaps this will lead to the facts of Who the fuck are they and Where the fuck do they come from. We cant all be crazy seeing things in the sky that defy logic or are not of our current technology.
 
Back
Top Bottom