> 8. It’s given stupid people unfiltered access to each other’s opinions
This is a big problem. Previously, 'the mob' only came into being when things got really bad. Now it is a constant (virtual) presence.
This is a big problem. Previously, 'the mob' only came into being when things got really bad. Now it is a constant (virtual) presence.
Heck, that ship sailed with the invention of the printing press (tabloids).
In those mediums (even tabloid press), there is a lot of centralization and control, combined with limited reach for any random nutter, combined with profit incentives that push towards relatively median behavior.
For instance, running a publicly accessible Radio and TV station requires compliance with extensive regulations, and to have significant reach requires significant (fixed) equipment and capital. Which makes that person easy to find, and with something significant to lose.
Cable reduces regulation, but the ‘easy to find, and something to lose’ problem is still there to some extent. PPV type rules limited that somewhat, since because the content wasn’t public it reduced a lot of liability (“if you don’t like it, don’t buy it!”) and coupled the liability they did get with actual money to offset it.
So, if someone wants to be doing it for long, they need to be able to make enough money off it (be providing something of value) to pay back equipment, and not be pissing people off enough they are incentivized to hunt them down. While giving out the content to the public for free.
Tabloids did change that dynamic a little, but have a similar issue of how to get paid/money without getting too much blowback. And the reach is limited to a small area, so unless they get distributors or the like, it’s a similar type of issue.
The internet changed this dynamic a lot - someone can run a website/service in any jurisdiction (and banning it is hard), and it can connect people globally (so potentially near infinite audience!) with very little extra work. It cuts out all the middlemen. It’s also relatively inexpensive in capital and work hours for a ‘info bit’ to be distributed compared to any other medium.
The hardest part is figuring out how to get paid, and if you can do that you’re doing pretty good.
Interestingly, social media is essentially a sweet spot here.
They get to disclaim liability for the actual message, while being able to algorithmically pick the messages with the most engagement (typically the most incendiary!), with relatively low equipment costs, and then get paid by ‘volume’/turnover (aka ads).
It’s like being a stock broker or market during the 20’s stock market boom, collecting commissions and pushing the craziest options to the most gullible.
Fascinating, really.
And in a similar vein, the abuses there did end up creating a huge economic collapse and the SEC.
In this case, I suspect it will end up creating a huge trust/attention collapse which will cause significant economic re-ordering (and contraction) as people stop doing transactions because they are getting scammed/stolen from.
Possible economic contraction too as a lot of things revert back to older ‘known good’ behaviors due to reduced risk appetites.
Enter your IQ to allow access to Wikipedia ...
Societal changes such as free education might improve the situation, not more segregation.