1. We are not prisoners of groupthink.

    How I stopped worrying about "cancel culture" with this one weird tip.

    This is a response to the Gareth Roberts essay titled "We are all prisoners of groupthink".

    A common theme on the Internet is selection bias. We seek out content and interactions that fit our sensibilities, beliefs and emotional disposition. Social networks have exploited this tendency, drawing us into filter bubbles where we are algorithmically bombarded with content designed to maximize our "engagement" with no regard to damage done in terms of our psychological well-being or intellectual isolation. This makes us better consumers, but reinforces divisions between individuals and poisons any possibility of meaningful discourse, instead favoring shit-flinging competitions between so-called "keyboard warriors." This is well-documented, the social media companies are aware of it, and they don't care because division makes money.

    Our filter bubbles are designed to comfort and placate us while we're force-fed promoted content and offers and idealized imagery. Our collective ability to think critically has been siphoned away; anything that remotely challenges our beliefs is seen as a threat or an attack. Over time this has lead to the ridiculous notion that "words are violence," and from this, the rise of cancel culture, the First World pastime of mobbing, doxing, and socially destroying anyone who dares to voice an unpopular opinion or do something stupid. This cancel culture was born of social media. Sure, some might blame other factors like liberal arts education but really they're nothing new to society. But I'll tell you what changed.

    Back in the good old days (when you didn't need 32gb of memory to browse the web), Twitter and Facebook used to display a chronological feed of your friends' posts. This was very functional, but ended up creating a problem for the social media companies: in order to maximize the amount of time you spend on their sites they needed you to friend/follow tons of people (even people you aren't really friends with). But if you did that, your feed would turn into a shitshow, with too much content for any person keep up with. So Facebook and Twitter went back to the drawing board and came up with a fantastic innovation: the algorithmic content feed (aka. the death of society and end of the Internet). The feed algorithm could "get into your head" with psychographic microtargeting, allowing the machine to recommend content and advertisements that you are likely to "engage" with—click, like, share, anything to keep you on the site and viewing more ads a little longer.

    The deprecation of the chronological timeline in favor of the machine-curated content feed had major psychological side effects for everyone involved. When the machine decided what content to recommend it would favor content that is most likely to create engagement; this trends toward content that creates an emotional response, which on the Internet is most often outrageous content that evokes fear or anger. By bombarding people with upsetting shit and exposing them to "communities" of other people circlejerking about how upsetting everything is, the machine dialed the filter bubble effect up to 11, essentially dividing people into groups and then radicalizing them with increasingly extremist content. And in the process, Facebook and Twitter radicalized the actual publishers of content.

    Remember when you could pick up a newspaper or turn on your television and get news coverage that seemed at least superficially factual and unbiased? Obviously those days are gone. Newspapers are mostly out of business, TV viewership is down, and the dying husk of our mainstream media is increasingly obsessed with a contrived "culture war." Traditional media has been superceded by the Internet, and with social media dominating peoples' time spent on the Internet, Facebook and Twitter have become gatekeepers between the publishers and their viewers. Factual and unbiased reporting is simply not engaging enough and will not appear on peoples' feeds. Only breathless hyperbolic fear-mongering and rage porn will break through the algorithm and get clicks. Mainstream publishers have been forced to shift their entire media strategies around online engagement as they desperately attempt to stay relevant on the Internet. And what's more engaging than a controversy? Thus, mainstream publishers have "picked sides" that resonate with their audiences' filter bubbles in the artifical culture war, promoting non-newsworthy events into manufactured controversies, and sparking mob action with headlines like "Here's why [food CEO's] meeting with [world leader] is prObLeMaTiC."

    And that brings us to recent months, where after locking every person of fighting age in closet-sized apartments, where peoples' only access to the outside world was filtered through the toxic lens of social media, and where the only information available was underpinned by fear and outrage, people lost their shit. And now we're collectively hand-wringing about cancel culture (but being real careful not to upset the mob.)

    But here's the thing: cancel culture is irrelevant if you don't give a fuck. You are not a prisoner of groupthink. You might be a prisoner of your belief that you should give a fuck. But that is under your control. We are not living a George Orwell hellscape, memes like "1984 was a warning, not an instruction manual" fall flat. The premise that we should care what a bunch of larpy wannabe do-gooders think on Twitter and Facebook is false. It doesn't matter—you can't lose a game you don't play. Cancel culture was born of social media. If we cancel Facebook and Twitter, we can break the cycle of extreme division and hyperbolic microtargeting, shatter the filter bubbles, and reclaim our access to information from monopolistic ad targeting algorithms. By divorcing our attention from these toxic echo chambers, manufactured controversies will become less profitable, people will be able to think more critically and talk to each other more sincerely, and cancel culture will end organically. There are really no major drawbacks.

    So much of our time online is wasted creating, curating, and "defending" these perfectly plastic personas, avatars, idealized identities that represent some vague notion of a persistent sense of self on the Internet. And for what? Do you really talk to your 600 Facebook friends? Do you even give a shit about who your 10,000 Instagram followers are? Do they give a shit about you? No. People waste so much of their lives trying to stake out an online identity that they start to believe it actually matters, but it doesn't. A persistent online identity is a liability, not an asset.

    We are all tempted by the lie that social networks base their existence on: that we need to put our "selves" online for all to see. This lie is a mental hack, exploiting our human need for meaningful interactions with other people, as well as the dark aspects of human nature: ego, anger and trauma. As society increasingly isolates and divides humans from one another physically and socially, we are tempted by the lie that our online personas form a meaningful extension of our real-world selves.

    Sadly, the vast majority of our interactions on social media are hollow, and the few glimmers of meaningful connections with others that do occur instill a Pavlovian-style hope, an addictive draw to keep us infinitely scrolling through our algorithmically-curated content feeds in the vain hope that the machine will bring meaning to the emptiness of our lives. But social media is little more than mental masturbation. The service is free but the price we pay is dear.

    When you put your real self online, you open yourself up to attack. Like a federal indictment, the mob can come for anyone at any time. Whether or not you are a good person is irrelevant, and trying to craft your online persona to appease the mob is a loser's game. As the filter bubbles increasingly divide-and-circlejerk people into more extreme viewpoints, what passes for acceptable behavior today could be heresy tomorrow. And when your name, your employer, and your family are all connected to your social media presence, you put yourself in real world danger for very little real world benefit.

    So what can you do? Cancel yourself. Delete your social media presence. Sever the link between your online self and your real-world self. Seriously. You can't lose a game you don't play.

    But wait, isn't this extreme? Maybe it is, or maybe you're just addicted to social media. I've talked to a lot of people about this and heard some common excuses people use to rationalize addictive behavior to themselves.

    • "But social media is an important part of my professional network."

    I can only speak anecdotally. I've built a successful career without using LinkedIn or other social networks to promote myself. My work ethic, skill and reputation have carried me as far as I care to go in my field. Also anecdotally, when I hired a contractor to remodel my basement, I didn't check her Facebook page; I saw her work at a neighbor's house and asked them to put me in touch. She did a great job on my basement (and later posted photos of it to her Instagram). Good work promotes itself.

    But what doesn't work is when the line between personal and professional gets blurred, which is almost inevitable on a medium designed around social interaction. The tension between being a professional and having an opinion is overwhelming for some people. The person who lists in their Twitter bio that they "work for Google" and "bash the fash" isn't doing themself or their employer any favors. Such tact only works for those who stay in the good graces of the mob, which is, again, a loser's game.

    • "But I use social media to keep in touch with my school friends."

    No you don't. You "friend" or "follow" people that you will likely never talk to again, and every now and then the algorithm surfaces some photo or blurb from a distant acquaintance that you are likely to engage with, you click "like" and go back to never talking again. This is little more than voyeurism, a creepy window into peoples' lives where you keep tabs on their activities but don't otherwise interact with them. What are you, some kind of stalker?

    Your real friends you talk to via SMS or numerous other mediums. You will hang out in person and text photos to each other. You don't use Facebook or Twitter for this. None of this changes when you delete your account.

    • "But I'm on a crusade to spread my political opinion."

    This is the most entertaining and misguided excuse. Whether it's "libtards owned" or "drumpf is hitler," your opinion as it pertains to some contrived holy war between forces of good and evil is little more than farting in the wind. You aren't changing anything by arguing with people on the Internet. You're just digging further into the addictive abyss of your filter bubble. You are literally the problem.

    One thing that people across the political spectrum can agree on, from socialist/communists to alt-right Neo-Nazis, is that Facebook is fucking unethical. Whether your jam is that they interfered in a U.S. election, or they're censoring conservative viewpoints, or they performed secret psychological experiments on people, we can all agree that Facebook is an evil company and Mark Zuckerberg is a creepy android sociopath. Twitter is also problematic. They allow @realdonaldtrump to spread "hate speech" and propaganda, but also they add propaganda to his propaganda, they censor Free Speech, and enabled mass surveillance of George Floyd protestors. No matter where you stand on these issues, it's hard to deny: the damage these companies have done to society is incaculable. And yet people continue to use their social networks, often to bash the social networks themselves with no sense of irony.

    If you're politically aware at all then you know that the social media companies are unethical af, you probably know that they are wrecking the Internet, and you should know better than to continue using them. Your attention is their commodity, and by continuing to click, share, and like, you continue to enrich them while surrendering a part of your soul to the machine. But you can break the cycle.

    You are not a prisoner of groupthink. You have a choice about how you spend your limited time on this planet. There is much more to the Internet than social media, and there's much more to life (and being social) than the Internet. Go outside, read a book, lawyer up, hit the gym. You don't have to be Zuckerberg's little bitch. You can delete your social media. If enough people do, the world will be a much calmer place. If this idea scares you, then it's because you're a follower. You know what you're doing is wrong and you're only doing it because other people are doing it. But you know who else did that? Nazis. So do yourself a favor. Cancel yourself before the mob decides you're a Nazi and does it for you. Free yourself from the tyranny of your persistent persona, and remember the age-old truth:

    On the Internet nobody knows you're a dog

    Posted 2020-07-10 11:40:00 CST by henriquez.


    One of the best comments I've read in ages about the so called "social" media. The whole hype about fb, twitter, insta, and the like, keeps reminding me of my experiences as a teen when I decided to say no to booze or smoking. It was a nightmare: even complete strangers where constantly trying to persuade me, claiming that you "had to do it because everybody else does", or that you "should just try once, for the fun of it", etc. Well, I guess, most addictions just start because of well-meaning (?) people like these...

    Thanks for the complete information. You helped me.

    I gave cbd gummies a prove for the primary adjust, and I'm amazed! They tasted great and provided a intelligibility of calmness and relaxation. My emphasis melted away, and I slept less ill too. These gummies are a game-changer since me, and I greatly endorse them to anyone seeking unconstrained pain recess and well-advised sleep.

    I recently tried Organic Body Essentials and was pleasantly surprised. Their CBD grease provided immediate recess in place of my concern without any noticeable side effects. The flavor was kind and not overpowering. Additionally, their bloke service was excellent, addressing my queries promptly. Entire, I highly make attractive Organic Body Essentials CBD for anyone seeking high-quality CBD products.

    Disquieting hemp products has been perfectly the journey. As someone fervent on usual remedies, delving into the in every respect of hemp has been eye-opening. From THC tinctures to hemp seeds and protein pulverize, I've explored a variety of goods. In defiance of the misunderstanding surrounding hemp, researching and consulting experts receive helped journey this burgeoning field. Entire, my sophistication with hemp has been despotic, contribution holistic well-being solutions and sustainable choices.

    I tried CBD products for the in the first place time last week, and I'm genuinely surprised by way of the results. I've struggled with eagerness and occasional sleeplessness, and CBD seemed to offering a subtle, despite everything effectual, have of coolness and relaxation. There was no 'high,' no more than a undisturbed easing of my foreboding symptoms and a more sedative incessantly's sleep. It tasted a grain crude, but that's a miniature trade-off for feeling more at peace. I'm looking forth to seeing how it helps in the great run.

    Infuriating hemp flower quest of the sooner metre was an eye-opening experience. The diminution and euphoria were unexpected but welcomed. It enhanced my sensory appreciation and sparked a newfound rise for music and art. However, the passionate yearn caught me misled guard. Overall, it was a illustrious introduction to a new world of sensations.