I think that the tweet genre of “this person (who might be a bot) had a bizarre opinion that made me think less of humanity and so the right thing by to do is screenshot it and show it to the largest number of people” is silly.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
And that right there is the funniest part of all this. When it comes to actual logical and moral stuff? Most white people literally refuse to share the most logical and moral stuff. Because it comes from black people.
It's crazy. Most times i HOPE white people copied stuff i say. Very rarely happens. lol I could say racism is inherently illogical until i'm blue in the face.
This is where i hear Jay in my head: "It's not crazy, it's racist. It's not a mental health issue. It's racism. Just because you "can't believe it" doesn't mean you haven't done it too because the *importance* of intention is a tenet".
I would honestly extend this to people who we know are not bots. If you can't debunk/expose it in less words than it took for them to express it, just block and ignore.
It is the age we live in. We must correct everything. We canot let it go. It gives us something to DO. “We are the Few, the Proud, the More or Less Constantly Appalled at Everyone Else.” — David Foster Wallace.
Since everyone here is acting like opinions are viruses that spread when you cough in their direction, consider such posts vaccines against those opinions.
That lukewarm take ain't gonna get you to the top of the HOT BSKY 100, Green. If you wanna make it to the top, try screenshotting something outrageous and indefensible, and then point out that it's outrageous and indefensible as proof that your tribe is civilized and other tribes are barbaric.
John with the translation or elaboration because I was confused. I've been a victim of people coming at me because their friend said they should. "look how stupid he made me feel, attack" Flies gonna fly, When you're the Shit you attract flies.
Are all these posts Kremlin-created? Not even half. We're plenty capable of writing dumb, inflammatory @#$% without their help. They're just grabbing that dial and spinning it up a notch or three.
lmfao So trump...a white supremacists/fascist. Did like those groups have historically done. And is attempting to rule the world. Other people? Don't believe it until they see his exact tweets.
Amplication? Is only a problem when the vast majority of people upon reading something. Doesn't and/or can't apply logic and morality to it. And thus..agrees with said misinformation. Otherwise. It's just..showing people a thing.
The real Jedi post is to start w/ “no one will see this but…” indicating that you’re dropping a truth bomb, then follow with a take so mid, that people wish there was an 🙄 button.
Screenshot THAT and parlay it into a career as a grifty, shadowbanned truth teller.
THANK YOU! I was following George Takei; he's a funny guy, but 90% of his posts were Twitter screenshots. We're not on Bluesky for Twitter screenshots - or anything Twitter related!
It’s the element of social media I find the most exhausting and damaging. There’s a ton of outrage generated by “random person says dumb thing” content. It happens on both sides of the political divide.
my least favorite internet trend honestly i wish people would stop doing this 😭 ive been seeing a lot of people doing that with sharing screenshots of tweets from the old website on here lately unfortunately too and im like…can’t we just leave that over there
I take it to mean "less and less of my interaction seems genuine and authentic. Are you seeing this? Can someone stop it?" as I can relate that way.
If there is a better way to combat the seige I am looking.
I love how smart this is but also the reality that Hank Green (that's you, because you're probably reading this) just watches social media like a normal person and even responds to peoples questions and stuff is always gonna make me so happy. He sees us, even when we're shitposting.
It's like people don't understand that that's how virus's bloom exponentially. "Don't Engage", means maintain social distance. If you are trying to warn others about getting infected by sharing the infection you are not only engaging, but also allowing multitudes of others to continue the spread.
Thats how Trump breaches containment and goes viral with everything he says... haters go dredge it up from the obscurity of Truth and smear it all over the internet.
But we like joining in this kind of shared misery. I was observing some friends do the Hot Wings challenge, with actual sauces from the show. I didn't join until they started complaining about how truly awful #5 was. Not for, just awful. I had to try. It was awful, and I was glad I tried!
The problem is, sharing it on social media platforms that determine reach from engagement is never going to clamp it down. Only when algorithms stop being designed this way can it be helpful to call it out in that way
I totally agree that misinformation and bad opinions should be called out, but only in a way that doesn't amplify the content you're trying to argue against.
Rage-bait and ridicule-bait are so effective because people can't help but share it with others. This is exactly what they want to happen.
It’s whatever personally i don’t put my feelings in the information I know to be true. I’m not going to be complicit in the propaganda and combat it with truth there is no feeling to be had to undeniablity. It’s why I think real life situations in what place they take by just the situation that…
Not if the reply is in facts. You can’t deny facts. Facts are a provable source that most can find themselves and is undeniable this is no algorithm problem but trolls trying to silent the ones that can back themselves up. And also some people are also young and just don’t know. You can’t just go….
If you are going to read and post every bit of propaganda that goes by you in an hour on social media (esp. Twitter) you are going to do nothing else. I see the point of recognizing and condemning it from politicians or journalists, but every guy/bot using a pseudonym?
Why not? Again I want truth so I spread it like a wildfire to say I won’t take it anymore. You never know you may change a consumer of the propagandas mind as I seen others before for not every liberal or democratic started as a liberal or democrat.
I’m following the people that I know or have come to met. I’m not here for a “numbers” game I also keep my DMs open. I’m not “asked” to follow back so why should I have to? If they want that they can tell me or ask. I’m not one to judge on someone asking for a follow back. I even have in my bio…
I’m not posting garbage but I research into what i don’t know. When I find what I do know i provide the links and evidence to support what is true i don’t have a bias as long as it doesn’t hate or discriminate.
Your profile says you like memes. Memes, emojis and the like are pretty much an instant block for me. Different strokes for different folks. I'm here for news and commentary.
it would be interesting to investigate how many tweets vs bsky posts there are in that format, cause i don’t really see it on here (probably because there’s no algorithm trying to maximise retention)
I think the desire to cast judgement on others overwrites our logical brains. I KNOW it's not a good idea to repost this moronic babbling of unserious people...but i think they deserve to MAYBE feel bad if they are real.
You're 100% right. I usually don't engage in obvious bait. I think I can relate pretty hard to the people who don't see it tho(or choose not to see it).
I think it's human nature to just...want to correct really dumb people.
Whenever I see any form of hate and/or ignorance spreading, I just insta-block them. "Don't feed the trolls". If everyone were to do the same instead of spreading it further, I think it could help prevent it...or am I just being naive?
It is particularly frustrating when I block someone, because I don't want to see the garbage they spew, and people bypass that by posting screenshot of what the garbage.
The bot craze was one of the first reasons I decreased my participation on Twitter well before the current owner. It was bad then, and IMO, has only gotten worse. I stay on Twitter for the space content b/c most of them are still there, but that’s about it.
I'll amend that: the people posting that content solely to make money on ad revenue from the views will go away. There will still be people with those opinions, but not the grifters.
This genre seems to be the entire strategy of some dem social media operatives. When people say the dems are bad at messaging I feel like these types are a big part of why.
I find it mostly creates divisiveness. And "numbers" obviously of course.
Block was invented to help ease people's minds. If it is bothering you follow your instincts and block them.
Doesn't interacting with Bots keep them activated?
I feel like you are skimming over the entire history of humans and gossip due to the amplification abilities of social media. It's what people have always done to create their hierarchies - "did you hear what so-and-so did? Isn't it crazy? I'm never going near them again!" Now super-sized.
Sure, but before social media algorithms, that action didn't quite cause the same level of "oh, this content sure is getting engagement, people must really like it. I'll show it to even more people" aspect
Remembering that viral tweet recently where a user asked what low soil quality had to do with grocery prices - extremely obvious bot, but so many people got duped
lmfao Yes. Because never in the history of mankind has a person been able to say they didn't say something (getting other people to believe it). And others had to present proof of them saying it. I mean it's more complicated than that sure. But come on now.
maybe if i were the queen of the world i would decree that for every post like this you do, you have to do like three "look at this amazing post from a great person whom i appreciate!"-type posts
The whole genre of content that consists of amplifying bad opinions to ridicule them is frustrating. We need to give them less visibility on social media, not amplify them.
Everyone loses in that scenario. The bizarre opinion person gets upset that you quote post them to make fun of them, the public gets exposed to (and therefore influenced by) the opinion you disagree with, and you invite discourse over the opinion you ostensibly don't want to discuss.
It used to only be in the employ of advertisers and only if it was not so shocking that it was disallowed from TV.
Now because the internet is a totally unregulated space the only limit to how shocking someone can be to sell their personal brand, is their imagination.
Yeah, our brains are not set up to handle the Internet at all. What should be "one person stated a dumb opinion and 2 people heard it" turns into "half the internet holds this absurd opinion". If *I* saw it, it must be rampant!
It was so common on reddit to simply post screenshots of "horrible tweets" that I started downvoting any screenshots that didn't at least contain a clear critique of the contents. I wish there was more I could do about such foolishness.
If it sounds outrageous - it's 'outrage bait' they need distributed, to keep them relevant!
All those wack jobs you'd never heard of until they started spouting shite to get their 15m of fame, are reported in MSM not cos they've done/achieved anything, but cos they're making outrageous statements!
Dwight D. Eisenhower, Commanding General of the Allied Forces that defeated Nazi Germany declared: “Get it all on record now - get the films - get the witnesses - because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened.”
Yeah sure, for atrocities and historical events. Some random internet saying something out of pocket anonymously isn’t of any archival value, and sharing it doesn’t increase the permanence in any meaningful way
Trump got elected through millions of people being unhappy with the current state of the world. Look around, incumbents are losing elections left and right. Were there some persuaded by online discourse? Sure. Does that make the discourse worth preserving? Maybe. Does sharing do that? No, not at all
My guess was a magat, trying to rationalize into some sort of socially acceptable way, why they're a magat because they just don't want to say it's one of the real reasons: bigotry, racism, misogyny, prejudice (or any combination of the above). Some magats like to try to hide on this app
They couldn’t have, because the options(in their mind) was democrats or trump. They didn’t like the government under democrats so only one choice was left
The unhappy people could have done much better than Trump, but our system has been turned into a lesser of two evils race in which two candidates primarily focus on the other candidate being worse than themselves.
Except trump voters were happy with the state of the world in 2016. Prices were lower, the border was tighter, housing was lower, and they think the president controls that all unilaterally.
Correction: these people have been propagandized into believing Trump is the solution to all of the problems created by Trump, his team, and supporters.
You can see how it works when Trump speaks. It's always "bad thing, bad thing opposition," followed by "soothing sound, good feeling Trump."
The more people who see the opinions, the more likely someone is to think it's a legitimate opinion. If they disagree with the person doing the ridiculing on some other issue, they might decide that this opinion is worth having as well.
That’s my feeling too. We need to document them, sure some will be bots 🤖 but some have general intent and we need record before the dead internet occurs and it’s all gone.
This begs the question: how best to react to a might-be-a-bot disinformation account? Ignoring it feels wrong, but engaging will drive the algo to show it more... 🤔
There is absolutely value to exposing the bad takes of decision makers. I appreciate knowing that a politician is likely to legislate against their constituents’ safety or values; it can inform voting and activism.
The type of account that just reposts bad takes with a confused animal as a reaction pic is like that one small block in the "Dependency" XKCD comic except we could probably do without it I think.
Are these bots programmed to mess with us on a deep deep psychological level. What is the goal? Adversaries are spending billions on this. Why is the big question.
Firstly, I suspect most accounts who are accused of being "bots" are actually just real live people with very bad opinions. We just like assuming they are bots to avoid having to accept the fact that there are real people out there who are that dumb or cruel.
< which then FUELS those dumb and cruel people to spread their very bad opinions. The more people are fighting among themselves, the less people can form a unified front to ACTUAL threats. So from billionaire-run corporations to wannabe world dictators, it's profitable (both literally and >
The trick, however, is that you can't simply ignore all the Dumb And Cruel People With Very Bad Opinions either, because they are usually the ones that unwittingly do the actual damaging things for the benefit of the misinformation peddlers.
And its even crazier that people are going over to the other place, taking screenshots of anonymous posters (bots, who knows) and bringing them here so that those of us who came here to escape that nonsense, get to see it too . . .
What we need is a network that requires you to prove your humanness to use it. I don't think it would take off though, so instead you just have to always wonder "is that just a bot?"
Comments
(Intention has really become a focus for me.)
“hey guys, what are we arguing about today?”
especially in this age of information warfare.
The best part is that MAGA will never co-op this.
They're terrified of vaccines.
Was it Mr. Green, with the candlestick, in the library?
Reliable investigations report that the Kremlin is spending millions of dollars a month sponsoring inflammatory social media posts.
https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/02/20/587371293/the-spy-who-trolled-me
So the Kremlin hires people to churn out anger-inducing idiocy on social media, and push it to the top of the feed.
He spends ~73 million rubles a month on this. Less than a million dollars, at the current exchange rate.
The real Jedi post is to start w/ “no one will see this but…” indicating that you’re dropping a truth bomb, then follow with a take so mid, that people wish there was an 🙄 button.
Screenshot THAT and parlay it into a career as a grifty, shadowbanned truth teller.
Do you like any of the various block lists on BlueSky?
https://www.tradoc.army.mil/social-media-bots/
What do you do when the other tribe is proudly and openly barbaric?
Asking for a country?
[goes back to avoiding Twitter]
A bot has no opinion
We need Turing tests
right up there with folks who do this
right up there with folks who do this
right up there with folks who do this
right up there with folks who do this
right up there with folks who do this
Plus even if it's a normal ass person, I think regular-people-as-content entertainment is incredibly gross and I wish people wouldn't do it.
If there is a better way to combat the seige I am looking.
The summary of the complaint it "stuff is getting weird. Do you see? Can you help?"
"Report it and be normal loudly" doesn't answer any of the ask.
It can even be small everyday things.
It’s rage bait and we can’t spread it around for them.
Rage-bait and ridicule-bait are so effective because people can't help but share it with others. This is exactly what they want to happen.
But I can promise you that if you repost garbage, others will not be so keen to follow you.
Just repost it. No one cares about your reaction.
THE TIME TO MAKE THEM PAY IS RIGHT NOW! ALWAYS!
I think it's human nature to just...want to correct really dumb people.
We should dismantle it now.
Invest thinking cycles only if the post seems worth it after looking at it for less than a second. Ignore as a default.
I would.
🙃
1. monetization of views on social media
2. Algorithms that determine reach based on engagement
I find it mostly creates divisiveness. And "numbers" obviously of course.
Doesn't interacting with Bots keep them activated?
With the amount of bot activity these days, idk if 100k is even a lot of likes.
It gives a rush of dopamine to see strangers being toxic but really stupid about it.
It's fascinating.
It’s tough being a human.
I'm grateful to Mastodon for breaking me of the habit, but the "quote dunk" is the only reason to use it.
If something is good we can just re-post it without our commentary.
I often mute accounts simply for doing this.
More signal, less noise.
It used to only be in the employ of advertisers and only if it was not so shocking that it was disallowed from TV.
Now because the internet is a totally unregulated space the only limit to how shocking someone can be to sell their personal brand, is their imagination.
All those wack jobs you'd never heard of until they started spouting shite to get their 15m of fame, are reported in MSM not cos they've done/achieved anything, but cos they're making outrageous statements!
Schadenfreud is one of my favorite dishes and I am already eating well.
You can see how it works when Trump speaks. It's always "bad thing, bad thing opposition," followed by "soothing sound, good feeling Trump."
Interesting.
The goal: spreading misinformation, >
The trick, however, is that you can't simply ignore all the Dumb And Cruel People With Very Bad Opinions either, because they are usually the ones that unwittingly do the actual damaging things for the benefit of the misinformation peddlers.