Zof’s Techdirt Profile

zof

About Zof


http://www.linkedin.com/in/linkedinisforoldmorons



Zof’s Comments comment rss

  • Nov 5th, 2018 @ 5:21pm

    Social Media Isn't Social Media Anymore

    Comments Sections aren't comments sections anymore. They are "idea farms". See, I've been reading the marketing section on how easy it is to build your own following with an AI Cloud "community and advocacy hub". There's literally a product you can buy now, if you are lazy. Like, if you don't want to hire your own Network Operations Center (NOC) and you want to outsource that, you can. It's going to suck, but you can. This is that same kind of thing, but you allow an AI to do it, and sign forms that say you won't sue if it messes up really bad somehow.

    So yeah, you can make a fake PeTa if you want with one of these advocacy farms, but make it for anything. Like your lame candidacy for town fire whatever. And it will have fake wholesome AI bots pretending to be real people chatting up your website visitors and "forming meaningful relationships that lead to support you can use, at the push of a button".

    The reason this is relevant is, I noticed something about a week ago when I finally quit social media forever.

    Nobody is talking to each other anymore.

    They have somehow made made things so bad now, we all just talk to the Ether, waiting for replies (like I am now, Like we all are, Like we all always are) but never directlyi at each other.

    We have literally been conditioned to just shout at each other in rooms like this, basking in the attention of a number incrementing on an approval indicator rather than expecting some meaningful conversation.

    (because that's more efficient and they make clicks and money faster. Man that boy that thought this up was a genius)


    This entire system in place now, with AI controlled comments sections, and AI deciding who to ban and who to keep on Twitter (Oh, unless you think a human being is doing that. Handling the judgement call on hundreds of millions of... anymore. Noob. Still think PEOPLE at the IRS do your taxes? Do you child?

    Most of our communication now is THEM to us. That was unheard of even say, 20 years ago. But now a good 90 percent of your TOTAL communication is between you and your interests rather than people. And they got your interests. They got that Game of Thrones. They got that hate boner waiting for you on Google News. Go justify being a hateful loser. The news media supports that now. They got those worldviews you should have this week on CNN. Whatever the wealthy 1 percenters on CNN think you should believe that week. For example, Maybe Warren Buffet has paid for the Media to say nice things about Apple again for that week. Since he had just invested a bunch of money into them, and didn't want them mentioning that they are now just a third place loser in smartphones. They got that new sexy Doctor Who spouting those Buzzfeed talking points. Because that's what the doctor does. Hang out on Earth and handle social justice issues.

    Point is, that's not you talking to me. That's not us talking to each other. That's us being nodes. And at some point they won't even need us anymore. It will be most cost effective to handle us with a "pocket AI" that just decides what we spend money on to "keep the economy stable".

    If that isn't already how things are. Kinds feels like it huh.

    : )

    This will probably be my last post here. I've suddenly decided this well is poisoned. I just spent six months following a careful plan to leave social media entirely and replace it with "actual media" where I have "friends" in "real life" again like I used to say, 20 years ago.

    I figured out a good 40 percent of what I thought I "liked" was just me trying to appease imaginary judges

    Example. "Actually, I kinda hate that TV show. A lot. I just felt I HAD to like it because of all the pressure from twitter". I kept watching a terrible tv show because I was conditioned to believe I was a "bad person" if I did not like that show.

    This was a year ago. Then, with a few months, boom, this huge controversy when absolutely terrible content from low rent talent was exposed to have hired the same PR astroturfing firms to make their shows about "sexism" or "racism" to promote them, and that's how terrible content from people with zero talent was suddenly both in the news, and being shame-sold to me by twitter AI bots.

    Again, a year ago...

  • Oct 25th, 2018 @ 12:28pm

    Fun Fact

    Claire Locke's largest client appears for all the world to be The New York Times. Funny that didn't make the story.

  • Oct 25th, 2018 @ 10:26am

    It's not hard to understand

    For some solutions blockchain reduces complexity by combining a currency for payment with a decentralized ledger. You can justify it that way. But barely. There's also potentially a cost argument, but it disappears in a puff of logic when you consider USENET, or even DNS as an alternative decentralized or hierarchical system. Both have been used for years to hold tokens by slick programmers.

  • Oct 25th, 2018 @ 10:17am

    So basically...

    Google is acting just like their own unethical corporate clients.

    Enjoy your new Ministry of Truth, Google Edition

  • Oct 25th, 2018 @ 7:40am

    There seem to be a lot...

    Of very unethical people trying to justify the current cash cow known as "evidence free news" with more of it. The unfortunate reality is that news with no evidence is "Yellow Journalism", and the people that write it are full of shit. Better, we can tell. You aren't following anybody.

  • Oct 25th, 2018 @ 7:03am

    Re: Just call it was it was originally called.

    1) scare headlines in huge print, often of minor news
    2) lavish use of pictures, or imaginary drawings
    3) use of faked interviews, misleading headlines, pseudoscience, and a parade of false learning from so-called experts
    4) dramatic sympathy with the "underdog" against the system.

    1) check
    2) check: (the least flattering photo contest)
    3) check: typically misleading headlines and fake experts
    4) check: pretending their rich sociopath 1 percenters are somehow better than the other side's.

    This is easily 95 percent of all news during one of the Yellow Journalism outbreaks (fake controversies)

  • Oct 25th, 2018 @ 6:54am

    Just call it was it was originally called.

    Yellow Journalism. Google it.

  • Oct 22nd, 2018 @ 1:58pm

    Re: Re: Counterpoint (since there isn't one)

    Yes. He's already guilty. The website decided.

  • Oct 22nd, 2018 @ 1:57pm

    If somebody is actively trying to destroy my life

    I'm not going to stop until I destroy theirs, and their desire to ever try it again. And that's not because I'm a shitty anything. It's because I'm normal and I like surviving.

  • Oct 22nd, 2018 @ 1:53pm

    Re: Re: Counterpoint (since there isn't one)

    Hmmm. I guess they probably shouldn't have talked shit about him huh. I guess it's good he has money. On the bright side, poor people can just kill themselves if they can't afford lawyers to defend themselves from hearsay and don't like their lives destroyed. Good talk.

  • Oct 22nd, 2018 @ 1:48pm

    Re:

    Are the women of that list current being sued and will he probably win because the law is on his side? Yes. Do they totally deserve it for acting like high school children putting together a slam book instead of going to the cops? Yes. Do we punish people in our society for talking shit without backing it? We sure do. Just because this is "right scented" doesn't mean you skip the process.

  • Oct 22nd, 2018 @ 1:37pm

    Counterpoint (since there isn't one)

    How dare he not ignore someone talking shit about him. As a man, he's suppose to let anybody say anything about him he wants. Hell, accuse him of anything. He should just quietly sit there and take it. Doesn't he realize he's already guilty?

  • Oct 21st, 2018 @ 6:42am

    It used to be...

    That the VERY FIRST CLUE something was fake was a complete and total lack of evidence, but a pile of very adamant witnesses. I mean, our brains would see that and IMMEDIATELY do the math and say "Oh, they've got nothing. This is a con. All they have are witnesses and no evidence."

    When did that change? I swear, I can remember that being normal.

  • Oct 21st, 2018 @ 6:05am

    I can't blame them

    We now have a good 8 working examples of completely fabricated yet fantastical stories that were pushed hard by our Media over the past two years. It's unprecedented. I used to joke that the Pulitzer was the "yellow journalism" award because Pulitzer is credited with creating fake news. Funny he's a hero for it. Now it's like they are competing to see how big of a lie they can get America to believe with no evidence.

    So yeah, we really can't blame Bloomberg for trying to fabricate a story out of thin air. They learned it from watching mom and dad.

  • Oct 18th, 2018 @ 1:22pm

    The problem....

    The problem the AG is going to run into is EVERYBODY is using these fake PR firms now to try to control the narrative. And nobody wants to give them up.

  • Oct 16th, 2018 @ 4:51pm

    Re: Re: Point/Counterpoint

    Really?

    Most of us use Google. Google uses unethical herding tactics to then get you to click on their news articles, then leading you into Google News, one of their most profitable products that they won't talk about. Wonder Why? A big part of it is User Control is an illusion. They pretend you can block a news source, then bring it back because they are paid to.

  • Oct 16th, 2018 @ 4:45pm

    Point/Counterpoint

    Point:

    That shit the story said.


    Counterpoint:

    There are no real journalists left anymore. Everybody works for a corporation or political party now. Opinion Control is big business. We live in an age where Google helps set up news repeaters for NYT and CNN and WaPo so that if you block them as a news source on Google News, they are instantly replaced by one of 30,000 news repeaters telling the story Google wants to make damn sure you get.

    Opinion Control, Tech by Google. All those eyes being literally forced to see what Google is being paid to show you.


    And most of us use Google News. Yet nobody is talking about that. When a Techdirt or an ExtremeTechNews does a ballsy story about how the information we are being fed is being controlled by about 5 corporations and 200-300 top level corporate officers...

    I'll start believing you aren't part of the problem here at Techdirt dot com.

  • Oct 15th, 2018 @ 12:51pm

    Re:

    They literally would have researched the data before writing the story, so they literally misrepresented reality on purpose. There's no benefit of the doubt here.

  • Oct 11th, 2018 @ 12:47pm

    LOL

    "News outlets have little incentive to crack down on this kind of disingenuous dreck, as they don't want to anger the companies footing the bill."

    Let's translate that into reality.

    "News outlets have no ethics and like money."

  • Oct 11th, 2018 @ 12:36pm

    The most annoying thing

    About all the fake news lately. And I don't want any childish complaints or semantics arguments. This story is clearly discussing fake news being paid for by Boeing.

    The most annoying thing about all this fake news is it's painfully obvious. So you find yourself in a position where you lose all respect for the Media for being so incredibly bad at it. That's why our orange president is still more trusted than our media. Consider that. That he has essentially double the trust rating of our media. That's amazing to me.

More comments from Zof >>