Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[liberationtech] Facebook Asks - Hard Questions: Social Media and Democracy

Andrés Leopoldo Pacheco Sanfuentes alps6085 at gmail.com
Mon Jan 22 11:53:54 PST 2018


I don’t believe that to betray democracy will ever be “technically impossible!!!!”

It all boils down to ETHICS, not TECHNOLOGY.

And ALL the “Social Network” COMMERCIAL platforms are NON-DEMOCRATIC BY DESIGN. They’re basically no different in that respect than traditional (corporate-controlled) broadcast stations.

Regards / Saludos / Grato

Andrés Leopoldo Pacheco Sanfuentes

> On Jan 22, 2018, at 9:52 AM, carlo von lynX <lynX at time.to.get.psyced.org> wrote:
> 
> No need to follow the link, here are the interesting snippets:
> 
>> Now, we’re as determined as ever to fight the negative influences and ensure that our platform is unquestionably a source for democratic good.
> 
> Just like democracy is no longer a democracy if somebody could
> decide to switch off, say, separation of powers or verifiability
> of vote, democracy is no longer a democracy if one corporation
> has the choice on whether to be a "source of democratic good" or
> secretively possibly unvoluntarily be not so. Therefore, the fact
> that Facebook has achieved such a role is unconstitutional.
> Actually, the way the whole Internet is easy to eavesdrop and do
> big data analysis upon is making every democracy whose voters use
> it struturally a post-democracy. How long until we regulate this?
> 
>> Our role is to ensure that the good outweighs the forces that can compromise healthy discourse.
> 
> Incorrect. No online platform should have this much power to
> make such decisions.
> 
> Further articles comment on the good and bad of social media,
> entirely neglecting that a properly regulated Internet would
> eliminate the risks of social media and only leave us with
> the good aspects of it, so there is zero reason to continue
> dealing with the threats of technology as if the benefits are
> inevitabily interweaved. That is a fallacy, albeit a
> remarkably popular one.
> 
> So do yourself a favor and skip reading those articles, they
> are only trying to convince you that Facebook is a reasonable
> company to entrust with the power to corrupt democracy, as if
> the Malvinas incident in 2009 hadn't already proven the opposite.
> 
> You can have all the apps and Internet fun you like, but to
> betray democracy must be technically impossible. Such an
> abuse-resistant Internet is possible. Society has to care
> and to regulate.
> 
> If anything of that sounds wrong or exaggerated, then you are 
> missing some of the clues. I can fill you in.
> 
> -- 
>  E-mail is public! Talk to me in private using encryption:
>         http://loupsycedyglgamf.onion/LynX/
>          irc://loupsycedyglgamf.onion:67/lynX
>         https://psyced.org:34443/LynX/
> -- 
> Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator at zakwhitt at stanford.edu.


More information about the liberationtech mailing list