Replying to Avatar Fabiano

nostr:npub1qfkcklnmes45z75y7y8dkud5yll8vp5eq5ysk9rmgqdxeasv8unsrfj6kq nostr:npub1ecdlntvjzexlyfale2egzvvncc8tgqsaxkl5hw7xlgjv2cxs705s9qs735 nostr:npub1nf9vm6uhs4j7yaysmjn9eqlf7et5t6hvrkdqgpd995vcc9yfjyas0pxa3x nostr:npub1wqfzz2p880wq0tumuae9lfwyhs8uz35xd0kr34zrvrwyh3kvrzuskcqsyn nostr:npub1cpstx8lzhwctunfe80rugz5qsj9ztw8surec9j6mf8phha68dj6qhm8j5e nostr:npub1wtuh24gpuxjyvnmjwlvxzg8k0elhasagfmmgz0x8vp4ltcy8ples54e7js

Imagine people getting mad at witnessing others in control of their social skills. No mental derangements (like theirs, at least).

I do think that is because the algorithm for social media was developed across the years to entice the users into being as primitive as it gets.

I agree. The algorithms were designed to increase engagement. As often happens, I don’t think this was done with bad intentions, but it had bad consequences because the thought is incomplete.

The easiest way to get people to engage is to get them angry. This is true here like it is anywhere. I can post something a little rage-baity, and it will get more responses. Unfortunately, the algorithms didn’t take that into account. And it’s hard to undo something making the stockholders millions once it’s done.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I do believe it was intentionally done as such.

Behaviorism is not only for the laboratory.

It is applied to condition people in work environment as much as general consumption, be it for products or services.

Manipulating online reactions is part of their game.