I do think it would be a positive development if on social media we could get a sense of the proportion of content we are being exposed to for any given keyword over time.
This idea of a transparency dashboard is what we were exploring in 2018 with FB data.
Basically, to define a keyword and see what percentage of
-the posts published by people you follow THAT
-contained certain keywords
did you scroll through in your timeline?
What proportion of those posts were seen by people in your city, state, country? i.e. people w/ a different network. Are you in a #filterBubble?
Assuming "time spent scrolling" remained equal, would an alt algorithm shown something different?
Should we have tools to engage in a conversation regarding what a healthy information diet looks like?
The platforms are definitely seeing that information. Shouldn't we?
It seems like having the companies study and disclose the ways in which their algorithms shape media diets will be one of the core discussions of the years to come, since both the EU and China are pushing rules in that direction
"...failure to conclude this negotiation in a manner that is deemed fair to all parties is likely to broaden the gap between key actors and lead towards the fragmentation of the web. Underpinning these growing tensions are two key issues: distributive justice and value systems."
"The distributive justice issue can be deemed internal: it does not question the way in which the web is geared towards creating value and its limitations, but the way in which such value is to be distributed."
"The value system issue can be deemed external: it questions the very way in which value is defined in the digital realm, and, consequently, the way in which our digital ecosystem is being managed."
Luego de años de que los medios adaptaran sus formas y formatos para ser funcionales a la plataforma, en este momento en Australia no se puede compartir enlace a artículos de medios periodísticos.
La efectividad del bloqueo a diarios en Australia por parte de Facebook, y su consecuente impacto económico, deja evidencia
el grado de dependencia en torno a FB,
y la urgencia por desarrollar una infraestructura digital orientada a sostener la libertad de expresión en el SXXI
ACLARO:
*EL* problema no es Mark Z.
*EL* problema es que se centralizó la web en torno a un manojo de empresas privadas que no tienen el interés público como prioridad. La web actual puso cimientos sobre infraestructura privada. Esta disputa muestra la punta del iceberg
Un 1/3 de la población mundial fue confinada a su hogar
Mientras el mundo que conocían se esfuma.
Las lógicas del mercado que decían gobernarlo
ya ni describen ni prescriben
Se ven desnudas: inútiles, bajas y ferozmente injustas.
Y sobre una crisis de salud, se gesta otra crisis
Con una población que ha visto al rey neoliberal desnudo
Se gesta una crisis de conciencia:
-"Décadas de vida se fueron trabajando para alguien que aparentemente no me necesita ni me valora"
-"En qué mundo hemos vivido todos estos años?"
Y así, el mundo deberá ser transformado
Con un 1/3 de la población mundial confinada a su hogar
El mundo será transformado
Pero sin movilización de masas
Sin encuentros de debate en unidades básicas o universidades
Sin discusiones en la mesa del domingo
El mundo será transformado con el pueblo frente a una pantalla
Huge victory for a technical community that has spent decade explaining how the architecture & ethos of the internet are under attack.
6 arts!
2. "But like Sir Tim, many people have recently become more critical of it (...) At the heart of their disenchantment, this special report will argue, is that the internet has become much more “centralised” than it was even ten years ago." economist.com/special-report…
3. #Decentralisation is ultimately a question of #democracy. As digital technology penetrates society ever more deeply & the two become ever more intertwined, the rules of the former will increasingly govern the latter" economist.com/special-report…