SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for takyon
This week, representatives from Google, Facebook, and Twitter are appearing before House and Senate subcommittees to answer for their role in Russian manipulation during the 2016 election, and so far, the questioning has been brutal. Facebook has taken the bulk of the heat, being publicly called out by members of Congress for missing a wave of Russian activity until months after the election.
[...] The point is clear enough: if you're fighting Russian interference on social media, anonymity is a big problem. In some ways, it's the original sin, creating space for that first lie that lets trolls enter the conversation unnoticed. "Account anonymity in public provides some benefits to society, but social media companies must work immediately to confirm real humans operate accounts," Watts told the committee. "The negative effects of social bots far outweigh any benefits." It's a common insight among bot-hunters, and one that's become particularly popular amid this week's hearings.
[...] The problem is social. We're used to anonymity on the internet, particularly on the services where it's still available. It's hard to know what an anonymity backlash would mean for services like Twitter, Reddit, and 4chan — all of which are named in Watts' testimony as playing a role in Russian disinformation.
In the background, there's an even harder question: is anonymity still worth saving? It's foundational to many people's idea of the internet, but amid widespread online harassment and Facebook itself, it's come to mean less and less. Even without Russian influence campaigns, the web's online spaces are largely associated with the ugliest parts of humanity. (4chan is a prime example.) With new pressure from Congress, bot analysts, and the public, online anonymity may not have any defenders left. In the face of that, Twitter, Reddit, and others might decide a real name policy is a small price to pay for forestalling federal regulation.
Source: Russia's Social Media Meddling Could Spell the End of Online Anonymity
Previously: Russia Bans VPNs and Tor, Effective November 1
(Score: 5, Interesting) by stormreaver on Sunday November 05 2017, @11:03AM (7 children)
Congress is conveniently ignoring the real basis for Russia's successful meddling in American elections, but would rather slap us all with the red herring of social media. The real basis for Russia's success is that our politicians make it all seem so plausible. They behave so badly, have such obvious unconstitutional agendas, that any bad messages spread by Russia seem like standard U.S. politics to most people.
The best way to halt foreign influence in American politics is to have respectable politicians, which seems laughable nowadays. But the blame for our current political crises rests solely at the feet of Congress and the White House.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 05 2017, @02:58PM
0) This is not meddling with elections, this is trying to influence your voters. There's a difference.
1) Was it really successful? They may have meddled but was it really significant? Just because someone wanting Trump to win posted stuff on Soylentnews and Trump won doesn't mean that person successfully meddled with the elections.
2) If it was significant then the real problem isn't that the Russians are buying ads, but your voters are retarded/messed up enough to "buy" those ads.
Half the US voters think the USA got regime changed by the Russians and are whining about it. The other half thinks they won legitimately. Seems more likely some people lost the election and are trying blame others for their loss instead of getting better so they win the next election (assuming Trump doesn't start WW3).
This is a mere hint of what the US has been doing to other countries for a long time.
The USA sponsored the Syrian opposition: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-syria-wikileaks/u-s-secretly-backed-syrian-opposition-report-idUSTRE73H0E720110418 [reuters.com]
And they went further than mere words and supplied weapons too: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/27/world/middleeast/cia-arms-for-syrian-rebels-supplied-black-market-officials-say.html [nytimes.com]
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/world/middleeast/arms-airlift-to-syrian-rebels-expands-with-cia-aid.html [nytimes.com]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 05 2017, @03:16PM (1 child)
The real problem is not that the Russians tried to get US voters to choose Trump instead of Clinton. Nor that the voters were allegedly easily influenced by the Russians.
The real problem is out of 300 million people, the top two candidates were somehow Trump or Clinton.
You're never going to get the "best" candidate but you really should start doing much better than this.
It's like giving voters a bad apple and poisoned apple to pick from. And then concentrating on complaining that the Russians tricked the voters.
If you had much better candidates it won't matter that much even if the Russians somehow got the voters to pick the worst one.
The real fucking problem is why are the choices so fucking bad?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 05 2017, @05:06PM
Because the electorate CHOOSES to remain ignorant, and doesn't want to get involved in their civic duty. Their precious, narcissistic lives are more important than the bigger picture of the society they live in, and their role in it. They expect government to do FOR them that which they should be doing themselves. Aint "western society" great. Make greed/avarice/narcissism great again.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday November 05 2017, @03:37PM (3 children)
But the blame for our current political crises rests solely at the feet of Congress and the White House.
You are aware that those are elected positions, right?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by t-3 on Sunday November 05 2017, @09:37PM (2 children)
You are aware that there is an entrenched two-party system and it is incredibly hard for someone without the financial and political backing those parties provide to reach a wide enough audience to get noticed, right?
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday November 05 2017, @10:02PM (1 child)
It is the audience that is entrenched in tribalism with their two party system, which feeds on their antipathy.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 06 2017, @11:54AM
Are you claiming that t-3's information is false? Unless you are, it sounds like you're blaming the victim: "she shouldn't have been dressed like that if she didn't want to be raped".
If you are claiming t-3's information is false, what is your basis for doing so?