(untitled)

>>77033 When you see only or dominantly more content that is close to your world view, you miss out the whole spectrum of opinions, which is balanced and opposing ideas to yours. But when the opposing side is not visible, you might find the more extreme of even toxic opinions on your side less extreme and disturbing than they are. Filter bubbles happen to drive polarization for two reasons : digital media lock people into isolated echo chambers and homogeneous groups lead to extreme opinions, while interactions with opposing ideas or individual leads to political moderation. People who are opposed to minimum wage are likely, after talking to each other, to be sill more opposed; people who tend to support gun control are likely, after discussion, to support gun control with considerable enthusiasm; people who believe that global warming is a serious problem are likely, after discussion, to insist on severe measures to prevent global warming. This phenomenon constitutes a whole threat to democratic systems especially in the era of AI generated content. While a large part of the population is constantly locked in individual and personalized echo chambers, those same echo chambers can be artificially created in such a way that could lead to extremism, radicalization and strong cultural shifts. Speaking now of how we can fix the wired, I personally think that one immediate solution is to isolate a network of like-minded individuals and establish strong barriers to entry (technical and intellectual wise). Thus, there is no point for government agencies and firms to corrupt and gain control over that network since it doesn't try to appeal to the general public.

Not having visibility and appeal seems like a good idea to protect a community, but I think it's not. Describing the origin of the threat from formal structures seems incorrect to me. The seeds lies in probably everyone. It would be interesting to try to make or improve the tools which allows one to access and produce content everywhere without fiilters. In doing you so you shift the possibility to reach something from the current platform to you, but you will still have to actually to break free from the things in yourself that seek the echo chamber. Assuming enough people can manage this, they'll end up communicating with each other organically. And of course it already happen in some marginal way in the wired and in meatspace. If you want quality exchanges, you've got to cultivate quality in yourself including in this case the your technical capacity to effectively navigate the wired in its current and projected shape. But don't get me wrong, making small secret groups of people is not a bad thing to do, more so if you want to solve big problems.