|
Eripsa posted:I dunno, guys. I have a group of some of the most hostile people on the internet talking pretty actively about my ideas for a few weeks every year. I think I'm pretty good at audience control and presentation. My writing sucks, but here we all are. I wouldn't be proud of being afforded the same respect that libertarians, Biblical literalists, and other monomaniacs get from these forums. Hell, you're basically priding yourself on trolling. Think about that for a minute. ETA: Hell, while I've got the top of the new page, consider this: your threads are a case study of how easy it is to game people's attention. You are clearly not producing anything of value to us, and yet we still engage you with our attentionbux. Absurd Alhazred fucked around with this message at 16:37 on Oct 20, 2014 |
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 10:55 |
|
|
Eripsa posted:I dunno, guys. I have a group of some of the most hostile people on the internet talking pretty actively about my ideas for a few weeks every year. I think I'm pretty good at audience control and presentation. My writing sucks, but here we all are. We talk about your ideas because this forum will talk endlessly about nothing for days at a time. Don't be so quick to pat yourself on the back there. A very special lol also at "pretty good at audience control" when the thread universally trashes on your ideas, and now we've discovered it's more fun to talk about you as a person. Absurd Alhazred posted:You are clearly not producing anything of value to us, and yet we still engage you with our attentionbux. Yes, but we're not perpetuating these ideas onward. These ideas are in a metaphorical containment zone, where they can be picked apart and mocked. The irony here is the guy proposing the attention-based social network recieving nothing but negative attention for the idea.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:I wrote a paper on exactly this topic. I saw this post on a phone and so I couldn't respond, but this is actually a stupefyingly dumb post and here's why: what Eripsa is saying boils down to "you don't need to stop people from trying to game the system, you just make it impossible for them to game the system". Of course you try to line up the individual incentives so that people are incentivized to do what you want them to do. That is the point of incentives. The hard part is when people figure out a way to get those incentives in ways you did not predict that both are more effective than the intended ways, and don't get the positive expected benefits. What you posted here is not a thesis. It is the very, very basic statement of what the goal of an incentive structure is. It is stupefying that you would consider yourself qualified to talk about how to create a system and then say this. People "gaming" the system so that it works for the system are not gaming it: they are using it in the way you anticipated. What you basically did was just define the problem away and then elided over how impossibly hard that is with any non-trivial incentive system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Answer me seriously here, are you paid in AMPs by the word? Or do you get 1 AMP for every good you convince to sign up for your service. And they can in turn get both you and them 1 AMP for recruiting someone else, and the those people and you two all get 1 AMP for new recruits and so on so on so forth? Ok, wait, I'm new to this craziness. Do I get paid every time people look at my posts, or do I get paid when I look at someone else's posts? Because I have a drinking bird and a refresh button and if I get paid every time I refresh a web page I am gonna rack that poo poo up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 16:50
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:Here's the curious thing: Has Eprisa ever gone and offered up his works to his contemporaries in other fields and disciplines? Has he showed this to a Sociologist and asked them to critique it? Or to a Psychologist? Or an individual in any number of other fields in which his work is connected to, but which do not necessarily have any investment in ideas like his? There's already been elementary critiques of his writing from this forum, and he's offered it up into an open space, but that's about as much as showing it off to a gaggle of strangers and hawking it on a street corner. He's not hand delivering it to a peer or contemporary for a line by line criticism and I would like to see the results of such a thing. I talk regularly with psychologists (I'm dating one), and I'm active in the crowd sourcing /AI wing of comp sci (which is where the Human Computation interdisciplinary thing is situated in the circle of science). I also have friends in the digital humanities doing all kinds of neat things. There's a lot of SEO guys on G+ who follow my work (you think my ideas are empty...). My most consistent interaction over the last few years has been with complexity theory, and that means mostly mathematicians and philosophy of science. Philosophy of science tends to have a lot of fingers in a lot of places around the academy. Philosophy is really like the academy's homeless network: we know everything that's going on. The OP was read and lightly edited by two philosophy phd friends and a grad in phil ed, and by Kane. I haven't sent my stuff off for publication because I'd rather write, discuss, and try to build things with people than try to pad my cv. I don't have much respect for the academic publishing industry, and since humanities publications don't matter anyway there's no need for an axiv-like pre-print journal to publish things. I'll just post my writing on my blog and the forums I participate in, and get editorial guidance from the communities that care enough about my writing to see it improved. It's been working pretty good so far; I think my writing this year has been stronger than any year before. I think it's reached more people and has had a more positive response than anything I've done before. Publishing is work you do in order to get a job and a salary and stuff. I don't want money, I want marbles. I don't want a career, I want a working attention economy. I can do that better from where I am.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Because I have a drinking bird and a refresh button and if I get paid every time I refresh a web page I am gonna rack that poo poo up. no this would be impossible, the system cannot be gamed because we made an ungameable system stop it Eripsa posted:I talk regularly with psychologists (I'm dating one), and I'm active in the crowd sourcing /AI wing of comp sci (which is where the Human Computation interdisciplinary thing is situated in the circle of science). I also have friends in the digital humanities doing all kinds of neat things. There's a lot of SEO guys on G+ who follow my work (you think my ideas are empty...). My most consistent interaction over the last few years has been with complexity theory, and that means mostly mathematicians and philosophy of science. Philosophy of science tends to have a lot of fingers in a lot of places around the academy. Philosophy is really like the academy's homeless network: we know everything that's going on. do you know anyone with a job that is not in academia Eripsa posted:I haven't sent my stuff off for publication because I'd rather write, discuss, and try to build things with people than try to pad my cv. I don't have much respect for the academic publishing industry, and since humanities publications don't matter anyway there's no need for an axiv-like pre-print journal to publish things. I'll just post my writing on my blog and the forums I participate in, and get editorial guidance from the communities that care enough about my writing to see it improved. It's been working pretty good so far; I think my writing this year has been stronger than any year before. I think it's reached more people and has had a more positive response than anything I've done before. "i think i can get farther with my ideas if i self-select my audience to people who are already prone to agree with me" you should hire me as an editor. only cash though boner confessor fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Oct 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:I don't want money, I want marbles. I don't want a career, I want a working attention economy. I can do that better from where I am. I think we're all in agreement that you could use some marbles. Hieronymous Alloy posted:Ok, wait, I'm new to this craziness. Do I get paid every time people look at my posts, or do I get paid when I look at someone else's posts? quote:No more will your time and attention on social networks be monetized by centralized powers. You are the direct beneficiary of the value of your attention. If someone wants it - a politician, a corporation, or your favorite party producer - they pay you directly. Koch brothers send AMPs to your account in exchange for you sitting through ads or reposting articles I guess?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:
Your writing is just as terrible as ever, and you've been told this repeatedly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
reading this thread reminds me of Adam Curtis' All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace never seen someone appeal so hard to the kind of bullshit he was talking about
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Are you sure it's not just your present that sucks? No, actually, my present is pretty good. I have regular employment for the first time in two years, I completed a degree that's been hanging around my neck for a decade, and people want to collaborate on me with projects I care about. I'm talking about things generally. I'm particularly worried about the most inhumane of problems, climate change. I think we need a serious restructuring of our modes of government and of production if we're going to tackle the problem, and we need it faaaaaast because poo poo's going to get real bad real soon. I'm imagining state capitalism as Godzilla-style monsters rampaging across the earth, and a digital network assemblage arising captain earth style ("with our powers combined") and wrestling the gozilla monster to the ground. You all might think I'm silly for trying to imagine monsters, but the godzilla monster is real and it's tearing poo poo up outside and I don't see anything else around that can stand up to it. I also see a lot of tech enthusiasts talking seriously about unfriendly AI as if it's a real threat to humanity, and virtually no one telling the positive story about how all these networked technologies we've been building for the last 20 years hook up into something that looks like a controlled system again. My crazy belief is this: I think we're going through Internet Puberty right now. It's our awkward phase where we're tripping over our own feet and we look weird and we can't do anything right. But in a few years (if we survive) we'll be mature enough to actually handle some real responsibilities. Like ourselves.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:I haven't sent my stuff off for publication because I'd rather write, discuss, and try to build things with people than try to pad my cv. I don't have much respect for the academic publishing industry, and since humanities publications don't matter anyway there's no need for an axiv-like pre-print journal to publish things. I'll just post my writing on my blog and the forums I participate in, and get editorial guidance from the communities that care enough about my writing to see it improved. It's been working pretty good so far; I think my writing this year has been stronger than any year before. I think it's reached more people and has had a more positive response than anything I've done before. The value of publication is you will get brutal, honest feedback from people. Given your petulant reaction when you get that here, I'm pretty sure all of the above is bullshit and you publish your work the way you do in order to avoid getting feedback you can't dismiss about how bad it is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:I dunno, guys. I have a group of some of the most hostile people on the internet talking pretty actively about my ideas for a few weeks every year. I think I'm pretty good at audience control and presentation. My writing sucks, but here we all are. Clowns can keep people laughing at them too, doesn't make them teachers. E: beaten to hell and back Who What Now fucked around with this message at 17:29 on Oct 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:My crazy belief is this: I think we're going through Internet Puberty right now. It's our awkward phase where we're tripping over our own feet and we look weird and we can't do anything right. But in a few years (if we survive) we'll be mature enough to actually handle some real responsibilities. Like ourselves. Eripsa I'm going to give you some real, honest advice here: do not use metaphors. Good writing does use metaphors, yes, but you don't know how to use them and you always use them as a crutch to avoid making an argument you want to be true but don't know how to make (invariably, because it's wrong). Not only do you use them as a crutch, you use them so poorly everyone sees what you're doing and generally can see immediately how they illustrate your lack of understanding of whatever you're discussing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:reading this thread reminds me of Adam Curtis' All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace I think adam curtis conflates pretty strongly the kind of digital collectivism I'm talking about, and the Randian individualism that is pretty diametrically opposed to what I'm talking about. I've taken every opportunity to point out how my views differ systematically from libertarian views, not just in method but in content and conclusion. I don't know what else to do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:No, actually, my present is pretty good. I have regular employment for the first time in two years, I completed a degree that's been hanging around my neck for a decade, and people want to collaborate on me with projects I care about. What makes you think that people want to do something about climate change? Like, you appear to presuppose that if you can strip away barriers and distortions to human communication, people will just get in line with your priorities. They'll become politically active and sign up for your cause (despite how little you engage with the issue of climate change itself, and despite how you claim not to be interested in the specific political goals people pursue, only that they be given the freedom to pursue them without distortion). What if people would prefer to masturbate and drink lemonade (to paraphrase Zizek) while the world burns around them? What if people prefer to burn the earth like a candle, sacrificing future generations for their own comfort? I think you would be OK with that Eripsa. If I gave you a neural jack and a few Second Life discussion forums to fly around in, you'd be happier than a pig in poo poo until the day you died. You don't care about climate change, and neither does anybody else; not enough, anyway. You are assuming that people want to fix things other than their own discomfort.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:08
|
|
Eripsa posted:I've taken every opportunity to point out how my views differ systematically from libertarian views, not just in method but in content and conclusion. Sorry but the unyielding faith in the ability of humans to choose what's "best" puts you right there with them.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:I haven't sent my stuff off for publication because I'd rather write, discuss, and try to build things with people than try to pad my cv. I don't have much respect for the academic publishing industry, and since humanities publications don't matter anyway there's no need for an axiv-like pre-print journal to publish things. I'll just post my writing on my blog and the forums I participate in, and get editorial guidance from the communities that care enough about my writing to see it improved. It's been working pretty good so far; I think my writing this year has been stronger than any year before. I think it's reached more people and has had a more positive response than anything I've done before. What an utterly convenient excuse for not being able to hack it among other academics. I am increasingly convinced you passed your diss defense more due to your committee's pity and/or desire to get rid of you than any actual merit of your work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:I think adam curtis conflates pretty strongly the kind of digital collectivism I'm talking about, and the Randian individualism that is pretty diametrically opposed to what I'm talking about. I've taken every opportunity to point out how my views differ systematically from libertarian views, not just in method but in content and conclusion. You have taken every opportunity to state your belief that your views differ systematically from libertarian views. However, you've failed to convince everyone because you don't really understand the critique and you're self-evidently wrong. So you're basically complaining you talk and you talk and you talk about how the world is flat but nobody listens, and you don't know what else to do. Here's what you do: you actually figure out why you're wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:The value of publication is you will get brutal, honest feedback from people. Given your petulant reaction when you get that here, I'm pretty sure all of the above is bullshit and you publish your work the way you do in order to avoid getting feedback you can't dismiss about how bad it is. Publication is also expensive in both time and money. It's nice to do research from the comfort of a tenured research position, but as a partially employed adjunct its a luxury. If I were looking for a career tenured position I'd be looking to publish. That's not at all what I want. I care about the ideas, as a passion not a career. The only thing I have right now that I would even think about publishing is the organisms, but I'm not sure who'd even want a thing like that. What aspect of these views do people think would be the most productive to publish on? I can elaborate pretty extensively on most parts of it to arbitrary levels; in the psychological domain I have ideas for very specific experiments I would like to run. The rest would have to be on scholarship and argument. But again, being able to do these things is the luxury one gets of having earned tenure (and all the networking that requires). An adjunct lecturer is pretty far outside the running for those things.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:I think adam curtis conflates pretty strongly the kind of digital collectivism I'm talking about, and the Randian individualism that is pretty diametrically opposed to what I'm talking about. I've taken every opportunity to point out how my views differ systematically from libertarian views, not just in method but in content and conclusion. I have a couple suggestions: Learn to write. Now learn to write clearly. Now learn something about the topics you want to talk about - not about philosophy or complexity theory, because those aren't the topics you want to talk about. Or, to put it in your terms: Learn how to improve your writing's strangecoin attractor factor so that you get more marbles. Learn how to streamline your writing s you get even more marbles. Give those marbles to information that actually has a background in the areas you claim to be interested in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:My crazy belief is this: I think we're going through Internet Puberty right now. It's our awkward phase where we're tripping over our own feet and we look weird and we can't do anything right. But in a few years (if we survive) we'll be mature enough to actually handle some real responsibilities. Like ourselves. evilweasel posted:Eripsa I'm going to give you some real, honest advice here: do not use metaphors. Good writing does use metaphors, yes, but you don't know how to use them and you always use them as a crutch to avoid making an argument you want to be true but don't know how to make (invariably, because it's wrong). Not only do you use them as a crutch, you use them so poorly everyone sees what you're doing and generally can see immediately how they illustrate your lack of understanding of whatever you're discussing. Oh god, Eripsa is Thomas Friedman, isn't he? quote:A wake-up call’s mother is unfolding. At the other end is a bell, which is telling us we have built a house at the foot of a volcano. The volcano is spewing lava, which says move your house. The road will be long and rocky, but it will trigger a shift before it kicks. We can capture some of it. IF the Middle East was a collection of gas stations, Saudi Arabia would be a station. Iran, Kuwait , Bahrain, Egypt, Libya, Iraq, and the United Arab Emirates would all be stations. Guys, here’s the deal. Don’t hassle the Jews. You are insulated from history. History is back. Fasten your seat belts. Don’t expect a joy ride because the lid is blowing off. The west turned a blind eye, but the report was prophetic, with key evidence. Societies are frozen in time. No one should have any illusions. Root for the return to history, but not in the middle. http://www.newrepublic.com/blog/jonathan-chait/84059/tom-friedmans-volcano-wakeup-call
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:I haven't sent my stuff off for publication because I'd rather write, discuss, and try to build things with people than try to pad my cv. I don't have much respect for the academic publishing industry, and since humanities publications don't matter anyway there's no need for an axiv-like pre-print journal to publish things. I'll just post my writing on my blog and the forums I participate in, and get editorial guidance from the communities that care enough about my writing to see it improved. It's been working pretty good so far; I think my writing this year has been stronger than any year before. I think it's reached more people and has had a more positive response than anything I've done before. So to not understanding (or caring to understand) people, not understanding what citations are for, and not understanding how to write intelligibly, we can add not understanding the purpose of publishing in a peer-reviewed journal. While there are incentives to publish for the sake of padding a resume, the point of publishing in a peer-reviewed journal is to have people who don't know you judge whether your results are acceptable, and offer suggestions for improvement. That is important because it is vital to have people who are not judging you by your character or social affiliation, but by the content of your results, and that the process allow them to express this without serious blowback. The fact that you do not see fit to bother with such frivolities as publishing your papers as a researcher is... well, let's be fair, not surprising.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Oh god, Eripsa is Thomas Friedman, isn't he? The next six posts will be crucial.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:Publication is also expensive in both time and money. It's nice to do research from the comfort of a tenured research position, but as a partially employed adjunct its a luxury. If I were looking for a career tenured position I'd be looking to publish. That's not at all what I want. I care about the ideas, as a passion not a career. The value is you will be forced to read, understand, and revise your work based on feedback and simply refusing (like you do here) will not work because the journal will have none of it. The issue is not that you need to elaborate more. The issue is you need to elaborate better, then read the feedback and take it to heart. Your ideas and writing do not improve because you refuse to recognize even minor errors in your work (for example, when you've stated two flatly contradictory things instead of owning up to the mistake you redefine terms in one so they no longer contradict, something that fools nobody). Without recognizing and acknowledging errors, understanding how they happened and how to fix them, you cannot and will not improve.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
really the best part about eripsa threads is that he can't apply his own ideals to his behavior "We need to construct a system which accurately tracks people's attention and rewards them accordingly. Now let me tell you why peer review isn't ideal."
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Because I have a drinking bird and a refresh button and if I get paid every time I refresh a web page I am gonna rack that poo poo up. Same except this is how I actually make posts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:I mean, realistically we have another 30-50 years before these things I'm talking about trickle out far enough into public consciousness (not just by me but by an entire generation of digital citizens) and we actually take the digital age seriously for once. But jesus christ can you blame me for trying to accelerate the future? The present loving sucks and you are dragging your feet. Hahaha, gently caress you, how dare you accuse me of dragging my feet, how dare you accuse anyone in this thread of dragging their feet. I'm going to let you in on a little secret: You're late. All this bullshit you're talking? It doesn't matter, because people like me, and the people I work with, have already spent the last ten, fifteen years, diving in, grinding, sweating, and building all the imperfect technology that you can't stand, but have no loving clue how to make better. Building online communities. Watching them fall apart. Picking up the pieces and trying again. You're like a slam poet at a construction site. You are too late. You are dragging your feet, simpering and posting in a loving internet forum thread about your ideas, too scared to take them to the people who could actually effect change. We already know about every idea that borders your insanity. The power of social networks, communication, mass force, broad appeal, slacktivism, attention. There are debates about it every single day, endless debates, hour after hour, determining the best course of action for every piece of software that connects people. Yes, a lot of those conversations are about monetization. This should not be shocking, even to a hopelessly lost academic like you. If you care about these things, really, truly, why aren't you a part of these conversations? A while back in SH/SC there was a poster called Victor. He was exactly like you in every way. He had no idea where to start, and at the same time wanted everyone to rally around his brilliance. He had no answers to hard problems. He would hand-wave away any details, and bristle at the slightest amount of criticism. He would even go so far as to criticize others when they couldn't understand his word salad. He would say things like quote:Because I do know stuff about the subject. I just don't use the proper jargon. to hide his massive, massive ignorance, and the fact that he was so far out of his depth he couldn't tell which way was up. No matter what we tried to say to him, no matter what sense we tried talking into him, he was convinced every single person, and not him, was the problem. Every single person, besides him, had the misunderstanding. Finally, we gave up, and left him to his insanity, and someone posted a reply that was so to the point I saved it. And now I give it to you: quote:good job theorising in solitude and watching the world pass you by irl. gently caress you and gently caress this thread.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
horse mans posted:A while back in SH/SC there was a poster called Victor. Victor posted here before he posted in SH/SC, i remember him starting threads arguing against evolution and getting utterly dogpiled. dogpiled so badly that he couldn't possibly respond point by point to everyone so he promised to write a tool to allow him to track every criticism he faced which he vowed to respond to in detail, then he stopped posting in D&D so very similar to Eripsa yes except Victor actually knows how to make software
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:What if people would prefer to masturbate and drink lemonade (to paraphrase Zizek) while the world burns around them? Zizek's example is misleading, because it suggests exactly the same naturalism endemic to the libertarianism you are all accusing me of. Sex and sugar, what is more natural an attractor than that? Well, okay, but the lemonade isn't just about being sweet, it's also because the neighbor on the right drinks lemonade and we like them, and the one of the left drinks beer and we're definitely not that kind of household. And for that matter, they masturbate because they like to watch, but we rawdog it because yolo turns us on. So again, we return to the same basic thesis this thread fails to fully grasp or contend with: the mutual informing of individual and community identity. What naturally attracts us is not just up to us as individuals (our individual wants and incentives), it is up to us as collectives, where there are incentives that might differ dramatically from our own. My claim in the essay is that our collective incentives derive from our local interactions, but that the information typically generated by those local interactions that is supposed to be available for organizing community behavior, gets diverted by existing social networks into ad revenue streams, and hence is diverted from its role in organizing the community. So I get confused about what my neighbors on the left and right live like, and hence confused about what social roles are being performed well, which are being performed poorly, and where I can best help improve the system. In a functioning community you have a few influential people who can make decisions about certain things, and that influence can trickle out to the rest of the community on the back of that influence. When I told my family to start using Chrome, they stated using Chrome. Moreover, who has influence is a product of the various local interactions and the way they build up over time. The relative influence of people for handling certain kinds of decisions changes moment to moment as events unfold; human sociality is our cognitive system for monitoring and managing these changes in influence over time. So governing the system, especially in response to things like climate change, isn't just about getting people to want to fix it as individual causes, or even about getting them to do particular work. Instead, it's about influencing the social field to have those goals as attractors. So, for instance, if my shopping habits (in terms of brand selection or store location, say) were available for everyone in my social network to investigate and compare to their own, then my shopping habits might have more chance to influence that social network overall. So my making better choices about food actually provides feedback to the overall network about what counts as good food. Now maybe they don't imitate my behavior, maybe they react deliberately against it. But either way, we have the basis for organization, because the community structure and its relation to my individual behavior are clear. In a functioning attention economy, instigating wide-spread social change is really about convincing the influential figures to make those changes, because for the most part the network will follow along. I'm proposing a social network in which it is easy to spot the influential figures on a community-by-community basis because I'm claiming it will assist the organizational development of the network. I'm also arguing that the problem with the existing system is that the don't recognize this social function, and often simply obstruct it from sheer ignorance. Representative democracy is based on the absurd premise that we can simply appoint the person with influence, not recognizing that influence grows organically; "corruption" in government is just the pull of influences outside its appointment. Online social networks make it all but impossible for anyone but advertisers to have any sense of influence or identity. Both of these processes break the link between individual and community that is required for these systems to function.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:we rawdog it because yolo turns us on. New thread title.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
You know what, I've got a few minutes before I'm going to start work, lets have some fun editing and critiquing!quote:With current social networks, you are not the client. You are the product being sold. Your paragraph split is garbage. Seriously, this is the first three lines of your document and you have a junior high level issue in your formatting! And of course I do love how this all starts with a bald faced statement about how the value you create goes somewhere else. It is a decent sales pitch even if this bears absolutely no relationship to reality.  quote:Synereo: Syn=Together; Rheo=Flow Cool logo. I can't help but notice however that you are missing an H, and that you have an extra E. Not really a problem per-se, but it is absolutely hilarious to me. quote:The beauty of recent developments based on the innovative Bitcoin blockchain technology is that they allow the public to claim control over previously centralized endeavours. By creating automated, trustless interactions over the network, we can now build systems that do not require concentrated power to maintain order. Rather, the power is spread throughout the network and is left in our hands, the active participants in it. Amusingly I've noticed that you actually don't change your pitch from place to place, which is surprising considering how absolutely loving toxic bitcoin is for many/most internet users. Good on you for sticking it to prospective investors. So lets go through this: -The blockchain in no way allows the public to claim control over previously centralized endevours. -The blockchain is not trustless, and in fact requires a lot of faith that someone won't get 51% and loving destroy it. This would have happened with bitcoin but for trust. -Doesn't require concentrated power? I get your meaning, but it is funny considering the utterly massive power costs required for security. -Power is not spread throughout the network. It is spread to the ones who can afford to buy into the network. -The bitcoin 'revolution' has not brought control over money. Bitcoin users number perhaps a very generous one million, with a more likely figure being in the low hundreds of thousands. -Bitcoin is utterly at the mercy of those in great positions of influence. Anyone on the Forbes 500 could utterly crush bitcoin in an afternoon. Bitcoin recently fell several hundred dollars in value based on one individual trader (the 'Bear Whale'). -Synereo is attempting to do the same? Yeah, I think that is a good summary. -I'd argue that you are the client and information about you is what is being sold. You are absolutely both. -Why are these massive social media giants going to lay there and take it (Hint: Because you aren't going anywhere. But if they had to they'd crush you.) quote:Your Identity is valuable. Your The top line here is poorly phrased. I'd say it is missing a comma, but even just having Your: is a very weird way of writing it and stands out like a sore thumb. Likewise, coming back out of that list into the middle of the previous sentence started by only a single word is pretty jarring. I don't think my Something Awful posts made on an incognito browser under a pseudonym are being tracked and monetized, but that might be me just being pedantic. But I am pedantic, so I'm going to make fun of you for it. We are not in a 'unique' position to do anything. Long after your life's work has completely floundered due to your lack of communication skills and the sheer improbability of your ideas, someone else will still be trying to build a better social network. You are not a unique special snowflake. You are not digital Jesus Eripsa.  I forwarded this image to Riot's customer service department to let them know you are using their artwork to hock your product without permission. I don't think it is actually illegal, but I hope it is. Really classy by the way.  I should also send it to Loomio, since you are pretty much ripping off their visual design. I suspect it is just a proof of concept idea and you'll actually try and be original quote:Synereo is a next-gen social network. It is: Jesus, my chair moved like six feet due to the sheer power of these buzz words. -Constrained by the financial desires of the people with enough money to control the blockchain -Possible to take down by people with enough money to control the blockchain -Rewarding (somehow) for content creators -Private except for the part where everything is on an eternal social ledger -This one is actually true! -Designed to somehow value your attention. Praise the Machine Spirit! -Wow... this one is just a straight up value judgement. quote:What is unique about the Synereo network? It's like Facebook... but with bitcoin. Oh wait that has already been done. So much for Synereo being so unique. quote:A token with an inherent value  Well we can add Economics to things Eripsa knows nothing about. Hey Eripsa, you are aware that pretty much nothing has inherent value. Gold doesn't really have any inherent value to speak of other than as a superconductor, and your internet funbucks only have value if people want to use them. That is pretty much the opposite of inherent value. quote:AMPs, Synereo’s content flow currency, serves as a way to Amplify the flow of information in the network. AMPing content increases its ability to propagate to peers and the chances of it being seen by more users. This gives them an inherent market value, as any business or individual wishing to bring information to your attention non-organically has to pay you with AMPs for it. Yeah, just to point out once more, those tokens have subjective market value. If no one is using your social network, they have no loving value at all. If they had inherent value, then they would have value regardless of whether or not people were using them. How the gently caress did you let this get into your network release? quote:A next-gen social network Bitcoin, the next generation. Still dumb. Stop. Saying. Inherent. That word does not mean what you think it means. Your attention does not have an inherent power to influence your reputation, as evidenced by every goddamned human reaction ever. Your actions have the power to influence your reputation. I suppose you could get a bad reputation if you were a sperglord who only paid attention to one thing. I'm curious what 'insights' from the function of the neural networks of the brain Eripsa drag this up from? Because remember, he is philosopher. Just like with technology he has next to no understanding of the actual workings of the human brain. Dunning Krugerands indeed. quote:Completely decentralized and distributed I am only now realizing that I have made a huge mistake. I'm not even halfway down the page of this garbage. so much for my afternoon nap. Anyways, ignoring the irony of saying something decentralized has a core, I love the language in this. Executing application logic functions. What in the holy gently caress does that mean? Keep in mind that this is designed as something to get john everyman interested in Synerenirheo, and it includes language that I am pretty sure is what you here C'thulu mumble before he melts your loving brain. Also, yes there is a single point of failure of the system. For one thing the internet being turned off is a single point of failure. For a more realistic, a flaw in SHA-256 or its implementation in this program. Or someone buying up hashing power. quote:You own your information The open ledger is completely proofed against spying. Eripsa, for legal reasons I'd recommend against saying things like this for when this inevitably goes to trial. Assuming you get it off the ground. Good to know that I can't be banned from Utopia (Much better name fyi) even for posting things like child pornography. I'm sure you just won yourself a new market. Your information, and its value, belongs to you quote:Synereo is Mesh-Network compatible, and does not rely on the centralized Internet. Okay, I'm actually starting to think you're just making things up. Even if you are not, shutting off the internet will block it for most users because most users are not smart enough to set up a mesh network. Also, a mesh network is typically quite local, so shutting down the internet would prevent it from connecting to the rest of the world. Also, I'd be curious to see what happens when you disconnect a blockchain based software from the blockchain. Curious like... watching a train wreck curious. quote:You own your identity. You own your communities Reputation matters! But you can be totally anonymous and have a lot of different names. Why no, I can't see any problems or contradictions in that, why do you ask? quote:Unique interaction types So the consensus check is straight up stolen from Loomio along with the UI right? Where do Conflict Resolution Algorithms come in? Inquiring minds must know! Imagine a perfect world. Isn't it perfect? We should totally do that. I'm just the idea guy tho. Also, every interaction? So when I send a cat picture to my mother I am engaging my mother in a smart contract? Also, what the gently caress is a smart contract. Also, why the gently caress am I still reviewing this garbage? Why won't anyone loving help me!?  This really, really feels like it should be illegal. You just copy and pasted a Riot press release for the purposes of selling your product. quote:Who benefits from Synereo? Shouldn't the answer here be 'everyone'? I've yet to see how the blockchain actually works here, but apparently I contribute to the strength and health of the network by posting. I'm not sure what the difference is between me the user and me the content producer. Is he talking to two people? Am I really two people? Oh god. Pounds Spergling do not have inherent value. Also I feel like you should be using intrinsic, since that is the word typically used for currency. To be honest your system of advertising sounds like a pain in the rear end, and I say that as someone who does a lot of advertising. The last two points are hilariously separate from the first three. This seems to be a weird problem with Eripsa, where he wants everything he makes to actually be all things at once. And as I clarified above, these programs can pretty easily be shut down, just like with bitcoin. Also, I think it is funny that he bolded the first three points but not the last two. They clearly did not know how to phrase them in such a way that they could bold them without bolding a full sentence. That is hilarious. Also, I am saying Also, a lot. Chalk it up to laziness. quote:Synereo AMPs: A Voice Amplifier I swear to god that Eripsa just read Daniel Suarez' Daemon book and thought that it would be cool to do that, but without the billions of dollars or super well planned AI. This is pretty much a total rip off of the social system derived in that book... but with bitcoin! Oh and there we go, the mining! I knew the bitcoin stupidity was in here somewhere, but I had to go pretty loving far to find it. I do like how the network is supposedly good for advertisers, but requires you to pay to advertise. Most of my success with facebook and twitter advertisement is based on the fact that it has nothing but an opportunity cost that is counted in Minutes of videogames lost/day. quote:How are AMPs allocated initially?  Synereo never launches with its full feature set. I have never toxx'd myself on these forums but I can say with an absolute loving certainty that this software never sees the light of day in the way it is being presented here.The sad part is that this pretty much reads like bitcoin ponzi/theft scheme #62345349. It has all the hallmarks of one, selling coins in advance to pay for the preparation of tech that is never going to see the light of day, wildly overstated goals etc. But unlike those this one is actually meant to succeed or to grift. I'm not sure if that is pathetic or funny. Both? quote:The Attention Model Protip: Having the words [presentation coming soon] in your pre-release sales pitch is incredibly loving amateur and serves no purpose but to show people how utterly unprepared you are for what you are attempting to accomplish. Oh god, they are trying to use Synereo as a constant term. Fun fact, I have no idea how to pronounce that. You'd think it would be Sin Re-oh, based on the original words, but they ditched the H and threw another E in there so are loving bets are off. You know, this pitch could be about half the size if you stopped repeating yourself. Also this doesn't seem to be based on Neural Science at all, though that is hardly a surprise. quote:Reo Oh god, there are Reo's now? So I can AMP my Reo to Sin my... gibson? Hack the gibson? Yeah, I'm gonna stick with that because jesus gently caress why are you reinventing the wheel with a bunch of fun new terms people aren't going to care about. People like twitter because it really matches the 'theme'. Its fun to say, easy to remember. Probably should have mentioned that thing about the patent up earlier. This is the exact poo poo I'm talking about with you being incapable of putting the best foot forward. You are goddamned awful at advertising because you make some of the cardinal mistakes of advertising. AMP's don't have inherent value. The fact that you continually state that they do show that you have a loving child's understanding of economics. Also, I think it is funny you think that anyone will try and steal your stupid loving idea. quote:Advertising on Synereo Uhh... it also relies on the advertisers, and the people running facebook. But no, it relies on the users in its entirety. quote:How is advertising on Synereo different? MY SOCIAL NETWORK WILL BRING UPON US AN AGE OF SOCIALIST ENLIGHTENMENT! - Daniel Estrada 2014. Shortly before stroking out. As a person who spends a lot of his time engaged in advertising I can say that your proposed model is a pain in my loving rear end. It might be better for big business, since I don't work to their scale, but for me? It is a pain in my rear end. I can't wait to hear about "smart" contracts. I'm sure they will be revolutionary.  Hey look! An image without any stolen content! I mean, I guess it has the Tesla Logo, but baby steps. Fun fact, any advertiser who needs that sort of depth of information has their own advertising people and software. Anyone who is small time like me uses different metrics and wouldn't bother with that sort of information because it isn't helpful. I can't really imagine anyone who would need that. quote:The technology Holy poo poo! I can see the end. This long internet nightmare is almost finally over. I don't actually have much to say about this because you are straight up repeating poo poo from before. Do you think word count matters or something? We already know all fo this, and that most of it is wrong. You know what other fun things are included in this? -Inability to recover a password. Grandma forgot her password and now she can't ever log into her Synesthesia account ever again. Lack of central server means no troubleshooting! -Get hacked, get hosed. If someone keylogs my facebook acount I can get it back with relative ease. Good luck with this! Also since there is 'money' involved, be prepared to get hacked, a lot! I especially enjoy that they are already backpedaling about features. "In the event we are totally full of poo poo, we may eventually release a barely functioning version of this to avoid being sued for fraud." quote:The application Missing paragraph break. loving amateur move there boyo. At the minimum we will be facebook, but without all of your friends. So... yeah. Pointless. The open source nature will allow constant updates, which are of course not centralized in any way, even though only one team can really work on the project without causing massive splits in population which would be fatal to a social network. quote:THE EXODUS At Syneramadingdong, we are well aware that there is a barrier to the creation and successful operation of a new social network - especially a lovely one that no one wants. This seems a lot like begging to me, but meh, I can't fault them for that. quote:The team Wait... that's it? Where the gently caress are my "Smart" Contracts Eripsa?  So, yeah. That was a 'fun' experience. I'm just about hitting the SA word buffer, and I've never done that before.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
I will happy attempt to publish a paper from these assembled writings if you all can suggest a particular, narrow thesis you'd like me to defend and this would be most likely to make it to print. I will post a draft here, submit it for publication, and keep you all in on the editing and drafting process if you'd like. Hell, if you want to help me to it, I'd give full authorship credits to the thread itself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
Eripsa posted:
This is my favorite completely nonsensical part. Apparently the monetization of facebook confuses me about what my neighbors live like. How? Nobody knows, it's a mystery.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
Eripsa your family started using chrome for the same reason you passed your oral defense, because it was the quickest way to get you to stop talking
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
Caros posted:So, yeah. That was a 'fun' experience. Most of that wasn't written by me. I was actually told to lay easy on the rewrites because "not everyone has a phd".
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
quote:So again, we return to the same basic thesis this thread fails to fully grasp or contend with: the mutual informing of individual and community identity. What naturally attracts us is not just up to us as individuals (our individual wants and incentives), it is up to us as collectives, where there are incentives that might differ dramatically from our own. [citation needed] Eripsa posted:Most of that wasn't written by me. I was actually told to lay easy on the rewrites because "not everyone has a phd". Yes, because someone would have to have a higher education to parse the gobbledygook you would inherently lay atop someone else's work with a loving snow shovel.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:The value is you will be forced to read, understand, and revise your work based on feedback and simply refusing (like you do here) will not work because the journal will have none of it. The issue is not that you need to elaborate more. The issue is you need to elaborate better, then read the feedback and take it to heart. Your ideas and writing do not improve because you refuse to recognize even minor errors in your work (for example, when you've stated two flatly contradictory things instead of owning up to the mistake you redefine terms in one so they no longer contradict, something that fools nobody). Without recognizing and acknowledging errors, understanding how they happened and how to fix them, you cannot and will not improve. This. I write for a living and all the practice and peer editing in the world did nothing to improve my work. It wasn't until I had a boss/editor/someone not my friend who would look at my work and say "This is garbage, no one wants to read this, do X, Y, and Z before I look at it again" that I improved. Your work needs to be challenged, both in content AND structure, if you're going to grow. I mean, you're a poor writer. You admit you're a poor writer. And you're in here trying to communicate ideas via writing. Do you not see a conflict in this? FAKE EDIT: Holy poo poo Caros 
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Please elaborate more on rawdogging it. I will give you a shiny Autism Marble Product (AMP).
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Eripsa your family started using chrome for the same reason you passed your oral defense, because it was the quickest way to get you to stop talking Holy poo poo
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 10:55 |
|
|
also, didn't digg essentially do 80% of this like ten years ago and partly get brought down by people gaming the system because it was really trivially easy five years ago
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2014 18:00
|
|