Let that SINK IN!

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by Blansky

Yup. Dangerous. Too much money and influence.

His cheerleaders seem to be people who want/need autocrats.

It's all fun and games until it isn't.

What people tend to fail to understand is there is only one winner in that case and that is the head autocrat.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by dddrees

I imagine so, but no matter how good he is that doesn’t mean he knows everything and that was my point.



He certainly appears to have gotten a rather large head and a very big mouth. It might not hurt if he stepped into this time. Not a fan of Twitter and those type of social media programs anyway. Although I don’t think that will stop him from speaking on things he knows little about.

Thats exactly where we agree and I got your point.

I suppose another way to look at it is that there's a fine line between genius and madman

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Blansky]

Originally Posted by dddrees

What people tend to fail to understand is there is only one winner in that case and that is the head autocrat.

One only has to understand the truism that power corrupts. It's a cornerstone of human existence. Always has and always will.

And another quirk of our existence is that a lot of people are always looking for a "savior", a leader, a guru, a king, a daddy figure to make everything ok, which creates a vacuum for the power hungry to flourish.

The concept of democracy was to remove these people seeking power and replace it with a consensus.

We are at time now when some people are again forsaking democracy and looking for 'saviors' again and mistaking the luck or ability to make vast sums of money, as someone who will be that person.

It never ends well.

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by brandrea

Thats exactly where we agree and I got your point.

I suppose another way to look at it is that there's a fine line between genius and madman

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Village idiot.

[superdog]

Originally Posted by dddrees

Village idiot.

I am not a particularly big fan of his.

But he did manage to make himself the wealthiest man in the world. He is going something right.

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by superdog

I am not a particularly big fan of his.

But he did manage to make himself the wealthiest man in the world. He is going something right.

He did that quite well. But there are more than just a few very rich men who do many other things that have nothing to do with making money rather poorly Judging men by pocket book alone is not something I’ve ever done. I guess that’s maybe because I’m not that rich or I just thought there was always more to being a better person than that..

[joli160]

I am glad that he takes over and believe he will ensure a much more objective ruling on what can be posted or not.

[DocHorton]

Originally Posted by Blansky

Yup. Dangerous. Too much money and influence.

His cheerleaders seem to be people who want/need autocrats.

It's all fun and games until it isn't.

No, his cheerleaders are those who are tired of the biased one-sided influence that pervades U.S. media and tech.

Only those who fear freedom and a more level playing field should be concerned.

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by DocHorton

No, his cheerleaders are those who are tired of the biased one-sided influence that pervades U.S. media and tech.
Only those who fear freedom and a more level playing field should be concerned.

Yeah, leaders such as Putin are all about freedom.

[Gab27]

Twitter is often a cesspool of angry people who routinely say absolutely awful things. I don't personally think Twitter is important to the future of civilization, and it often seems to function as a vehicle for furthering polarization. Further, I sometimes question if the benefits of social media outweigh the negative aspects.

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by Gab27

Twitter is often a cesspool of angry people who routinely say absolutely awful things. I don't personally think Twitter is important to the future of civilization, and it often seems to function as a vehicle for furthering polarization. Further, I sometimes question if the benefits of social media outweigh the negative aspects.

[superdog]

Originally Posted by Gab27

Twitter is often a cesspool of angry people who routinely say absolutely awful things. I don't personally think Twitter is important to the future of civilization, and it often seems to function as a vehicle for furthering polarization. Further, I sometimes question if the benefits of social media outweigh the negative aspects.

Unfortunately it simply shines a light on what we are as a species.

Are there anomalies? Yes. Are there good people? Yes.

But mostly we are a self centered narcissistic, ego driven, and selfish species.

Take away social media, and nothing changes. We just take the spotlight away.

Am I jaded? Maybe. But I see what I see, and it ain't pretty.

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by superdog

Unfortunately it simply shines a light on what we are as a species.

Are there anomalies? Yes. Are there good people? Yes.

But mostly we are a self centered narcissistic, ego driven, and selfish species.

Take away social media, and nothing changes. We just take the spotlight away.

Am I jaded? Maybe. But I see what I see, and it ain't pretty.

Sorry I think it amplifies it and makes it much worse. Because as you say we are who we are, frankly I don’t think we need the spotlight.

[DocHorton]

Originally Posted by dddrees

Yeah, leaders such as Putin are all about freedom.

Huh?

[superdog]

Originally Posted by dddrees

Sorry I think it amplifies it and makes it much worse. Because as you say we are who we are, frankly I don’t think we need the spotlight.

To each their own. You are certainly entitled to your opinions. Mine are similar.

I don't much like it myself, and I don't participate much besides here and LinkedIn.

But whether we like it or not, it is here to stay and only getting worse.

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by superdog

To each their own. You are certainly entitled to your opinions. Mine are similar.

I don't much like it myself, and I don't participate much besides here and LinkedIn.

But whether we like it or not, it is here to stay and only getting worse.

Extremely unfortunate in my opinion I really think it does us much more harm than good, but I agree that it appears we are stuck with it.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by brandrea

You know, I can’t decide. There are times when I feel the same way you do, and other times I think he is pure genius.

Agree. For better or worse. My opinion: similar to Steve Jobs, but not as focused. And less disciplined with impulse control and speach.

[superdog]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

Agree. For better or worse. My opinion: similar to Steve Jobs, but not as focused. And less disciplined with impulse control and speach.

great comment. agreed.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by dddrees

Sorry I think it amplifies it and makes it much worse. Because as you say we are who we are, frankly I don’t think we need the spotlight.

Well I agree with all three of you. The human condition is historic and not a recent phenomena.

The amplification issue is a problem. Many people live in an echo chamber - only read or watch what confirms their beliefs and only associate with like minded people. And a constant barrage of unconfirmed yelling by like minded people on social media just compounds the problem.

But living in an echo chamber is is is a choice people make.

Personally, I view media across the spectrum. And oddly, most of my friends hold very different beliefs than I do. But that is a choice I make.

[Blansky]

Originally Posted by DocHorton

That's not at all what it means, nice try at gas-lighting.

Goggle it.

[mailman]

Originally Posted by Blansky

Goggle it.

Keep the thread on track.

[Andy0331]

Originally Posted by Chester01

RI think folks are so trapped by their thinking, they can't see its social medial that created the current polarized climate that we live in and that tech/social media/computers are not going to save the world indeed its tearing us apart in front of our very eyes.

Spot on! I think social media peaked with online forums (such as this one). They encouraged & allowed for actual discourse on topics and leave a lasting, searchable reference of the discussions "of the day". But, forums are a dying breed, as they aren't flashy, trendy, hard to "swipe" and fewer people have the attention span to read. They need it in pictures, or in 140 characters or less.

Modern, "swipeable" social media is basically cotton candy for your brain. It was designed to target/create a limited attention span, where you see as much as possible, without focusing on any of it. It's addictive. Yes, I still use some of them, but I don't post, nor do I really read the comments, as they aren't designed for actual discussion, just a quick "feel good" for the poster.

[Blansky]

Originally Posted by Chester01

Really, really now. He wants to save humanity for a digital town square. I think folks are so trapped by their thinking, they can't see its social medial that created the current polarized climate that we live in and that tech/social media/computers are not going to save the world indeed its tearing us apart in front of our very eyes.

Agree. When people try to compare TRF and say well it's social media too. What they're missing is ITS MODERATED.

Social media platforms are HEAVILY designed to manipulate the "victim" to not only stay on, but to lead it down the garden path to keep them on, all the while using psychological tricks like the "like button" to actually release dopamine in the brain. (OH somebody likes me, I'm part of a community.)

Add in the millions of bots from other countries trying to create chaos and you have a perfect tool to destroy societies, while the unsuspecting rube watching it has no idea of the manipulation he/she is undergoing.

Free speech has a cost. And we are in a time when misinformation in the form of "speech", much like money in the form or speech, could be our undoing.

And having billionaires buying up media platforms so their whim of the week can be exercised is dangerous.

[OYptL]

I don’t get it. I’ve been put on two time outs for far less. Honestly makes me wonder.

[Star Ferry]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

Sorry Starr. Not driving into politics but I do not agree with you. Way too over broad generalization in my opinion. Regardless of political persuasion, my experience over a broad variety of topics (not just the hot ones in vogue at the moment) is simple. Most people are for it on topics where it helps their agenda. And against it when it does not.

Just go back to the 7 dirty words and look at how that played out

Some folks do have a vested interest in Twitter and what information flows there, but I think most people don’t. I’d like to see free speech on Twitter but ultimately it doesn’t affect my bottom line. I think most people just have their own opinion on things like this, independent of any agenda

[rolexpatek363]

Originally Posted by Blansky

Goggle it.

Absolutely right.

If this is in relation to the meaning of "woke", my deleted comment is true. No gaslighting whatsoever, DocHorton.

But "woke" has been hijacked by a certain faction to mean whatever they want it to mean. Basically, it has become a cover term for racists to attack people they don't like, whilst retaining some "plausible deniability".