The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 17, 2017, 06:37:26 pm
Home Help Search Login Register
News: UQM development migrated from Subversion to Git

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  Starbase Café (Moderators: Michael Martin, fossil, Lukipela)
| | |-+  You have lost
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 Print
Author Topic: You have lost  (Read 1869 times)
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522



View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #30 on: December 13, 2016, 09:59:22 am »

The problem isn't mostly the smartness of the people, especially not the smartness of the few - not on its own. I think civics and sincerity (as opposed to the cynicism that yielded the 2016 Presidential Election) are more crucial to creating a society.

What comes to my mind regarding the 2016 presidential election, is that people mostly get their information from their facebook friends today, and that they are very bad at using the Bayesian theorem when they are updating their beliefs and they are very bad at checking references to the validity of information sources they are exposed to. People are much better at herd mentality (if all my facebook friends believe that crocked Hillary is a devil worshiper, then I guess she must be a devil worshiper). My facebook profile was filled with posts like this one:



What we mustn't do is to use fake information against our enemies, because that is detrimental to the entire democratic process. Elections shouldn't be a propaganda war, it should be a war about facts.
Logged
Scalare
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 229



View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #31 on: December 13, 2016, 01:04:13 pm »

Your elections are only a war about money.
The fucked up part is that Kevin Spacey can't even do this corrupt country justice with his portrayal of Frank Underwood in House of Cards.
Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522



View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #32 on: December 13, 2016, 01:24:21 pm »

Yeah, but except for a few European countries, it is mostly even worse in other countries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/09/20/best-and-worst-countries-for-women-the-full-list.html
« Last Edit: December 13, 2016, 01:49:22 pm by Zanthius » Logged
Scalare
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 229



View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #33 on: December 13, 2016, 03:17:51 pm »


That was data from before the elections. You're likely to get fucked over roally in press freedom, corruption perception and lgbt rights once Trumpy takes office Smiley
Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3587


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #34 on: December 13, 2016, 06:48:44 pm »

What comes to my mind regarding the 2016 presidential election, is that people mostly get their information from their facebook friends today, and that they are very bad at using the Bayesian theorem when they are updating their beliefs and they are very bad at checking references to the validity of information sources they are exposed to.

Hence the civics. You don't need to understand Bayes for that. Civics is hard too, but in a different way, and I'd rather that the union rather than the intersection of people who can understand civics and Bayes get the benefit of that lesson.
Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522



View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #35 on: December 13, 2016, 10:11:52 pm »

Hence the civics. You don't need to understand Bayes for that. Civics is hard too, but in a different way, and I'd rather that the union rather than the intersection of people who can understand civics and Bayes get the benefit of that lesson.

Ok. Can you describe a bit more about what you mean with "civics". Do you mean some kind of mandatory education in primary, secondary or high school? You think that if the population is better educated about these things, they will engage more in society and vote better?

Btw. I have deleted ideology.pdf from my server now. The most updated version of my manuscript can now always be found at: http://archania.org/manuscript_for_a_new_world_government.pdf

Today I made a new illustration for the front page, and wrote an additional paragraph in the abstract.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2016, 06:35:21 pm by Zanthius » Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3587


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #36 on: December 14, 2016, 06:50:08 pm »

I mean understanding how societies and governments fit together, the advantages and disadvantages of various systems, but also how to not be suckered by the worst arguments in the world, and what productive policy debates look like.

How to get people to know that is a different question. School might be best, but that gives up on the adults... IDK.
Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522



View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #37 on: December 14, 2016, 06:56:30 pm »

I think the first thing we need to do, is to form a highly diverse team of highly talented individuals, only to figure out how to raise the level of understanding for the rest of the population. But I do think it is very important that not just a few, but the general population, believes in certain principles; such as freedom of speech and civil rights. Because I do think we need to have a democratic system, just because any system that isn't democratic will become too alienated from the general population. But a democratic system that votes a narcissistic sociopathic demagogue to president is clearly dysfunctional. Which is very sad, considering that we used to believe that things were going in the right direction with Obama. Now, there aren't a lot of sane presidents left in the world, except for maybe Angela Merkel and Justin Trudeau . There seems to be more power in the hands of evil ones; such as Putin, Erdogan, Duterte, and now Trump.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2016, 07:56:29 pm by Zanthius » Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3587


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #38 on: December 15, 2016, 09:21:37 pm »

The place it seems would be most helpful would be media places. These take a lot of money to run. There is a lot of competition for the ears and eyes of the people.

It's a hard problem, and having smart people on board isn't even the beginning.
Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522



View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #39 on: December 15, 2016, 11:34:25 pm »

I understand that social media wants to stay apolitical, but it might be a very successful technique, if the largest providers of social media came with ads for press freedom and civil rights. Press freedom should also be in social media's self interest. But it probably would get banned in China and Russia then.

Also, I think civil rights is quite difficult for people to understand, unless you belong to a discriminated people. Privileged "normal" people have difficulties with understanding the importance of civil rights. And even when people are discriminated, they might not understand the importance of civil rights for other discriminated people. Discriminated women might for example not understand the importance of less discrimination against black people and homosexuals. This is why I am not such a huge fan of feminism. Because I do not think it is all-inclusive, and I would rather support a movement that works against all kinds of discrimination. A civil rights movement.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2016, 01:35:22 pm by Zanthius » Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522



View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #40 on: December 19, 2016, 08:56:46 am »

Does anybody know if Facebook and google have intelligence-specific commercials? I am thinking that if Facebook and google collects a lot of information about their users, it might be more efficient to have simpler commercials to people with simple interests, while it might be more efficient with more complicated commercials to people with more complicated interests.

For example mathematical proofs and references to scientific articles for people with more complicated interests, while more emotional manipulative “cool” types of commercials for superficial people.
Logged
Krulle
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 698


*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!


View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #41 on: December 19, 2016, 09:11:23 am »

Officially not.

But there are ad companies who will select the selectors of your campaign such, that the ads shown will have a very high likeliness to be displayed separated by such criteria.
(This can be done by providing ads according to your newssites. Readers of NYT will have different interests and abilities to think things through than those solely relying on news feeds from fb. - but again, not a directly selectable ciriteria for alfabet and fb ads.)
Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522



View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #42 on: December 19, 2016, 10:55:29 am »

I am thinking that it could be possible to make a bayesian algorithm that guesses which commercials to show, based upon data collected about the user. Then the bayesian algorithm measures success based upon if the user clicks on the ads or not.

The goal of the bayesian algorithm should just be to make people believe in freedom of the press and civil rights. Anybody here have experience with self-learning bayesian algorithms? We also need people to make ads that the algorithm can choose between (in multiple languages, including Arabian, Hindu, Mandarin and Russian).

« Last Edit: December 20, 2016, 12:42:07 pm by Zanthius » Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522



View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #43 on: December 28, 2016, 05:42:55 pm »

I have removed most of my old stuff from http://www.archania.org, and now I only have a link to the manuscript for a new world government there.

I have started a small scale advertisement campaign in google, but in order to succeed with this we probably need something like what I proposed in the previous post here.

Some of you might think that it is immoral to manipulate people, but I would say that it is much better than killing each other with conventional weapons.  People that have grown up in cultures where they are indoctrinated to believe that women are inferior to men, that black people are inferior to white people, and/or that homosexuality is deadly sin won't be easily convinced to believe in our modern understanding of civil rights.
Logged
Scalare
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 229



View Profile
Re: You have lost
« Reply #44 on: December 28, 2016, 06:05:57 pm »

I am thinking that it could be possible to make a bayesian algorithm that guesses which commercials to show, based upon data collected about the user. Then the bayesian algorithm measures success based upon if the user clicks on the ads or not.

The goal of the bayesian algorithm should just be to make people believe in freedom of the press and civil rights. Anybody here have experience with self-learning bayesian algorithms? We also need people to make ads that the algorithm can choose between (in multiple languages, including Arabian, Hindu, Mandarin and Russian).



I work as a technical consultant / programmer in internet advertising, but I don't really have experience with the algorithms that you mention (though I know that in my sector htere are companies working with such algorithms). I should mention though that european laws prohibit you from collecting such data about users unless they have agreed to it. And people already inclined to believe in free press are also more likely of the mindset that this info shouldn't be stored. So there you have a tough one.
Also, how do you determine if the ad is succesful in making people believe in free press? Because a lot of ads like the ones in the US presedential campaigns make you believe that they do care about free press.. but they likely have ulterior motives..

Additionally, how do you know what defines free press? I don't think anybody knows.
For example, I personally am very interested in how history repeats itself in Israël, with the zionists treating palestinians like an üntermensch. So I follow sites which claim they have free press about the things that are going on over there. But as with every freedom movement they choose what they report on carefully. If something diminishes their points (ie. a terrorist attack by palestinians) they don't report on that as heavily as they would when the IDF kills a palestinian kid. So I don't think that is free press.
But as a civilian, how can I judge whether every event is reported equally? Can journalists really be blamed for not reporting on things that don't interest them as much, and if so how is this measurabole? Because I don't think it is measurable at all.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2016, 06:11:30 pm by Scalare » Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!