D4L's political musings

[dolphins4life]

I think can we clearly conclude two things


The vaccines are very dangerous.  Dozens of studies have shown this

If you survive them, they offer great protection

Other thoughts 

I thought Fauci got an unfair rap for the pandemic, but he is responsible for pushing the vaccines.  It is time to prosecute everybody who pushed for them

[Dave Gray]

^ Both of those are nonsensical statements.  So much so that I'm not going to engage them.

Wherever you're getting your head filled with that kind of toxin, stop.   It makes people not take you seriously.

[dolphins4life]

Great youtube comment.

How did he get elected when every single video on him has more dislikes than likes?

[dolphins4life]

This supports my claim that Republicans may be dominating social media, while the Democrats are not posting.

[fyo]

The vaccines are very dangerous.  Dozens of studies have shown this

This supports my claim that Republicans may be dominating social media, while the Democrats are not posting.

These two are related. Can you tell how? Other than being wrong.

Social media is not dominated by Republicans (or Democrats, for that matter). Social media sites / apps like YouTube, TikTok, and Facebook are *extremely* good at suggesting content that reflects the content you have already watched, particularly if you have "engaged" with it (liked, looked at comments, commented yourself, shared, "subscribed" to the channel, or even just watched the whole thing).

I like poking at the algorithm every once in a while and YouTube Shorts (their attempt at TikTok) has such a short memory that it is very easy to see the effect of various actions. For instance, I watched one baseball short that came across my feed and looked at the comments. The result was that almost 20% of my feed was baseball-oriented, despite me skipping the vast majority most. This obsessive, short-term behavior resulted in several categories of my preferred shorts actually getting booted completely from my feed (it almost feels like there's a limit to how many categories it can handle). While attempting to rid myself of baseball shorts, I watched a few "tool hacks" and some takes on them (and looked at comments, because I couldn't figure out wtf the tool was supposed to do) and the result is that now I'm getting inundated with "tool hacks".

It's the same with the other social media platforms, but YouTube Shorts just seems to react faster (and more). It's a pretty bad algorithm, IMHO.

Try watching a few of those "lost ancient civilization" vids and pretty soon your feed will be dominated by "experts" claiming that there was an extremely advanced globe-spanning civilization 12000 years ago that could, among many other things, cut stone using some sort of vibration "magic" that we don't even know of today.

Or try watching a bit of Andrew Tate (on second though, no, please don't) content and the next thing you know, your feed is filled with "Sigma" bullshit.

These algorithms don't serve you content that you agree with. They serve you content to maximize engagement. And, at least currently, that means serving you heaps of the same shit, whatever shit that might be. So if the algorithm decided you are likely to engage with "leftist" shit, that's pretty much all you'll see. Conversely, if the algorithm decided "rightist" shit is the kind for you, THAT is all you'll get. And since "centrist" content, on average, engages audience much less, no one gets that. It's all just extremist, exaggerated shit.

This kind of algorithm-served content is a HORRIBLE way to get news, but it is an increasingly common way for large segments of society to do so (particularly young people).

[dolphins4life]

These two are related. Can you tell how? Other than being wrong.

Social media is not dominated by Republicans (or Democrats, for that matter). Social media sites / apps like YouTube, TikTok, and Facebook are *extremely* good at suggesting content that reflects the content you have already watched, particularly if you have "engaged" with it (liked, looked at comments, commented yourself, shared, "subscribed" to the channel, or even just watched the whole thing).

I like poking at the algorithm every once in a while and YouTube Shorts (their attempt at TikTok) has such a short memory that it is very easy to see the effect of various actions. For instance, I watched one baseball short that came across my feed and looked at the comments. The result was that almost 20% of my feed was baseball-oriented, despite me skipping the vast majority most. This obsessive, short-term behavior resulted in several categories of my preferred shorts actually getting booted completely from my feed (it almost feels like there's a limit to how many categories it can handle). While attempting to rid myself of baseball shorts, I watched a few "tool hacks" and some takes on them (and looked at comments, because I couldn't figure out wtf the tool was supposed to do) and the result is that now I'm getting inundated with "tool hacks".

It's the same with the other social media platforms, but YouTube Shorts just seems to react faster (and more). It's a pretty bad algorithm, IMHO.

Try watching a few of those "lost ancient civilization" vids and pretty soon your feed will be dominated by "experts" claiming that there was an extremely advanced globe-spanning civilization 12000 years ago that could, among many other things, cut stone using some sort of vibration "magic" that we don't even know of today.

Or try watching a bit of Andrew Tate (on second though, no, please don't) content and the next thing you know, your feed is filled with "Sigma" bullshit.

These algorithms don't serve you content that you agree with. They serve you content to maximize engagement. And, at least currently, that means serving you heaps of the same shit, whatever shit that might be. So if the algorithm decided you are likely to engage with "leftist" shit, that's pretty much all you'll see. Conversely, if the algorithm decided "rightist" shit is the kind for you, THAT is all you'll get. And since "centrist" content, on average, engages audience much less, no one gets that. It's all just extremist, exaggerated shit.

This kind of algorithm-served content is a HORRIBLE way to get news, but it is an increasingly common way for large segments of society to do so (particularly young people).

I did not say they were related.

THESE two are related

1a) Every Biden video has more dislikes than likes, while EVERY SINGLE COMMENT on them is negative

1b) Biden keeps owning it in elections, as he won in 2020, while having the best midterm performance of any president since 2002.

2) Republicans dominate social media, the Democrats are not posting but dominating elections.

[dolphins4life]

If I was Dr. Fauci, after the midterms, I would have made a speech like this:

One side listened to me

One side didn't.

The side that listened to me had the best results in the midterms.

KISS MY ASS. 

[dolphins4life]

Has anybody here actually participated in any sort of political survey?

[Dave Gray]

^Yes, I have.

[fyo]

I did not say they were related.

No, *I* said they were related and proceeded to ask if you could tell how - and then proceeded to tell explain how, just in case there was any doubt.

THESE two are related

1a) Every Biden video has more dislikes than likes, while EVERY SINGLE COMMENT on them is negative

1b) Biden keeps owning it in elections, as he won in 2020, while having the best midterm performance of any president since 2002.

2) Republicans dominate social media, the Democrats are not posting but dominating elections.

"THESE two" followed by 3 points, where 1a and 1b are very oddly "named" in that they appear to be not related in the slightest.

I'm not sure you've understood any point I've tried to make in any of my posts. Ever.

As for your claim in point 1a above (every Biden video has more dislikes than likes + overwhelming majority of negative comments), I'm struggling to verify it. What platform are you observing this phenomenon on?

[dolphins4life]

No, *I* said they were related and proceeded to ask if you could tell how - and then proceeded to tell explain how, just in case there was any doubt.

"THESE two" followed by 3 points, where 1a and 1b are very oddly "named" in that they appear to be not related in the slightest.

I'm not sure you've understood any point I've tried to make in any of my posts. Ever.

As for your claim in point 1a above (every Biden video has more dislikes than likes + overwhelming majority of negative comments), I'm struggling to verify it. What platform are you observing this phenomenon on?

Youtube

[dolphins4life]

I'm confused.  What I say is clear.

Biden is universally deplored across youtube and social media.

Yet, he still keeps owning it in elections.

Something is not adding up.

[Fau Teixeira]

You have 2 statements there, one is a fact, one is an opinion.

Biden keeps winning elections (or outperforming expectations) - fact
Everyone hates Biden - opinion

Soo .. if those two statements don't add up. Do you think the fact is wrong, or your opinion is wrong?

[dolphins4life]

That's not what I said.

I said almost every comment on every Biden video is negative and most have more dislikes than likes.

THAT is a fact.

[Dave Gray]

You're just looking at videos tailored for you that have an anti-Biden bias.  We told you this.  It's algorithms.  It's also the type of videos, probably.  I have no interest in that kind of stuff so you won't find me in the YouTube comments.

But if you go on the Reddit front-page, you'll see plenty of anti-conservative talk.

Social media isn't the same from place to place.


But also, social media isn't real life.  The vast majority of people will never comment on a YouTube video as long as they live.  You're just looking at a fraction of a fraction of one type of angry online person.  That isn't reflective of people who go to actually cast a vote.