1. Exquisite Tweets from @lifewinning, @dryan, @michalmigurski, @cydharrell, @hondanhon, @npseaver, @blaine, @JulesPolonetsky, @hunter_owens

    blechCollected by blech

    I think there's a typo on their "the problem" section Anil because something seems missing

    Reply Retweet Like

    lifewinning

    Ingrid Burrington

  2. Protected tweet: 960316317382225920
    You might be able to see it if you sign in with Twitter.

  3. That. That’s the sentiment I felt but couldn’t articulate.

    Reply Retweet Like

    dryan

    Dan Ryan

  4. Protected tweet: 960316810099748864
    You might be able to see it if you sign in with Twitter.

  5. If they're serious about lobbying, finding others equally worried about algorithm-driven propaganda, and aiming to get the intelligence community on board I could see this having an impact. /me imagines the FBI going full-Dem in about 25 years…

    Reply Retweet Like

    michalmigurski

    Michal Migurski

  6. Protected tweet: 960318355843399680
    You might be able to see it if you sign in with Twitter.

  7. Protected tweet: 960318507480104960
    You might be able to see it if you sign in with Twitter.

  8. Yeah. They'll need to find an angle that isn't "ethics" for that to work, ideally one that has a warm-bodied constituency.

    Reply Retweet Like

    michalmigurski

    Michal Migurski

  9. yeah, I'm a little worried that this is being done with the same form of earnestness that led to the problem in the first place.., I do wish it well, - but maybe involving different types of people even...you know?

    Reply Retweet Like

    cydharrell

    Cyd Harrell

  10. Protected tweet: 960321349297192960
    You might be able to see it if you sign in with Twitter.

  11. I agree! I think that part of my doubt comes from Tristan Harris's name on it. He seems like someone looking for a issue to ride, and I'm not hearing much about wholesale filter bubble manipulation here.

    Reply Retweet Like

    michalmigurski

    Michal Migurski

  12. yeah, the focus on addiction & kids is not well-informed from what I can tell.

    Reply Retweet Like

    cydharrell

    Cyd Harrell

  13. Protected tweet: 960324159321485312
    You might be able to see it if you sign in with Twitter.

  14. I have complex personal and professional opinions and emotions about this.

    Reply Retweet Like

    hondanhon

    Dan Hon

  15. Protected tweet: 960325673448390657
    You might be able to see it if you sign in with Twitter.

  16. Protected tweet: 960326039816740865
    You might be able to see it if you sign in with Twitter.

  17. I thought quite hard about that tweet and it’s very sincere.

    Reply Retweet Like

    hondanhon

    Dan Hon

  18. I’ve got this kind of thing listed as one of the topics for my next fieldwork grant (on the attention stuff). Definitely interesting to see where they do and don’t share frames of reference with their former employers.

    Reply Retweet Like

    npseaver

    Nick Seaver

    Like the difference between “companies think your attention is like a commodity!” and “it is, and they’re stealing it from you!” Or, similarly, the addiction stuff—behaviorism on both sides, here.

    Reply Retweet Like

    npseaver

    Nick Seaver

  19. The proof for me will be if they lobby for alternatives that are Actually Good, or if they simply lobby for the equivalent of "Smoking Can Kill You" labelling on the monopolies.

    Reply Retweet Like

    blaine

    Blaine Cook

  20. They are donating all the stock option profits they made because these were ill gotten gains. Right?

    Reply Retweet Like

    JulesPolonetsky

    Jules Polonetsky

  21. hunter_owens

    Hunter Owens

  22. Protected tweet: 960376721756209152
    You might be able to see it if you sign in with Twitter.

  23. Live aid but for social media / 🎶 free the woooooorrld 🎶

    Reply Retweet Like

    hondanhon

    Dan Hon