"The media" reflects the status-signaling games of upper-middle-class youth, those in their teens to thirties. Not even their true beliefs. Industrialisation has increased the reach of these games, to a naive and trusting audience.
Is there anything special about the Cancer Act here? Advertising pharmaceuticals and medical services is illegal in most places (US and NZ exceptions), for broader policy reasons. The same is true for advertising treatments of specific medical conditions without scientific evidence, as opposed to "holistically improves wellbeing, may help with just abotu anything".
While I agree with this analysis, regulation is not going to solve this problem. Politicians are selling online safety and regulation of social media (an soon AI I expect) as a solution. People are unhappy - in the most generalist sense possible - because they believe they are getting a raw deal from our economic and social structures. Even if regulation cleans up the debate (and I don't believe it will), it is not solving the underlying problem so the discontent will remain. Some things no amount of media management can control.
>the state of constant low-level cognitive exhaustion created by the attention economy.
A few years ago when I was forced to have a lot of time on my hands I put together a logical model of the process of integrating multiple data models. The core problem, I realized, is the problem of "semantic debt." When you decide that customer field A in the erp is equivalent to customer field B in the crm, you make a semantic judgement, and that judgement has various costs - calories, salaries, opportunities, constraints, etc.
I can tell you now roughly the cost of integration if you give me a few data models and a price sheet, although it's still nebulous. But it's a far more quantifiable kind of semantic debt than, say, integrating 1000 Tweets or the variation in implicit data models between Fox and MSNow and the CBC.
"The media" reflects the status-signaling games of upper-middle-class youth, those in their teens to thirties. Not even their true beliefs. Industrialisation has increased the reach of these games, to a naive and trusting audience.
It will all wash out by 2300.
Is there anything special about the Cancer Act here? Advertising pharmaceuticals and medical services is illegal in most places (US and NZ exceptions), for broader policy reasons. The same is true for advertising treatments of specific medical conditions without scientific evidence, as opposed to "holistically improves wellbeing, may help with just abotu anything".
While I agree with this analysis, regulation is not going to solve this problem. Politicians are selling online safety and regulation of social media (an soon AI I expect) as a solution. People are unhappy - in the most generalist sense possible - because they believe they are getting a raw deal from our economic and social structures. Even if regulation cleans up the debate (and I don't believe it will), it is not solving the underlying problem so the discontent will remain. Some things no amount of media management can control.
>the state of constant low-level cognitive exhaustion created by the attention economy.
A few years ago when I was forced to have a lot of time on my hands I put together a logical model of the process of integrating multiple data models. The core problem, I realized, is the problem of "semantic debt." When you decide that customer field A in the erp is equivalent to customer field B in the crm, you make a semantic judgement, and that judgement has various costs - calories, salaries, opportunities, constraints, etc.
I can tell you now roughly the cost of integration if you give me a few data models and a price sheet, although it's still nebulous. But it's a far more quantifiable kind of semantic debt than, say, integrating 1000 Tweets or the variation in implicit data models between Fox and MSNow and the CBC.