Does our society incentivize disinformation? | Daniel Schmachtenberger

Does our society incentivize disinformation? | Daniel Schmachtenberger


So if I’m in a competitive game and I have
some information about reality, the reality of the playing field that I’m in then that
information can be a source of strategic competitive advantage against whoever I’m competing
against and so I have an incentive to withhold that information from other players and maybe
even disinform the other players. So we see this is actual games. This is bluffing in poker. This is fake left and go right in soccer,
football. But we also would see this in keeping the
knowledge to ourselves of where the water is or where the goal is from another tribe
or another kingdom or whatever and maybe even trying to throw them off the scent trail with
an intentional leaked fake treasure map that has them going the wrong direction so they
don’t accidentally discover what we discovered. Things like that. So within a rival risk context where information
is strategic competitive advantage there is an incentive to disinform. And as we get increasing information technology
which is media technology and computational technology and statistics and all these things
we have, we really have exponential information processing but applied to disinformation,
the incentive to disinform we have exponential disinformation capacity which means the ability
to customize inflammatory, fake news, propaganda, narrative warfare to specific demographics
and all the way down to specific types of people that are the types that are most likely
for that person to believe, be upset by, affect their actions. So we see with social media platforms like
Facebook the capacity to be able to target the things that are going to be the stickiest
for an individual and the stickiest often is by appealing to limbic hijacks of what
is scariest to them or hits addiction buttons the most or creates a sense of ingroup-outgroup
dynamic or things like that. So when you think about having a society that
has an incentive to both withhold information and to disinform and you think about a huge
number of different agents who all have increasing disinformation capacities and you also think
about the radical asymmetry between an individual just trying to make sense of the world and
a huge platform like Facebook or Google or a company that is doing split test, optimized
marketing you have an asymmetric information warfare of the largest powers in the world
with agendas that are not the same as the agenda of the individual for themselves being
put forth on radically powerful information technology platforms. So you look at the world today and whether
it’s climate change or whether it’s what the extent of the damage at Fukushima is or
what the actual tactical capabilities of North Korea are or how long we actually have with
coral die off or most any of the things that are the most critical issues in the world. What goal other countries or what effect other
countries had in influencing U.S. elections. No one really knows the most important things
clearly to be able to inform good choice-making even about how we survive as a species. So this is critical when we’re trying to
understand the current information ecology.

Author: Kennedi Daugherty

36 thoughts on “Does our society incentivize disinformation? | Daniel Schmachtenberger

  1. "Does our society incentivize disinformation?" . . . yep, yep and yep . . . just ask mainstream media – they make a living off of divisive, defamatory, hack-filled disinformation . . .

  2. The agenda of the individual should be in line with the agenda of society. The fact that we have this adversarial relationship within our society IS the most important piece of information. Societal cohesion is breaking down due to usury and multiculturalism: ie due to globalism. Yet to say so would be discribed as misinformation. It's not. It's not in my interest for this to be true, it is terrible that it is true, because it means our society is heading in the wrong direction and it will hurt to turn it around. But it is true.
    Life isn't about power, it is about truth. All these thinkers and philosophers I keep hearing fundamentally misunderstand this. Most dissidents are not trying to gather power: they are trying to protect their society from break down.

  3. This is why Free Speech is so essential for a democratic society.
    Also Critical Thinking needs to be taught at schools. As most people are shockingly bad at it.

  4. There is no solution for that that affects information itself, and any 'solution' that does is dangerous for the freedom of the Internet. The only way is affecting people by teaching them to be skeptical. You have to even be skeptical of social media giants labeling 'trusted sources'.

  5. uh… DER!!! look around…. if people don't like the truth, they make up another one…. and media helps with that by inventing 'deep state' stuff to explain why are the guilty are REALLY innocent – simply victims in a horrible underground conspiracy…

  6. Corporatism owns MSM & insentivises society, by also using the tech' industry to 'programme' the unwitting masses, abusing their over privileged position & self entitled pathology, investing huge sums into psyops on SM.

  7. Great to see Daniel, a radical social thinker, on a more mainstream channel, It is rare and invaluable to have such incisive analysis that addresses the root causes of social instability and conflict. Only by the systems thinking demonstrated by Daniel and Peter Joseph can we expose underlying structural problems; in this case the perverse incentive structure of competing actors in capitalism and the deficiencies of proprietary information.

  8. Answer is yes. For news, the goal is to get people to open the article so they clickbait and look for the most salacious thing they can find and failing that make it up. For people, many are just looking for upvotes or followers – see news for a similar drive. For Google, twitter, facebook, they are looking to advertise crud to us and get us upset because it gets more engagement and sales than a level head.

  9. “No one is going to give you the education you need to overthrow them. Nobody is going to teach you your true history, teach you your true heroes, if they know that that knowledge will help set you free.”
    Assata Shakur

  10. Indeed, all this is true in a rivalrous society. Can we stop being shunted through the Malthusian error of this all being a zero-sum-game. Like Bucky Fuller pointed out so clearly – we are doing ever more with ever less and so making the pie grow bigger at a faster rater than our population growth. Anything else is misinformation.

    In short, Malthus was wrong because he did not account for human ingenuity particularly in the era after his thesis. The solution is not fewer people or more raping of the planet. More people means more problem solvers and that is why Malthus was wrong.

  11. No. Our society positively glorifies and exalts in misinformation, bad evidence, and belief claims. It's why we're fucked and it's not going to get any better.

  12. This video itself is very disinformative. It puts corals ahead of financial colapse as the most dangerous threats we have, "other coutries" meddling in elections instead of big money, and so on…

  13. Problem: society is stylized as a competitive game
    Solution: rig the game so that it becomes coop with friendly fire
    So where's my Nobel at, Dixie?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *