Quote:
Originally Posted by Peregrino
You "get it". A lot of people don't. The potentials inherent in FB (social media in general) are mind numbing. We're like a weatherman in the path of a Pacific cyclone trying to influence its course. How do we leverage what we can and mitigate the effects of what we can't? And on a related note - what is ethically permissible? Do ethics even apply when you're in an existential battle for survival?
|
The good guys have to win.
As I started turning grey I've been shifting away from kinetic towards non kinetic problem solving, with some great work done by one of your retired SF Group commanders as a pathfinder.
There's a lot of new words, doctrine, and dogma that many are using for internal organisational influence, rather than external influence.
It's "Gangs of New York" not just with AK47s, but with smart phones.
And not just for bad guys to attempt another Mumbai(which I genuinely don't really think about despite that Ahole Headley getting snapped in a Philadelphia Eagles Hat), but for bad guys to move up the spectrum towards legitimacy and a malignant app enabled Boss Tweed.
It's also "Empires of New York" with the rise of transnational social media oligarchs acting as digital sovereigns.
The book "Ghost Fleet", in my opinion, was a truly terrible digital generation's answer to Red Storm Rising.
The Soviet's didn't come across the Fulda Gap, but Iraq invaded Kuwait and the Soviets imploded. Great fiction, but it never happened.
Just as I seriously doubt the Chinese will ever invade Hawaii, but the US will(it already is) face "multi-domain" conflict, but in a different context, meaning both external and internal transnational threats we do not expect, and/or are not prepared for.
Goebbels and Riefenstahl for the YouTube generation.
Digital WMDs that risk dangerous alterations to our cultural fabric and DNA.
Or worse.
Digital dominance thru a mix of monopoly user base combined with big data analytics and the icing on top of A/B testing of advanced neuroscience influencing technique based propaganda/marketing.
I'm reminded of the Milgrim Experiment that I cover in small team problem solving training in Bias/Influence Mitigation:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yr5cjyokVUs
Unethical.
But what about social psychologists who study addiction?
Who runs those A/B tests and why on next generation video gambling machines to enhance audio/visual for higher return on player investment?
How ethical is that?
We will certainly be going down some interesting ethical roads that's for sure.