Just gonna leave this here. When we released the Alternative Influence Network report (@beccalew is the author), many were criticial of the humble recommendation that social media companies should review accounts as they gained popularity.

Becca wrote, “In a media environment consisting of networked influencers, YouTube must respond with policies that account for influence and amplification, as well as social networks.” This recommendation was simple, clear, and I told every company of the implications.
I wonder if we would be in this situation today if some of the more prominent disinformation voices had supported this recommendation, instead of saying that deplatforming threatened free speech.

Too busy trying to spot a bot maybe? Too worried about declining data stockpiles?
It’d abhorrent to have been arguing for simple policy fixes for years and only have support for them when hell touches down for the white middle class. BIPOC and women have been organizing for decades to get policies enforced for community safety online.
Instead of learning their work and policy recommendations and doing everything we can as researchers to help get these shared concerns on the table, I see white men rebranding as “disinformation,” “extremism,” and “conspiracy” experts.

It’s bumming me out.
Most repeat the same lines that Q believers are deluded and can be saved. For every one that is saying that deplatforming means it’s harder for you to find extremists, I wish you could hear yourself.

The problem is the design of social media as a content delivery system.
The same values of openness and scale that built these companies wealth reinforced the growth of white supremacist and conspiracist ideologies. It took a decade for that model to give us Trump.

The only way to talk society off the ledge is to work on smaller scales.
We need to build our communication system differently. I highly recommend following @ColorOfChange @BrandingBrandi @changeterms @culturejedi @mediajustice @stevenrenderos @womenindisinfo @ReFrameMentor @jonathan_c_ong @hypervisible @fightfortheftr @gabriellelim @lotus_ruan
The list continues @RMAjayi @dalitdiva @EqualityLabs @marylgray @nandoodles @sjjphd @JacquieSMason @BridgetMarie @LionsWrite @eramanujam @EvanFeeney @WideAsleepNima
And of course, stay with the trouble caused by insufficient infrastructure w/ @safiyanoble @ubiquity75 @sivavaid @EmmaLBriant @stacyewood @drbrittparis @IrenePasquetto @sarahbmyers @sobieraj @TarletonG @YochaiBenkler @JonasKaiser @nancybaym @zephoria @wphillips49 @meredithdclark
And more from those who care about technologies disarming doublespeak: @dude_crooks @drbethcoleman @LizCarolan @lizlosh @ruha9 @alondra @LatoyaPeterson @sassycrass @mutalenkonde @Combsthepoet @LeonYin @JuliaTicona1 @JuliaAngwin @EthanZ @alicetiara @YESHICAN @Data4BlackLives
And the anthropologists & sociologists who care about the people embedded in the systems @BiellaColeman @LimnMagazine @AaronPanofsky @gleemie @KeeangaYamahtta @tressiemcphd @alexhanna @ztsamudzi @xuhulk
And then there was one, @amelia_acker, who has kept all the receipts on presidential tweets since before it was cool. I cannot wait to see her work on the archives and their enemies.
The bottom line is we don’t need to give it a fancy name like “circuit breaker” or “break glass” because it’s the most simple and logical policy going forward: do not reward hate, violence, and incitement with money and clout. Instead, amplification needs curation. #10kLibrarians
People seem to really like lists, so I’ll keep going. For different ways of thinking about design and history of tech: @lnakamur @schock @histoftech @PopTechWorks @merbroussard @kmtamurphy @shannonmattern @cjack @cmcilwain @aschrock @DocDre @whkchun
https://t.co/uwzKlwUX7J

More from Tech

A common misunderstanding about Agile and “Big Design Up Front”:

There’s nothing in the Agile Manifesto or Principles that states you should never have any idea what you’re trying to build.

You’re allowed to think about a desired outcome from the beginning.

It’s not Big Design Up Front if you do in-depth research to understand the user’s problem.

It’s not BDUF if you spend detailed time learning who needs this thing and why they need it.

It’s not BDUF if you help every team member know what success looks like.

Agile is about reducing risk.

It’s not Agile if you increase risk by starting your sprints with complete ignorance.

It’s not Agile if you don’t research.

Don’t make the mistake of shutting down critical understanding by labeling it Bg Design Up Front.

It would be a mistake to assume this research should only be done by designers and researchers.

Product management and developers also need to be out with the team, conducting the research.

Shared Understanding is the key objective


Big Design Up Front is a thing to avoid.

Defining all the functionality before coding is BDUF.

Drawing every screen and every pixel is BDUF.

Promising functionality (or delivery dates) to customers before development starts is BDUF.

These things shouldn’t happen in Agile.
The 12 most important pieces of information and concepts I wish I knew about equity, as a software engineer.

A thread.

1. Equity is something Big Tech and high-growth companies award to software engineers at all levels. The more senior you are, the bigger the ratio can be:


2. Vesting, cliffs, refreshers, and sign-on clawbacks.

If you get awarded equity, you'll want to understand vesting and cliffs. A 1-year cliff is pretty common in most places that award equity.

Read more in this blog post I wrote:
https://t.co/WxQ9pQh2mY


3. Stock options / ESOPs.

The most common form of equity compensation at early-stage startups that are high-growth.

And there are *so* many pitfalls you'll want to be aware of. You need to do your research on this: I can't do justice in a tweet.

https://t.co/cudLn3ngqi


4. RSUs (Restricted Stock Units)

A common form of equity compensation for publicly traded companies and Big Tech. One of the easier types of equity to understand: https://t.co/a5xU1H9IHP

5. Double-trigger RSUs. Typically RSUs for pre-IPO companies. I got these at Uber.


6. ESPP: a (typically) amazing employee perk at publicly traded companies. There's always risk, but this plan can typically offer good upsides.

7. Phantom shares. An interesting setup similar to RSUs... but you don't own stocks. Not frequent, but e.g. Adyen goes with this plan.
1. One of the best changes in recent years is the GOP abandoning libertarianism. Here's GOP Rep. Greg Steube: “I do think there is an appetite amongst Republicans, if the Dems wanted to try to break up Big Tech, I think there is support for that."

2. And @RepKenBuck, who offered a thoughtful Third Way report on antitrust law in 2020, weighed in quite reasonably on Biden antitrust frameworks.

3. I believe this change is sincere because it's so pervasive and beginning to result in real policy changes. Example: The North Dakota GOP is taking on Apple's app store.


4. And yet there's a problem. The GOP establishment is still pro-big tech. Trump, despite some of his instincts, appointed pro-monopoly antitrust enforcers. Antitrust chief Makan Delrahim helped big tech, and the antitrust case happened bc he was recused.

5. At the other sleepy antitrust agency, the Federal Trade Commission, Trump appointed commissioners
@FTCPhillips and @CSWilsonFTC are both pro-monopoly. Both voted *against* the antitrust case on FB. That case was 3-2, with a GOP Chair and 2 Dems teaming up against 2 Rs.

You May Also Like

So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.


The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.

This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.

The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."

This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.