1/2
>>843920
>Appealing to emotions is more effective though
True but that's the way of manipulation.
>just look at /pol/s reaction.
Any people political motivated will be driven by emotions.
>>843923
You seem to not be good at listening to people but don't worry most people are like that.
I'm going to have to pin point that to you so please learn from this this is important for you or anyone who wants to understand motivations in a speech. (I won't do parts about body language, if you want to learn that please seek people that are physical there)
In the first minute they talks about how people more or less don't know how use emails or figures to use technology in general, this is bullshit to sound smart, Steve jobs and other thought/cult leaders uses these kind of moves to make you believe that they know what they are talking about.
If they had talked about the understanding of computing I wouldn't say no, but how functions emails and how people uses emails are pretty limited and well known.
The second thing that they talks about is about how every action that is made has political effects and that we must understand them, that is also wrong because the effects of technology doesn't affect people (it's not alive), people choose to use technology to affect them, politics can only be done by people and it's the people who decides to do something politic or not.
For example is the software that runs 8chan a software that promotes left or right ideologies ?
No it's not it's a tool to communicate between people, then the discussions of the people can be or not about politics.
So if one wants to understand people you need to control the methods of communication to extract data from it that is generated by the people using a particular software.
>They really didn't have a side
Yes they do since they announced what kind of politics they follow and that's announced in the second minute since "Quin" is a blend of anti-capitalist anarchism and California liberalism, and "Quin" adds that "Ella's" is a Marxist syndicalism with presumably with blood on her hands.
>And "despite the political parts" has said it's not "about politics"
This is just plain wrong because if you don't want to add politics you simply don't talk about it at all, and when someone does that it's the beginning of BIAS.
And it's certainly not about what "Ella" or "Quin" wants since they are making a conference about things they want to talk about (sarcasm).
2.25
>Networks are political so does the design of software.
This is plain wrong because has always politics are existent because of people and not because of networks or the architecture of software.
3:18
They consider the state has a entity with a will of it's own and each example they made are basically taken as a pejorative one against "the state".
5:10
>maps of Amsterdam of where all the jews were for the nazis
Goodwin point +1
This is the kind of thing that NO ONE will ever try to say "stop this is wrong" because of course it's wrong to genocide people, but blaming something has a map of X people because of the nazis is plane wrong, hell I could do same thing right now example: did you know that IBM participated indirectly too the Holocaust by supplying PCs to the Nazis? in that case we need to make autodafes of computers.
This is part of the emotional manipulation that I was talking about.
Statistics about who and where X people are aren't bad has long has, it's not used in a bad way (planned killing or manipulation) or if it's not accurate like nowadays (meaning 7/7 24H big bro knows where/what you are and doing).