Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Dear Mark. I am writing this to inform you that I shall not comply”

aftenposten.no

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 215 posts

Re: “Dear Mark. I am writing this to inform you that I shall not comply”

#101

Post by bbarn »

xg15 wrote: post #64
xupybd wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if I agree with the outrage at Facebook. They are out to make money. They can make more money if they avoid controversy and keep their site a place that brands like to be associated with. It results in corporate censorship for sure, but is it Facebook's responsibility to provide a censorship free platform? I fully agree with people taking note and becoming aware that Facebook is simply a business providi…

This is mostly true, but IMO ignores: a) the network effects that make people join the network even if they wouldn't want to on their own b) Facebook's own agressive strategies of bringing users into their network without conscious choice - e.g. the acquisition of whatsapp or the internet.org initiative. At this point it's more like some property shark who'd buy up half the city's apartment blocks, then proceed to cu…

Point A is especially important. I quit four years ago, and I constantly get bombarded by people trying to get me to come back onto it. I have a few friends who've resisted and never gotten an account, but they are also constantly goaded about it.

Re: “Dear Mark. I am writing this to inform you that I shall not comply”

#102

Post by m1sta_ »

typeiierror wrote: post #37

Sometimes I wonder that when we shower criticism on Facebook about privacy concerns, we're missing the forest for the trees. The bigger issue I see is the sheer amount of eyeballs trained exclusively to Facebook's content. What does it mean for society when Facebook can demote a challenging but important article (say, of war reporting) in your newsfeed so it can promote your friend's Wedding photos, because an algori…

Gmail has similar power through its automatic filtering.

Re: “Dear Mark. I am writing this to inform you that I shall not comply”

#103

Post by m1sta_ »

typeiierror wrote: post #37

Sometimes I wonder that when we shower criticism on Facebook about privacy concerns, we're missing the forest for the trees. The bigger issue I see is the sheer amount of eyeballs trained exclusively to Facebook's content. What does it mean for society when Facebook can demote a challenging but important article (say, of war reporting) in your newsfeed so it can promote your friend's Wedding photos, because an algori…

Gmail has similar power through its automatic filtering.

Re: “Dear Mark. I am writing this to inform you that I shall not comply”

#104

Post by ninju »

nix0n wrote: post #38
xupybd wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are saying that Mark Zuckerberg is a dictator and no one has the freedom to leave his rule? This is so different, if you don't like Facebook use a competitors service. If a good one doesn't exist that lines up with your moral aspirations create one. But under Saddam and Gaddafi, you don't like them, keep quiet or you might disappear, if the wrong person over hears you.

> if you don't like Facebook use a competitors service. If a good one doesn't exist that lines up with your moral aspirations, create one Is anyone working on this?

https://joindiaspora.com/

Re: “Dear Mark. I am writing this to inform you that I shall not comply”

#105

Post by pwinnski »

eCa wrote: post #100

> If you take the liberty to challenge Facebook’s rules, you will be met – as we have seen – with censorship. You are in Marks living room. He has asked you not to bring certain kinds of photos to his place. You did anyway so he took the photo from you. You brought another copy the next time. Now he is getting angry with you. Maybe you should meet at your place in the future? Or maybe you shouldn't be friends with Ma…

It seems that the analogy breaks down badly when the "private property" is treated 99.9% of the time as a public property, and the entire world is invited (except for those with important political messages that don't go well with advertising).

I'm not saying Facebook isn't Mark's to do with as he pleases, but... something isn't right here.

Re: “Dear Mark. I am writing this to inform you that I shall not comply”

#106

Post by gozur88 »

bunderbunder wrote: post #90
dragonwriter wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What does it mean for society when Facebook can demote a challenging but important article (say, of war reporting) in your newsfeed so it can promote your friend's Wedding photos That Facebook is a social networking platform that some people incidentally use to try to relay news of general public concern, not an online public affairs platform with an incidental social networking function?

There's what a thing was originally designed to be, and then there's what a thing currently is. They aren't always the same thing.

It's still mostly a social networking site, and to the extent "serious" content threatens the social networking aspect, Facebook has an interest in placing limits.

Re: “Dear Mark. I am writing this to inform you that I shall not comply”

#107

Post by Torgo »

linkregister wrote: post #87
nix0n wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you don't like Facebook use a competitors service. If a good one doesn't exist that lines up with your moral aspirations, create one Is anyone working on this?

The product manager for Google Plus just punched a hole in his hat. On a serious note, there were platforms that used to dominate discourse on the internet before Facebook. Usenet, ICQ, AOL, Myspace. Now there are alternatives. Medium for blogging; Reddit and 4chan for discussion; Twitter for sharing breaking news, trolling celebrities, and complaining about customer service; LinkedIn for connections and keeping in t…

social networks are a natural monopoly, you want everybody to be on the same one. So if you want to avoid the centralized authority problem, you need to define it as a network of many nodes communicating via open protocols. Sort of like email. This is how Diaspora and GNU Social work.

Re: “Dear Mark. I am writing this to inform you that I shall not comply”

#108

Post by yazaddaruvala »

eCa wrote: post #100

> If you take the liberty to challenge Facebook’s rules, you will be met – as we have seen – with censorship. You are in Marks living room. He has asked you not to bring certain kinds of photos to his place. You did anyway so he took the photo from you. You brought another copy the next time. Now he is getting angry with you. Maybe you should meet at your place in the future? Or maybe you shouldn't be friends with Ma…

I hate physical metaphors for digital things. They always seem so succinct, and without possible counter argument.

You're absolutely right that if this happened in someone's living room, their rules should apply.

However, there are 1.3 billion people in "Mark's living room". Is it still his?

Re: “Dear Mark. I am writing this to inform you that I shall not comply”

#109

Post by gozur88 »

ksk wrote: post #71
hiddenkrypt wrote: post #13

> "Facebook is for the pleasure and benefit of the whole world, myself included, on a number of levels." Wrong. Facebook is for making money. If providing users with pleasure or benefits makes them money, then that's lucky for the users. > "Facebook has become a world-leading platform for spreading information, for debate and for social contact between persons. You have gained this position because you deserve it." A…

The idea that you should discard your integrity in the pursuit of money, or even that that is to be expected, is quite damaging.

I don't see where anyone is discarding integrity. Not all content is appropriate for all sites. Beyond that, while this is a famous picture, what most people think they know about it is wrong, so it's not really adding much to the public discourse.

Re: “Dear Mark. I am writing this to inform you that I shall not comply”

#110

Post by rdiddly »

hnbroseph wrote: post #73
Torgo wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a man-in-the-middle attack on culture.

just like tv, radio and newspapers. perhaps even churches, temples and mosques... though that might be more controversial to say.

All the examples you cite are essentially one-to-many communication channels, where you expect to hear one viewpoint from the getgo. Whereas Facebook dishonestly promises many-to-many, but all you get is the same old one-to-many.
Post reply on HN