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

191–200 of 215 posts

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

#191

Post by vidarh »

aaron695 wrote: post #162
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…

> 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 You'll be a hell of a lot healthier since the war photo is pointless(Exactly what's the point of reseeing the photo... to remind you war is bad?) but your friends count.

You are assuming people will "resee" it. But people need to have seen it for the first time somewhere in order for that to happen. A lot of people don't know this picture, or have idea what impact it has, and if Facebooks censorship remains unchallenged, a lot of important pictures will remain unseen by a growing proportion of people.

This specific people may escape that fate, as it's important enough to be in history books - I believe I first saw it in primary school - but handing Facebook the power to hide important parts of history from a huge proportion of people is dangerous.

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

#192

Post by vidarh »

xupybd wrote: post #24
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…

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…

Exactly because they can make more money by avoiding controversy there is every reason to be outraged and make it known - it is the one channel we have to make it worth it for them to listen and consider changing their policies, by making it costly for them to ignore it.

> But until people are willing to get upset enough about issues like this to leave Facebook, they really have no incentive to change.

They will have an incentive to change if e.g. advertisers start worrying about their image if they advertise on Facebook too. Causing outrage and creating a debate around whether Facebook is damaging our society is a way of making Facebook a less attractive advertising channel as well.

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

#193

Post by exodust »

mthoms wrote: post #84
bambax wrote: post #66

> Facebook is for the pleasure and benefit of the whole world Wait, what? Facebook is more like tobacco: addictive, very bad for you, and very profitable.

You shouldn't really try to sum up Facebook in a single sentence any more than you would do the same with the internet as a whole. The truth, of course, is much more nuanced than a short sentence permits. For instance Facebook allows me to communicate with friends and family I wouldn't otherwise be able to communicate with (at least not as efficiently). I can't see that being bad. As a matter of fact it's something I…

I wish people would stop kidding themselves that Facebook is the same as the Internet as a whole. Facebook is just one service you happen to use. Some of your friends happen to use it too. Please don't pretend that cutting it off would mean you couldnt communicate with your friends anymore. You and your friends are resourceful. You would find another way. The Internet is a big place with many pipes for you and your friends to use.

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

#194

Post by exodust »

pwinnski wrote: post #105
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.

Don't confuse Facebook with the Internet. One has terms and conditions and policies and moderators and shateholders, the other does not.

If our governing authorities took measures to pull such photos from the web, then we'd have a problem worth protesting. If Facebook.com pulls the photo and points to its policies as the reason... then simply publish the photo elsewhere.

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

#195

Post by lomnakkus »

ImTalking wrote: post #151
lomnakkus wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you meant to say "[...] like any other legal person?", perhaps? :)

Why complicate it? Morality is upto the individual entity whether it is a person, or a business, or a govt-body. For example, I believe there are still 'dry' counties in the US. They have decided that a no-alcohol policy is the morality they want to have within their town. I say fine, and I can accept that or move or try to change it... totally up to me. And as long as their morality does not infringe upon my rights…

Oh, I thought you were being sarcastic :/.

There's quite a bit of difference between corporations and people which means that granting corporations "personhood" is quite... crazy, IMO. In particular, almost all corporations are (almost by definition) asocial, don't care about what their peers think of them, etc. etc. They're basically sociopaths. Besides that they are (when big enough) effectively invulnerable to judicial sanctions, etc. etc.

It should be obvious why this is a bad idea.

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

#196

Post by exodust »

howeyc wrote: post #126
mickronome wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what is your point then ? What you wrote lend itself to several interpretations, most rehashed to death already. What then is this point that is so grand ? How can we come to know the secret, I'm curious! Unless it's -"Don't use Facebook", because we already know we can do that, and unfortunately it doesn't appear to actually solve the problem except under unreasonable assumptions, and then the next thing will lik…

Censorship is their right. They are under no obligation to hold views that align with SJWs. Free expression cannot be had on Facebook. If you want that, Facebook is not the forum. That people feeled entitled to free expression on a closed ecosystem controlled by one company is ludicrous. The question should be, where should people move to discuss things openly, not "how can we make Facebook think like us". Not least…

Agreed. You've nailed it actually. I'm not sure why your comment would be voted down. I think people believe Facebook.com is an open platform without rules, regulations, moderation and the certain influence of advertisers and stakeholders. One way to cause investors to frown is by disappointing the wholesome family-friendly, advertisement clicking userbase. Nudity is traditionally the domain of the unwholesome. Sad but true.

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

#197

Post by zaroth »

throwanem wrote: post #190
zaroth wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The real value of money is that you can use it in place of time. This is true to a point, but you stretch it to an absolutism. As if, a lack of money by definition means a lack of time, which is most certainly false. In many ways, having more money increases demands on your time, and this can hold true up through even Larry Page levels of wealth. Working-class and poor people; many often hold a much more balanced w…

I love Hacker News! I can't imagine where else it might happen that a Silicon Valley startup founder would explain to a mouthy unlettered Mississippi redneck what it's like to be poor or working class. Thank you for that!

Aparently not enough to curb the sarcasm, ditch the personal attacks, or think twice about your preconceived notions before posting.

Now, your self-description is quite colorful, but seems to only support my claims. It almost sounds like you're saying that a diverse group of people do actually have the means to discuss complex topics and critically analyze diverse viewpoints beyond whatever Facebook's algorithm might choose for them.

And thank you bobcostas55 for bringing data to the conversation upthread.

But if this is what you call "communicating with people not just talking to them" I'll just step out now.

Sorry to say, yours is the first direct reply in years of HN I've regretted not being able to downvote.

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

#198

Post by dragonwriter »

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.

True in general, but not relevant in this particular case. Facebook is still a social networking site with an incidental public affairs use, and not the other way around.

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

#199

Post by zaroth »

S3curityPlu5 wrote: post #174
zaroth wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking beyond Facebook for news and reporting on diverse topics with balanced viewpoints is a "privilege"? On what can you possibly base this claim? This is why Internet.org and the walled garden got nuked. This is what we really mean when we talk about network neutrality. You type a URL into the address bar and press enter, and the page you requested loads. While certainly there are populations where internet acces…

can u expand on the comment. "this is why internet.org and the walled garden got nuked" please..

The bad idea that a free walled garden is better than nothing, or that it's worth sacrificing network neutrality in order to increase overall access.

And to give a little more background, Facebook was trying to get free "internet" access away in India, but it wasn't really internet access it was actually just a Facebook walled garden. The local population organized and ultimately the government rightly told them to piss off.

Because being able to access a diverse set of viewpoints on the Internet is not, actually, a "privilege" but rather the central point of the whole affair.

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

#200

Post by throwanem »

zaroth wrote: post #197
throwanem wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love Hacker News! I can't imagine where else it might happen that a Silicon Valley startup founder would explain to a mouthy unlettered Mississippi redneck what it's like to be poor or working class. Thank you for that!

Aparently not enough to curb the sarcasm, ditch the personal attacks, or think twice about your preconceived notions before posting. Now, your self-description is quite colorful, but seems to only support my claims. It almost sounds like you're saying that a diverse group of people do actually have the means to discuss complex topics and critically analyze diverse viewpoints beyond whatever Facebook's algorithm might…

Well, I was about to write out a long and detailed reply about how having more money means also having more choices, and how I think there is a substantive difference there which you overlook. I further intended to point out that I'm actually very unusual among my cohort, and that it is inadvisable to draw general conclusions about that cohort on the basis of what I say about myself or how I say it.

Before I could get more than a few words into all of that, though, I got an email from my father, who told me that my distant cousin who nearly died when his meth lab blew up is in fact permanently paralyzed in the lower half of his body, and between that and other injuries will almost certainly require lifelong care.

I may be a sarcastic asshole of a redneck, but I am also an amazingly fortunate redneck. I have made a successful career in software engineering, which enables me to earn more in a year than both my parents combined. A lot of that I send back home. I cannot send enough. I do not make enough. In that light the perspective you express strikes me as thoughtlessly facile. I did a poor job of expressing that in my last comment, which was written in the heat of the moment. Perhaps this one, with the benefit of reflection, will make it more clear.

It's a shame you are unable to downvote that comment, if you feel it is warranted. Perhaps someone else will step up and do so.

Post reply on HN