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

201–210 of 215 posts

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

#201

Post by viraptor »

Miner49er wrote: post #32
viraptor wrote: post #25

I wonder what the solution to this is. From what I know about reviewing reports about content, it's basically a case of someone reporting the post, then the report being farmed to reviewers, then the reviewers can check the post and I optionally the context to either kill the post or leave it alone. That means your post is one of hundreds this person sees that day and their guidance is likely "no genitalia, no nipple…

One solution is to not remove anything until told to do so by law enforcement. If people don't like what's posted they can choose to not view it.

And once you realise your site turned into something between /b/ and sad parts of reddit, what do you do then? (I'm assuming that's not your goal)

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

#202

Post by Johnny_Brahms »

openasocket wrote: post #53
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 I think it means absolutely nothing. I use Facebook so I can see how my friends are doing, not to find news articles to read (unless it's an article my friend just shared, and even then only maybe). I don't think many people use facebook to get their news and nowhere else.

My biggest gripe with facebook is that we have given them, a company that earns money by knowing as much as possible about us, and important role in deciding how we interact with society and the people around us.

I believe you have to be a special kind of crazy not to acknowledge that as a problem. Or, considering their big user base, a very general kind of crazy.

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

#203

Post by MaxfordAndSons »

openasocket wrote: post #53
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 I think it means absolutely nothing. I use Facebook so I can see how my friends are doing, not to find news articles to read (unless it's an article my friend just shared, and even then only maybe). I don't think many people use facebook to get their news and nowhere else.

> I don't think many people use facebook to get their news and nowhere else.

Actually, nearly 50% of American adults use facebook as a news source [0]. Not that this means they don't have other sources, but it seems very likely that increased consumption of news via facebook is cutting into consumption from other sources. Anecdotally I've noticed that trend in my own news consumption, to my chagrin.

[0] http://www.niemanlab.org/2016/05/pew-report-44-percent-of-u-...

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

#204

Post by posterboy »

posterboy wrote: post #182
ridgeguy wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not dumb. When corporate executives make decisions, they're explicitly constrained by legality. Morality is negotiable. And relative.

Law is ideally not different to morality. The same ethic measures should apply to both. The law is supposed to codify morality. It can capture only so many aspects of daily life, so there is a personal responsibility for everyone to account for the cases not explicitly mentioned. Law is also negotiable, that's why parliament literally means discussion.

Add to that, it's proper protocol to wait for consent before affecting other people.

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

#205

Post by kefka »

jshevek wrote: post #95
kefka wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that answer is what is wrong with capitalism. Why can a drug maker jack their prices up 100x? Because it's profitable. Why do gas companies raise their prices when there's an impending disaster (hurricane, blizzards, etc.)? Because they can. Capitalism is great in a different aspect: it provides a form of unaccountable eugenics. Your parents were poor, and went to a public school that wasn't funded well. That tra…

I agree with you the first three stanzas of your post, but is this what is wrong with "capitalism", or is this what is wrong with "the way we are currently doing capitalism" ?

Capitalism, the economic theory as posited by Adam Smith in "The Wealth of Nations" fails when stuff approaches infinity.

We already have a taste of it with the internet, where it's 'Create once, share everywhere'. The idea of scarcity is forced via legal tools, where scarcity means little.

And now, with cheap solar, leads to cheap/free energy. And robots are creating more and more goods. And we're on the cusp of a level 4 vehicle automation systems. As this trend continues, many things will approach 'infinity' the same way they do already online.

What does that mean? It means that people could have the requirements of life provided as a citizenship right: food, water, shelter, electricity, internet, plus a bit more. Unlike the older socialism and communism systems, that required people be slaves to the state and work in prescribed manners, robots and computers could be the provider of these essential resources.

And that starts looking at post-capitalism systems. Would there be money? Of course. Some resources would still be rare. But this idea of "go to work so you can eat and survive" would no longer be hanging over people's heads like a guillotine.

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

#206

Post by dragonwriter »

vidarh wrote: post #171
gozur88 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can the rest of us not go to other web sites for this kind of content?

The rest of us can , but the question is to what extent the rest of us are or will in the future . It's irrelevant if the most fantastic analysis of news and current affairs is readily available around the corner if people stop going there.

> The rest of us can, but the question is to what extent the rest of us are or will in the future.

Look, if people aren't going to choose news-focused sites over social-networking-focused sites, then existing social-networking-focused sites that bait-and-switch their users into a news-focused experience are just going to lose to actual social networking sites, starting the problem back at zero.

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

#207

Post by xiaoma »

mabbo wrote: post #152
khattam wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I REALLY hope that you are being sarcastic.

Honestly? I'm not. I personally browse a few news sites, hacker news, etc, but I'm in the minority. Facebook is doing a very fine job of being the first place people hear about stuff happening. It's one website, and it will give you exactly the news you care about- big stories side by side with your friends' random musings. They've aggregated all information that a person cares about in one place, personalized, custo…

You may have a point about facebook, but I have to disagree about McDonald's. Many, many people eat tons of McDonald's and live to a ripe old age, including Warren Buffet, my great aunt (now 103), and countless others.

Yes, you can make a strong argument that eating ONLY McDonald's is unhealthy (though others have done the opposite in various documentaries), but if you're going to say that McDonald's is "literally" killing us, you'll need to back it up with a mountain of evidence. Anecdotes aside, the places with the greatest longevity also tend to have a lot of McDonalds restaurants. The top McDonald's eating countries (per capita) outside the US are Sweden, Switzerland, Austria, Japan, Hong Kong, Canada and France—some of the longest living people in the world!

If they're "literally" being killed by the food, it sure takes a long time to do its damage!

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12464729

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

#208

Post by xiaoma »

mavrc wrote: post #18
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…

> Wrong. Facebook is for making money. I know you're not wrong here, but at what point does social responsibility trump profit? Should it?

Surely you wouldn't support working slaves to death just to make a profit? Or murdering people to sell their organs? You wouldn't do either of those things even if there were no law stopping you, right?

Of course social responsibility trumps profit.

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

#209

Post by palerdot »

yazaddaruvala wrote: post #108
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?

Unfortunately it is still his. When people sign up, there is a line hidden somewhere that says "This is my living room and you agree you stay here on the condition that you will agree to whatever I might ask you in future".

In a way, some physical metaphor like this one drives the point home well. Though Mark might not say bluntly that "You are in my living room, just adhere to what I order you", he is actually saying something like "I'm not permitting this in my living room because it is an inconvenience to other people".

The ugly truth is 1.3 billion people are guests and no matter how big they are they have to agree with the host.

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

#210

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN