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

Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 454 posts

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#201

Post by vidarh »

r_smart wrote: post #144
zelos wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it: "A Facebook spokeswoman said: “While we recognise that this photo is iconic, it’s difficult to create a distinction between allowing a photograph of a nude child in one instance and not others. "

>it’s difficult to create a distinction between allowing a photograph of a nude child in one instance and not others. I'm assuming this is just PR, but if not, what a dumb statement. I'm sure there are cases where this might be true, but given the photograph we're talking about, give me a break. You really can't create a distinction between this and most other nude photos? Unless she meant algorithmically. I could se…

And that justifies the initial removals. It does not justify not having an effective appeals method to someone who isn't just blindly applying their rules, and a means of white-listing things that have been approved once.

This is not a new problem that they've never been exposed to before.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#202

Post by Broken_Hippo »

briandear wrote: post #120
red_admiral wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. It's more effective to lobby your local member of parliament/congress to pass laws restricting what media organisations can or cannot do. Granted, by "more effective" I mean something like 0.1% instead of 0.01%, but it's worth a try.

That's a very dangerous path on which to travel. China passes some strong laws what media organizations can and can't do. Free speech isn't a right given by governments, but one cultivated and protected by the people. The marketplace solves these problems. Nobody is forced to use Facebook. If so many people care, perhaps they ought to vote with their dollar and seek alternatives. If they are unwilling to do that, it'…

There are a few problems with your examples, I think.

There is a difference between bad regulation and good. Some regulation is necessary in many circumstances. China's strong laws over media organisations are an example of over-reach: Not calling emergency crews to your house to complain about how your think they are misusing tax dollars isn't bad to regulate.

The marketplace solves some problems, but definitely not all of them. Discrimination is a lot harder to solve just relying on the market, for example. Regulation comes in to help.

> Perhaps they aught to vote with their dollar and seek alternatives The problem with alternatives is the same problem folks have with seeking alternative utilities. The alternatives are few and far in between and offer an inferior service comparatively. In fact, facebook is more like a telecom that refuses to connect to other telecoms at this point. Your basic options are to participate... or not.

It isn't like buying tacos at all - tacos has a market that competes to an extent, and this just isn't such a thing. And to get it to the point that it is easier for other folks to start the business, you are knee-deep in regulation, including standards so the different services can communicate with each other easily and other such monopoly-busting sort of regulation, which will probably last for many years.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#203

Post by 1_listerine_pls »

nine_k wrote: post #192
1_listerine_pls wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody will close their accounts.

Not having a FB account may be unwise: an impersonator might take your name, if only to make fun of you before his/her/your classmates. Having an empty account, and actually not opening FB, may be a better way.

It's too useful to be ignored. Soon, interaction with businesses will be done through their platform. It's easier to set up a FB page with services + marketing included than to create a website.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#204

Post by vidarh »

soylentcola wrote: post #52
wonks wrote: post #3

I feel like this is a good argument for taking another look at projects like Diaspora and Friendica Red

As much as I'd love to see some alternative to Facebook that provides generally the same basic features (easy sharing of original content and links/reposted media with a large group of contacts) I feel that they'll all face the same issues for the foreseeable future. Same issue with the ones you mentioned or even ones like G+ that are backed by another big player: critical mass of users combined with no standardized…

Something that "gateways" to Facebook would be great, but of course Facebook would fight it with every weapon possible if it were to get any kind of traction.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#205

Post by ythl »

splawn wrote: post #188
ythl wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not an absurd statement, it's the truth. Europe can't compete with American web tech (and probably even software in general). Think about it. In your day to day dealings with computers, what percentage of the software you use is American/European? I'm betting it's something like 99:1 (unless you try to make the claim the Linux is Finnish even though the majority of the developers for it are American and the crea…

Most software and languages I deal with are open source and the names I see associated with them seem very european to me. Im also pretty sure that these are the same tools that my fellow american developers that you are putting on a pedestal use as well. Just walk away, you really are backing yourself into a corner.

Yes, if you try really hard, you can pretend that Europe contributes just as much to the tech scene as America does.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#206

Post by ramblenode »

RodgerTheGreat wrote: post #28

If you're a Facebook user and you are unhappy with the way the company strongarms, censors and manipulates its audience, the most effective way for you to express this dissatisfaction is to close your account, block social media bugs and encourage your friends and family to do the same. Facebook doesn't care how you feel when you use their service; their bottom line simply depends on your contribution to the statisti…

Or change your profile picture to Napalm Girl and let Facebook close the account for you. I'm strongly considering it.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#207

Post by amscanne »

red_admiral wrote: post #159
awinder wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is Facebook a media outlet as opposed to, say, a private gathering place like a mall or movie theatre?

Facebook arguably has a monopoly position in the way that your local mall, movie theatre or newspaper does not. If I don't like the Times, I can read the Guardian instead. If I don't like what's on at one cinema, I can go to another (granted this may be harder in a small town with only one). Of course I can close my facebook account and move to diaspora, but then I'd lose everything from keeping in touch with my frie…

TIL that I wear an antisocial badge.

It's perfectly possible to be happy and healthy without a Facebook account. You might lose out on one particular kind of "social" connection, but that doesn't mean you lose actual social connections. You just catch up with people in person, via telephone, via email, via chat, or a million other ways.

Personally, I don't really find the "social" information Facebook has to offer all that valuable. It's just a stream of trivia from extended not-really-friends.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#208

Post by wyager »

red_admiral wrote: post #45
RodgerTheGreat wrote: post #28

If you're a Facebook user and you are unhappy with the way the company strongarms, censors and manipulates its audience, the most effective way for you to express this dissatisfaction is to close your account, block social media bugs and encourage your friends and family to do the same. Facebook doesn't care how you feel when you use their service; their bottom line simply depends on your contribution to the statisti…

No. It's more effective to lobby your local member of parliament/congress to pass laws restricting what media organisations can or cannot do. Granted, by "more effective" I mean something like 0.1% instead of 0.01%, but it's worth a try.

While Facebook censorship policies are very annoying, I fully support their right to have complete discretion over what goes on their platform.

I would rather punish them through voluntary market mechanisms than by using the government as a blunt instrument to force them to behave as I like.

Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates

#209

Post by wyager »

paganel wrote: post #110
awinder wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is Facebook a media outlet as opposed to, say, a private gathering place like a mall or movie theatre?

Facebook has become a de-facto political "agora" for the politicians and high-Government officials from my country (I live in Eastern Europe). More exactly, that's where now they first express their views on current political, social and economics affairs affecting my country. Nowadays I would say that most of the important stuff first gets posted on FB, and only then it gets re-published by the local media (whatever…

So once your platform gets popular enough, the government can tell you what to do with it? Why? It's not Facebook's fault that politicians started using it.
Post reply on HN