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

Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

mondaynote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 244 posts

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#181

Post by logfromblammo »

SuperPaintMan wrote: post #125
throwanem wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it matter? Weapons are where you find them. The Nice attacker used no firearms and killed eighty-six people. The DC attacker used a firearm and killed no one. Is it possible that firearms aren't really the problem here?

In Canada here we have a strange definition of a weapon (as opposed to firearm or otherwise). A object becomes a weapon when it is used with the intent to harm/kill someone. Or something close to that, prevents shenanigans trying to skirt the formal definitions. For this reason some bikers carry hammers on their bikes, y'know incase repairs need to be done. In the case of Nice, a truck is inherently a weapon. Can't r…

As an American, I demand that you turn over this secret technology you undoubtedly must possess for inserting common sense into the written law!~

The idea that "tool" and "weapon" are separated by intent rather than construction is so simple and obvious that apparently no one in certain buildings of Washington, DC, is capable of thinking it.

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#182

Post by ianstallings »

gdulli wrote: post #173
herbst wrote: post #104

This is just getting more stupid everday. Facebook is no and never was a news platform. It is a crappy social network and only reflects your inner friend circle. Why anyone and especially facebook should care about fake news is beyond me.

Well here's why someone should care about fake news: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2016/12/04/d-c-... I won't answer whether that entity should be Facebook. But when people start getting shot at and transparently disreputable demagogues start getting elected I would say the conversation at least has to begin.

Maybe if the public trusted the mainstream journalists this wouldn't be such an issue. They've eroded that trust themselves. It's their job to clean up the mess by gaining that trust back through integrity. Everything else sounds dangerously like thought censorship.

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#183

Post by marbletiles »

Pigo wrote: post #133
herbst wrote: post #104

This is just getting more stupid everday. Facebook is no and never was a news platform. It is a crappy social network and only reflects your inner friend circle. Why anyone and especially facebook should care about fake news is beyond me.

I think people who are so concerned about Facebook policies and practices are way too invested in it, and should focus on spending less time on it. It's just a platform for showing grandma pictures of the kids, providing ex's a means to stalk you, and check out the latest virtue signaling. Anyone using it as a primary news source is doing everything else wrong too. I don't expect Facebook to start restructuring just…

The set of citizens concerned by this stuff is not the same set as those taken in by fake news on Facebook. So the concerned types spending less time on Facebook won't solve anything.

And I think the Arab Spring shows your dismissive characterisation of Facebook is way, way off the mark.

You're right that people using it as a primary news source are doing everything else wrong too. They apparently are, including voting for ill-suited demagogues and regressive causes. That is the problem to be addressed.

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#185

Post by PretzelFisch »

welanes wrote: post #152
grive wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Click the Like button on a Page that challenges your beliefs, interact with that information and you'll see more of it. That's precisely the problem with it. I'd like to read more on extremists groups and see how and why they exists, what kind of people they are, why do they think the way they do, what their fight is in our society. This is the first step to build a dialog. However, "liking" their pages is out of q…

> There should be a way for us to navigate different bubbles, to inhabit different, neutral profiles to explore other niches of population Twitter is the app for that. Set up lists of different individuals so you can switch between different viewpoints in two clicks. No need to follow anybody on your list. It's actually fascinating to do so. Watch 'the reality' of a current or political event contort as you switch fr…

but still there is no conversation/debate on twitter with its 140 limit. For that you need a blog or medium. Where twitter can a poor rss feed reader.

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#186

Post by rm_-rf_slash »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #127
GotAnyMegadeth wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a relatively heavy FB user, I use the like button as a "I've read this" button for my friend's comments and statuses, and not at all otherwise.

Perhaps FB would benefit from a check or looks-interesting reaction

It's a trap!

Instead of reevaluating how our simplified models damage discourse and complex thinking, further simplifying human interaction to better fit over-simplified models only further skews us from the complex reality that our fake world obscures from us.

Ex: many journalists "favorite" tweets to refer back to later for their stories, but an uninformed observer might draw the wrong conclusions from seeing a New York Times journalist's twitter profile "favoriting" incendiary tweets by white supremacists or ISIS propaganda outlets.

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#187

Post by gdulli »

herbst wrote: post #176
gdulli wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well here's why someone should care about fake news: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2016/12/04/d-c-... I won't answer whether that entity should be Facebook. But when people start getting shot at and transparently disreputable demagogues start getting elected I would say the conversation at least has to begin.

So lets censor everything that some entity thinks is false on the whole internet? This shit grew on reddit and 4chan, 2 of the last places i want to see government censorship. Also nobody was shot, the other article i read in the morning clearly mentioned that he only shot upwards and was not trying to actually hurt anyone. Seriously if people are stupid enough to do such shit there are different issues to be solved.…

No one has mentioned the government here except you. Without giving in to totalitarianism, there's plenty of room for Reddit or Facebook to make some effort towards doing the right thing out of a sense of responsibility and decency. They're not obligated to let human garbage use their service as a platform.

It's in a site's best interest anyway. Imagine if normal adults weren't so embarrassed to admit using Reddit.

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#188

Post by baby »

andrewvijay wrote: post #6

> We are not in the business of picking which issues the world should read about. We are in the business of connecting people and ideas — and matching people with the stories they find most meaningful. Our integrity depends on being inclusive of all perspectives and view points, and using ranking to connect people with the stories and sources they find the most meaningful and engaging. Simply incredible. They are ass…

> The bubbles are getting incredibly smaller that its very worrying.

I'd argue that most people did that before Facebook, and still do that outside of Facebook. It is your responsibility to get surrounded by different kind of people. It's not easy, and most people won't be able to do it, but if you're living in an echo chamber it has always been your fault.

(I'll admit that geography sometimes doesn't help. For example I live in Chicago and it's not the best place to meet Trump supporters.)

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#189

Post by herbst »

gdulli wrote: post #187
herbst wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So lets censor everything that some entity thinks is false on the whole internet? This shit grew on reddit and 4chan, 2 of the last places i want to see government censorship. Also nobody was shot, the other article i read in the morning clearly mentioned that he only shot upwards and was not trying to actually hurt anyone. Seriously if people are stupid enough to do such shit there are different issues to be solved.…

No one has mentioned the government here except you. Without giving in to totalitarianism, there's plenty of room for Reddit or Facebook to make some effort towards doing the right thing out of a sense of responsibility and decency. They're not obligated to let human garbage use their service as a platform. It's in a site's best interest anyway. Imagine if normal adults weren't so embarrassed to admit using Reddit.

They did. Not sure if you followed the pizzagate laughfest. But they actually did, but they had a really hard time to net make it censoring. All they could really do was banning people that abused the rules, what they did (even 4chan did that mind you).

But why would Reddit be allowed to decide which conspiracy theorie can be discussed? Seriously, i dont want to live in a world where the few semi open platforms we still have decide what we are allowed to talk about and what not when no laws are broken anyway.

Re: Facebook’s Walled Wonderland Is Inherently Incompatible with News

#190

Post by fullshark »

twhb wrote: post #142

Going on a tangent for a moment, please don't take it as a comment on Facebook, Facebook's culpability, what Facebook should do, etc. Say we have a Facebook alternative X which implements no filter, makes no effort to garner views and shares (let's elide financials for now). Say X, like Facebook, has news published on it, which users may subscribe to and receive. Is it not true that most users will more often follow…

Sounds like Twitter. We've seen this thought experiment play out!
Post reply on HN