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

211–220 of 244 posts

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

#211

Post by dTal »

lovich wrote: post #167
yummyfajitas wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wrote a reply to this asking about the alternate category of material which is both true/accurate and also intended to incite negative feelings. That comment was flagged to death. I guess that's the answer - it's not just "fake" news we want suppressed.

The closest I've seen to something like that is when a country's merits or good deeds are being discussed and someone brings up past mistakes/atrocities. An example would be bringing up Unit 731 when discussing Japan giving aid to some country as a reason that Japan is evil. As an aside, I frequently see your comments flagged to death and have used you as an example of how a community will create its own bubble. I ha…

>I've yet to flag a post just for being infuriating

On the contrary, these are the posts you need to examine the most carefully. A strong emotional response is sometimes a defense mechanism against cognitive dissonance. Flagging something because it made you angry is just sticking your fingers in your ears. If it's objectionable, you should be able to articulate why.

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

#212

Post by Natsu »

noxToken wrote: post #109
pjc50 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Page that challenges your beliefs .. and doesn't insult the reader or insult their intelligence. That's the hard bit. The stuff that goes round on facebook is often both hyper-partisan and low quality, because people are sharing it for group-belonging purposes not for use as facts. I'm having this trouble with some of the causes that I agree with; how do I say "I see what you're trying to do and we're on the same s…

> The stuff that goes round on facebook is often both hyper-partisan and low quality, because people are sharing it for group-belonging purposes not for use as facts. This is only tangentially related. This is why the pieces lambasting Tomi Lahran saying that views like here don't deserve a platform are, in my opinion, wrong.[0] It was the 2nd second result after searching for that interview, and I've seen it shared…

It's funny that for as much as you may have seen written about 'truthiness' (false statements that "feel" true to some people), I've yet to see anything about 'falsiness' which would be the inverse. That is, true statements that "feel" false.

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

#213

Post by EdHominem »

grzm wrote: post #18
andrewvijay wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One concrete step would be to accept that they easily bring war/peace in any country they are allowed to operate. The moral responsibility of such a huge platform where people interact needs to be very high. Pointing fingers or giving sugar coated answers is not acceptable. Facebook's motto should be changed from 'connecting people' to 'connecting people to show only what they like'. See we both are arguing something…

Facebook's motto should be changed from 'connecting people' to 'connecting people to show only what they like'. Is this what you think Facebook should be? Or what you think is a more accurate description of what Facebook is? What would this look like in concrete steps? How do you manage bullying? Knowingly spreading misinformation and disinformation? What prevents Facebook from becoming one big flamewar? How do you d…

Trivial. Stop policing facebook groups and curating feeds. Let everyone say what they want even if it's disgusting.

Also, let the police/etc read it, so that if you incite violence someone shows up at your door exactly as if you sent a postal threat-letter.

They already give people the tools to cope with this. You choose who to follow and who to block.

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

#214

Post by wccrawford »

Spooky23 wrote: post #122
vixen99 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its delivery

That's not a bad thing, but they've chosen to become a delivery truck for the id. That's fine, but will ultimately kill the brand. Good riddance.

They're correcting your grammar.

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

#215

Post by ibejoeb »

vivekd wrote: post #199

To be fair, if an individual's primary source of news is facebook, it doesn't seem like such an individual would be all that informed about the world around them with or without facebook.

That makes a lot of sense. I wonder if facebook is a more or less effective force-feeder of perspective than traditional media. The instantaneous, self-affirming discourse that goes on, I think, is probably more compelling.

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

#216

Post by EdHominem »

saint_fiasco wrote: post #70
andrewvijay wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Is this what you think Facebook should be? It was a metaphor. >What would this look like in concrete steps? Taking social responsibility. I dont know the steps because I dont run that business only affected by it. >How do you manage bullying? >Knowingly spreading misinformation and disinformation? >What prevents Facebook from becoming one big flamewar? FB should be deciding on these. They can if they want to. >How d…

Nobody is asking you to take the steps, just describe them. What steps would you take if you had all the resources at Facebook's disposal and it was your responsibility. Yes, I know it's not really your responsibility but it's all hypothetical.

Simple. Step back and let people listen to, and say, what they want.

The police will undoubtedly come and arrest a few of them for what they say, but that's not your problem. Let the legal system handle the issues.

The only thing making this a problem is Facebook's insistence on curating what you see so they can show you ads. They made this problem themselves and could solve it in an instant by stopping the interference.

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

#217

Post by lovich »

dTal wrote: post #211
lovich wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The closest I've seen to something like that is when a country's merits or good deeds are being discussed and someone brings up past mistakes/atrocities. An example would be bringing up Unit 731 when discussing Japan giving aid to some country as a reason that Japan is evil. As an aside, I frequently see your comments flagged to death and have used you as an example of how a community will create its own bubble. I ha…

>I've yet to flag a post just for being infuriating On the contrary, these are the posts you need to examine the most carefully. A strong emotional response is sometimes a defense mechanism against cognitive dissonance. Flagging something because it made you angry is just sticking your fingers in your ears. If it's objectionable, you should be able to articulate why.

to me at least, being infuriating means it just makes me angry. Lots of things that happen to be correct or worth discussing can infuriate me. If there's a problem with it that I can articulate, I would give it a different description like misleading, wrong, or fallacious

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

#218

Post by lovich »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #172
lovich wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The closest I've seen to something like that is when a country's merits or good deeds are being discussed and someone brings up past mistakes/atrocities. An example would be bringing up Unit 731 when discussing Japan giving aid to some country as a reason that Japan is evil. As an aside, I frequently see your comments flagged to death and have used you as an example of how a community will create its own bubble. I ha…

I get a little bit of exposure to white nationalist blogs since they are occasionally quoted by neoreactionary blogs. I don't agree with their normative conclusions at all, but their factual claims seem reasonably accurate. There was a great article on this recently: http://hurryupharry.org/2016/11/27/who-gave-us-post-truth-co... Some years ago, a friend sent me a shocking article. It said hundreds of British girls w…

I agree with your point that theres not really a solution anyones putting forth that prevents false positives, but I wouldn't agree that its entirely necessary.

You are never going to get a system that is 100% accurate so I feel it would be better to focus on being as accurate as possible. This would involve false positives and negatives to some degree. What degree that should be isn't apparent yet, but I don't think that 100% accuracy is realistic

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

#219

Post by dpandey »

pyrophane wrote: post #166
dpandey wrote: post #150

A huge part of the story seems to be around confirmation bias (people like reading stuff that supports what they already believe). While confirmation bias is a fact of life, reading fake stories to confirm your bias is not something that anybody wants to do, regardless of how irrational the bias is. Facebook obviously doesn't want to be seen as having influenced the election so they're unwilling to say anything that…

> But Zuckerberg has shown boldness and maturity as one of the best CEOs time and again In what respect?

Facebook is the only social network (if you discount Linkedin) from 2005 that's not just existing, but thriving today. All the other social networks that succeeded (except for SnapChat - which also has an incredible CEO) are owned by Facebook. And he made bold bets by acquiring them for unbelievable amounts ($1B Instagram, $18B Whatsapp). While companies like Twitter and Pinterest have essentially stagnated, Facebook keeps growing and growing, and so do all their acquisitions. And they have incredible product momentum despite their size. They have incredible revenue momentum.

This is not accidental. Zuck has shown amazing maturity and judgement in not just making the right decisions but convincing those founders to accept his offer. He turned down a billion $ acquisition offer early on, and bought Whatsapp and Instagram in bold bets and tried really hard to buy SnapChat.

= boldness in making the right big move

= maturity/good judgement in making good decisions

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

#220

Post by pg_is_a_butt »

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…

no, all of you idiots CHOOSING to use facebook simply kills democracy for the benefits of yourselves.

you're all completely pathetic.

Post reply on HN