Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#231

Post by idibidiartists » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 12:47 PM UTC

simongray wrote: post #126

idibidiartists wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China has more people than Facebook has users.

China has just shy of 1.4 billion people. That is not more people than Facebook has users according to this statistic》 https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-net...

A lot of them are business accounts, bots and fake or throwaway. I have 3. How can anyone be sure that each account is a person. It says a lot about general IQ on HN that I got 4 downvotes for suggesting that Facebook has less users (real ones) than China has people (real ones, too!)

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#232

Post by Kiro » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 12:50 PM UTC

colordrops wrote: post #226

Kiro wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if Facebook was actually listening to your mic we would know it. They wouldn't be able to hide and it would be a massive scandal. It's simply too conspiratorial to take seriously when there is no evidence other than anecdotal stories like this.

Is this non-anecdotal enough for you? I'm tired of using the "conspiracy" label to shut down valid discussion. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=786909 https://www.cnet.com/news/samsungs-warning-our-smart-tvs-rec... https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/03/09...

You don't see any difference between Alexa (which wouldn't work without listening to everything) and Facebook secretly listening without your consent to use it for ad targeting? None of your links provide any evidence this would be the case, or even mention Facebook.

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#233

Post by markatkinson » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 12:59 PM UTC

I live in Cape Town, South Africa and we had a storm that was a bit worst than usual. I don't have facebook but someone told me the Safety Check came up for them during the storm 0_0.

Sounds like a neurotic grand mother.

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#234

Post by mikeash » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 1:12 PM UTC

jdietrich wrote: post #111

rabboRubble wrote: post #78

I lived through a major natural disaster that left me an evacuee for months. Facebook's safety check is the only reason I haven't killed my account and I've said this before in prior comments here on Hacker News. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14412146 Thank god the author hasn't lived through an event where everybody you know is affected by the event. The ability to say "I'm okay", say it once, and have everyb…

About 500 people were directly endangered by this incident. The Safety Check alert seems to extend well beyond Greater London, so at least 9 million people. That gives us an approximate false positive rate of 99.995%. Is that reasonable or proportionate? Does it actually provide useful information? Is it likely to quell unfounded fears and provide genuine reassurance? As tragic as this incident was, it affected a sin…

I'm puzzled by this idea that social norms were "safe by default" until social media came along. It's certainly not my experience. When some high-profile event happens in the area, people check in and worry if they don't hear from you. It's been like this since long before Facebook was a thing.

This looks like yet another case of nerds assuming the entire world thinks and acts like we do. Yes, worrying about someone just because they live in the same major city as a disaster that affects a couple hundred people is irrational. Yes, your adds of being killed by a bus while crossing the street are far greater. Yes, just about any event which makes the news is unlikely by definition. No, none of this actually influences how normal people think and act.

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#235

Post by willvarfar » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 1:20 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #234

jdietrich wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About 500 people were directly endangered by this incident. The Safety Check alert seems to extend well beyond Greater London, so at least 9 million people. That gives us an approximate false positive rate of 99.995%. Is that reasonable or proportionate? Does it actually provide useful information? Is it likely to quell unfounded fears and provide genuine reassurance? As tragic as this incident was, it affected a sin…

I'm puzzled by this idea that social norms were "safe by default" until social media came along. It's certainly not my experience. When some high-profile event happens in the area, people check in and worry if they don't hear from you. It's been like this since long before Facebook was a thing. This looks like yet another case of nerds assuming the entire world thinks and acts like we do. Yes, worrying about someone…

It Britain, the default is "no news is good news", which is a proverb meaning "without information to the contrary you can assume that all is well".

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#236

Post by AlexandrB » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 1:21 PM UTC

whatevthrow31 wrote: post #20

Ok, I had to make a throwaway for this because apparently its a heated debate. Why does everything Facebook do have to be so heavily criticized? Safety Check is a wonderful feature. If I remember correctly, it started off as an internal hackathon project that got turned into a full feature. They get shit if they turn it on (here), and if they don't turn it on (past tragedies where they failed to turn it on). Why does…

> Why does everything Facebook do have to be so heavily criticized?

Personally I find it offensive that an ad network thinks it has anything to say to me about the safety of my loved ones or that it has pretensions to providing services for the "public good".

If you're going to sell ads, sell ads. Don't pretend that you're not in the psychological manipulation business and you're somehow saving the world.

> After years in the industry, 95% of things that are "bad" that come out of big companies end up being well meaning and just look malicious without context. Hanlon's razor is real.

Intentions don't matter. The negative effects of pervasive corporate surveillance and finely targeted advertising are real and potentially catastrophic. Being "well meaning" just means that the engineers either didn't fully consider the consequences of their actions or acted with enough hubris to think they knew the consequences even though there were many unknowns.

The cost reductions that removed hardware interlocks for the Therac-25[1] were well-meaning. Still killed people.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#237

Post by AlexandrB » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 1:35 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #138

aaron-lebo wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't just have lots of users, they have more users than any country in the history of the world (that's 1.9 billion monthly users). Therefore there are potentially massive, world-changing consequences to everything they do, and even those who don't use it can't opt out of the effects. Do you really feel like a non-democratic oligarchy (or more inflammatory language, a dictator) should have that much power? edit…

But Facebook isn't a country. It's a free (as in beer) on-line service. It's completely opt-in, and its only claim to you is the strength of its network effect - which, as history shows, is something very fragile both on the local and global scale. What you're afraid of is evil CEOs doing mind control, not despotism.

> It's completely opt-in

No, it absolutely is not. Facebook creates shadow profiles[1] even if you never use the service based on what your friends and family upload about you. Not to mention that not having a facebook profile is often treated as suspicious[2] by potential employers, landlords, significant others, and now US customs[3].

[1] http://www.zdnet.com/article/anger-mounts-after-facebooks-sh...

[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/08/06/beware-t...

[3] https://www.cnet.com/news/border-patrol-agents-checking-face...

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#238

Post by losteverything » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 1:36 PM UTC

jdietrich wrote: post #88

whatevthrow31 wrote: post #20

Ok, I had to make a throwaway for this because apparently its a heated debate. Why does everything Facebook do have to be so heavily criticized? Safety Check is a wonderful feature. If I remember correctly, it started off as an internal hackathon project that got turned into a full feature. They get shit if they turn it on (here), and if they don't turn it on (past tragedies where they failed to turn it on). Why does…

Imagine if one-fifth of the entire global population read the same newspaper every morning. Imagine if that same newspaper also operated the largest espionage network in the history of humanity. Facebook doesn't receive nearly enough scrutiny and criticism. Western governments have been completely blindsided by the immense power that lies in the hands of Mark Zuckerberg. Facebook have a near-monopoly on social media…

I feel strongly to respond.

Chicken little. That's what came to mind when I read your reply.

If FB OR ANY other entiry gets you so upset then stop using it.

We all make choices. I always give this example.

My grandmother could have voted for every losing president during her lifetime but because of other more important choices like who to marry, whether to work hard or not, what people she associates with, when to have sex and if and when to create life her life became a function of those choices.

Why in anyone's name would a person by choice use or contemplate FB or any other entity if it makes you upset.

I just don't get it.

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#239

Post by rhonda321 » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 1:40 PM UTC

Hey guys i really dont know about the scam of a thing but i recommend you contact emrysghosthacker@gmail.comfor an untraceable real hacking job and PI for scammed victim to track down and trace back scammer, with much experience on the previous guy that scammed me he helped me trace and recover back my lost money..he also help me hack my ex's mail, facebook, whatsapp,and his phone conversations through the software i payed him for and installed remotely on my phone cause i suspected he was cheating. all he asked for was his phone model, no physical contact.if you need help hacking any social site without password he will surely help tell him lilian referred you..he will surely help you out..you can thank me later...

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#240

Post by whatevthrow31 » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 1:43 PM UTC

ebbv wrote: post #56

whatevthrow31 wrote: post #20

Ok, I had to make a throwaway for this because apparently its a heated debate. Why does everything Facebook do have to be so heavily criticized? Safety Check is a wonderful feature. If I remember correctly, it started off as an internal hackathon project that got turned into a full feature. They get shit if they turn it on (here), and if they don't turn it on (past tragedies where they failed to turn it on). Why does…

Are you kidding me? This is not a "wonderful feature" this is a blatant attempt to capitalize on disasters and turn it into user engagement which becomes ad revenue for Facebook. Give me a break.

Is there anything Facebook could do at this point that wouldn't make you think this?

Just because someone's making money off of something doesn't mean it's inherently bad.