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

Facebook Can’t Cope with the World It’s Created

foreignpolicy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 192 posts

Re: Facebook Can’t Cope with the World It’s Created

#161

Post by chiaro »

beautifulfreak wrote: post #49

>Facebook can no longer deny its moral responsibility to try to understand how cyberspace, law, and politics collide in each of the countries where it operates, nor its responsibility to do something about it. That sentence doesn't make sense. Do something about what? How those things collide? It's very unclear what the author thinks Facebook is supposed to do, or what he thinks Facebook is actually responsible for.…

The article is fair. Wilful indifference has been the status quo for how social networks have been run for most of their existence, under a kind of techno-libertarian idealist vision of free speech. Child pornography was the first hard check against that, but it's still taken a long time for these companies to realise that they are in control of the narrative through their recommendation engines and filters and content policies and that they need to actively engage with the social responsibility that entails.

Re: Facebook Can’t Cope with the World It’s Created

#162

Post by chiaro »

ThomPete wrote: post #50

I am still unconvinced Facebook played any role in the outcome of the 2016 election. It played a role in the the form of the discussion but the actual outcome it didn't. Most people vote based on some very personal and everyday issues. Things they experience in their lives not discussions on facebook no matter how many times they like it.

There is no escaping it played a significant role, when it's where a significant portion of people got their news.

http://www.journalism.org/2016/02/04/the-2016-presidential-c...

Re: Facebook Can’t Cope with the World It’s Created

#163

Post by bigger_cheese »

spunker540 wrote: post #97
bshimmin wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see a few problems with this. The concept of "you are their product" is not an easy one to understand if people don't have any relevant background or experience in thinking critically about the problem. It requires thinking through several non-obvious layers: for example, it's easy for people to get stuck at "yes, I don't pay for Facebook, that's why it has advertising" without making the leap to "most business…

The “Facebook sells your data” myth is too often rehashed. Facebook has done studies and actually found that your personal info is not all that valuable in and of itself. Your likes, statuses, friends and photos do not provide meaningful targeting data. (Age and geography are meaningful, but those are already available with traditional media). Facebook’s huge money maker is its ability to let other companies target t…

What killed Facebook for me was their creepy targeted advertising. About a year ago I saw an ad buried in my facebook feed to "buy Gallium and Bismuth metal in Australia" I thought it was an oddly specific ad so I made a joking post about it - turned out several of my friends were seeing the same ad.

A common friend we all shared who is a high school science teacher spoke up. He explained his class was studying the periodic table and he had purchased samples of Bismuth and Gallium online to show to the class. That was the eye opening moment for me if my friends and I can see ads based on another friend's online purchases what can my friends see about me? I've rarely used the site since then.

Re: Facebook Can’t Cope with the World It’s Created

#164

Post by dredmorbius »

ivix wrote: post #64

It's quite eye opening the way that this article paints Facebook as a clueless giant, unknowingly enabling revolutions, swinging elections and upending societies. I don't think there's any precedent for this.

I'd very strongly suggest you read media theory.

The role of media -- the press, cheap paper, high-speed printing, widespread literacy, pamphlets, telegraph, radio, cinema, audio tape, public address systems, mass media, advertising, television, cable, talk radio, BBS systems, Usenet, the Internet, the WWW (versions 1.0, 2.0, and mobile), etc., in political and social matters is absolutely profound. And often quite unexpected at least by the initial creators.

Elizabeth Eisenstein's The Printing Press as an Agent of Change is one introduction to this, though there are many others. I'm going through Robert W. McChesney's work presently.

Re: Facebook Can’t Cope with the World It’s Created

#165

Post by dredmorbius »

zerostar07 wrote: post #149

If it wouldn't be facebook it would be something else. The bigger issue here is that the completely-decentralized or completely-centralized civil society of the earth that the internet creates is incompatible with the way the world is run for the past 2 centuries.

Whilst true, the fact remains that it is Facebook, for now, and it's Facebook's place to admit, understand, and address this fact.

Re: Facebook Can’t Cope with the World It’s Created

#166

Post by matte_black »

jayess wrote: post #158
jondubois wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US government should take possession of all Facebook shares and use the profits to fund universal basic income. I don't think anyone would complain... Except a tiny percent of the population who owned Facebook shares but who cares, they're evil/morally bankrupt anyway.

Lol, you realize that the government would have to pay current shareholders the value of their shares, right?

I assume he meant the shares would be seized illegally.

Re: Facebook Can’t Cope with the World It’s Created

#167

Post by libertyEQ »

libertyEQ wrote: post #139
dgzl wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> can choose whether or not to follow in the path of liberal democracy or authoritarianism Liberal Democracy can also be authoritarian. The words you're thinking of are libertarian and authoritarian. Liberty as in free, authority as in ruled.

Do you not recognize that both words have the same Latin roots? It is only in the US where this illogical distinction is made because the word liberal has been bastardized. "William Safire points out that liberalism is attacked by both the Right and the Left: by the Right for defending such practices as abortion, homosexuality, and atheism, by the Left for defending free enterprise and the rights of the individual ov…

It is so annoying to be DV'd without a rebuttal. Please make your case and we can debate the merits.

Re: Facebook Can’t Cope with the World It’s Created

#168

Post by RaleyField »

InternetOfStuff wrote: post #99
saas_co_de wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it is interesting that the author sees no place in the modern world for the kind of free speech enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. They are happy with a giant global monopolist controlling all speech, as long as they use that power to enforce their political agenda. That is an incredibly dangerous mindset and one that seems to be becoming more pervasive in respectable circles.

> Yes, it is interesting that the author sees no place in the modern world for the kind of free speech enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. Well, there is such a place. The U.S. However, in Germany, German rules of speech apply. As a German, I consider this a good thing. And remember, the German constitution was written at the pleasure of the allies -- the US were apparently quite happy with the way our constitution b…

> But I don't have a decent solution to this conundrum.

I have. The German model is wrong for the reasons you allured to. If states can't be trusted to be arbiter of acceptable speech then they shouldn't have that job.

> And remember, the German constitution was written at the pleasure of the allies

That would be an appeal to authority and we all know US made few mistakes in the past so I'm not sure why you'd want to use that fallacy.

> This is largely cultural I'm sure.

Must be. Thinking that the state is always right and bossing people that disagree is historically very German.

Re: Facebook Can’t Cope with the World It’s Created

#169

Post by zerostar07 »

dredmorbius wrote: post #165
zerostar07 wrote: post #149

If it wouldn't be facebook it would be something else. The bigger issue here is that the completely-decentralized or completely-centralized civil society of the earth that the internet creates is incompatible with the way the world is run for the past 2 centuries.

Whilst true, the fact remains that it is Facebook, for now, and it's Facebook's place to admit, understand, and address this fact.

what i meant is that it is not possible to address this fact. this is the new world order.

Re: Facebook Can’t Cope with the World It’s Created

#170

Post by ThomPete »

chiaro wrote: post #162
ThomPete wrote: post #50

I am still unconvinced Facebook played any role in the outcome of the 2016 election. It played a role in the the form of the discussion but the actual outcome it didn't. Most people vote based on some very personal and everyday issues. Things they experience in their lives not discussions on facebook no matter how many times they like it.

There is no escaping it played a significant role, when it's where a significant portion of people got their news. http://www.journalism.org/2016/02/04/the-2016-presidential-c...

That's a different discussion. Whether they were actually swayed by it is a very very different discussion.
Post reply on HN