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

Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 134 posts

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#11

Post by CodeMage »

everdev wrote: post #2

I'm no fan of Facebook and deleted my account years ago, but the flood of articles like these that are barely embarrassing since the major Cambridge Analytic embarrassment feels more like an agenda or piling on than newsworthy items. There are many reasons to reduce or eliminate your time on FB, but this isn't one of them.

On the contrary, everyone's willingness to accept this kind of behavior as normal indicates how far the Overton window has moved when it comes to the trustworthiness of our digital services. We need a collective effort to shift things back where they belong.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#12

Post by gaius »

matte_black wrote: post #5

Thing is a nothingburger. Do people really believe messages can’t be deleted no matter what?

It’s difficult to retract a message SMTP’d to my server then POP3 download to my desktop computer

Sometimes the old protocols are the best

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#13

Post by haydenlee »

throwaway84742 wrote: post #4
everdev wrote: post #2

I'm no fan of Facebook and deleted my account years ago, but the flood of articles like these that are barely embarrassing since the major Cambridge Analytic embarrassment feels more like an agenda or piling on than newsworthy items. There are many reasons to reduce or eliminate your time on FB, but this isn't one of them.

That’s because you misunderstand the intent of this pile-on. The intent is to ensure full compliance in 2020 elections.

Using bad arguments is rarely an effective way to get what you want.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#14

Post by haydenlee »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #6
everdev wrote: post #2

I'm no fan of Facebook and deleted my account years ago, but the flood of articles like these that are barely embarrassing since the major Cambridge Analytic embarrassment feels more like an agenda or piling on than newsworthy items. There are many reasons to reduce or eliminate your time on FB, but this isn't one of them.

The behaviour described in this article implies a culture willing to look one way for users and another way for themselves. That’s pertinent less to users and more to lawyers and lawmakers.

I dislike FB as much as the next dev here, but surely it's a widely accepted (and beneficial) practice that employees have special privileges in the apps they build. Imagine using this argument to say that Facebook couldn't shut down a page/group/account.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#15

Post by saagarjha »

throwaway84742 wrote: post #4
everdev wrote: post #2

I'm no fan of Facebook and deleted my account years ago, but the flood of articles like these that are barely embarrassing since the major Cambridge Analytic embarrassment feels more like an agenda or piling on than newsworthy items. There are many reasons to reduce or eliminate your time on FB, but this isn't one of them.

That’s because you misunderstand the intent of this pile-on. The intent is to ensure full compliance in 2020 elections.

> The intent is to ensure full compliance in 2020 elections.

I don't see how these actions help Facebook be compliant in any way.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#16

Post by [deleted] »

CodeMage wrote: post #11
everdev wrote: post #2

I'm no fan of Facebook and deleted my account years ago, but the flood of articles like these that are barely embarrassing since the major Cambridge Analytic embarrassment feels more like an agenda or piling on than newsworthy items. There are many reasons to reduce or eliminate your time on FB, but this isn't one of them.

On the contrary, everyone's willingness to accept this kind of behavior as normal indicates how far the Overton window has moved when it comes to the trustworthiness of our digital services. We need a collective effort to shift things back where they belong.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#17

Post by sunir »

haydenlee wrote: post #13
throwaway84742 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s because you misunderstand the intent of this pile-on. The intent is to ensure full compliance in 2020 elections.

Using bad arguments is rarely an effective way to get what you want.

In business. In politics it works.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#18

Post by feelin_googley »

The folks in Myanmar apparently have taken issue with how Zuckerberg referred to FB's "tools" and "systems" for detection of hate speech in his Vox interview. They sent him a letter:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/05/technology/zuckerberg-fac...

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#19

Post by supertrope »

alphakappa wrote: post #8

I think it's clear from nearly a decade's worth of Facebook's trysts with privacy issues that it is a company that doesn't have a fundamental stance that's in favor of user privacy. Over and over again it has either intentionally built features that disregard privacy, or put in wrong defaults, or simply brushed off criticisms when others have misused Facebook. At this point we should be asking ourselves why we expect…

I agree that FB has shown time and time again that they consider user privacy a mere road bump. Pervasive dark patterns. I disagree that specific regulatory oversight is needed. Advertising supported websites will always remain loyal to their customers: advertisers. Users are not willing to pay money and requiring a cover charge hurts adoption. What used to be called spyware is now "analytics." People proudly proclaim targeted advertising as a benefit for users. If we want privacy to be respected we need a right to privacy law. It's hard to be a sustainable business if everyone else is racing to the bottom. I'm waiting on FB's marketshare to tank.

Re: Facebook retracted Zuckerberg’s messages from recipients’ inboxes

#20

Post by fowl2 »

saagarjha wrote: post #10

> Zuckerberg’s profile doesn’t show a button to add him as a friend on desktop, and the button is grayed out and disabled on mobile. Of course he has special rules for himself. Fun fact: you cannot block Mark Zuckerberg on Facebook. It just won't let you.

Everyone can controls who can send them friend requests.
Post reply on HN