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

Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 152 posts

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#81

Post by [deleted] »

Sebguer wrote: post #76
randyrand wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did Facebook cause this to be made? The wording implies that it's meant to address the administrators that demanded such an ad be made. The ones who decided to make it. Who caused it to be made. Facebook is just the hardware store in this sense. They provide tools. And you make the billboard. They did not cause this to be made. edit: They still may be responsible for publishing it, which is illegal. I would think…

Facebook likely restricts and prevents other kinds of illegal ads. Why shouldn't they be responsible for restricting and preventing this kind of illegal ad?

[deleted]

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#82

Post by zwkrt »

notacoward wrote: post #46
LarryDarrell wrote: post #32

We have regulations on the books that are there as a result of 100 years of painful human experience. Wave a computer screen in someone's face and all of a sudden it's a different plane of existence and some people feel like these laws don't apply. I'm glad to see there is finally being some push back.

> some people feel like these laws don't apply That's catchy, but doesn't address the crucial question of which people should be held accountable for using a tool in a discriminatory way. You could argue that the publisher bears some or all of that responsibility, and I'd be fine with that, but shouldn't the advertisers bear some too? Why is HUD only going after Facebook and not them? Hint: the advertisers don't have…

Why do people have this notion that Facebook is some unbiased public space, like an undisturbed forest or a beach where passersby can pedal their wares or something? Facebook is like a dystopian shopping mall combined with Clockwerk Orange reeducation techniques.

Due to it's algorithmic nature, Facebook ultimately decides every single post, ad, like, and person you see, and in what order. Creating a housing ad and targeting white people is not like putting an ad on the smooth jazz station, it is like having a storefront in the rich-whites-only section of the Facebook mall. In fact it's even worse because other people don't even know the rich-whites-only section exists, since they can never see it, even if they are your friend! I actually have a hard time imagining how an online system could reinforce existing class and race structures any more than Facebook currently does, short of disallowing users to become friends if it detects that this would be financially disadvantageous to allow.

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#83

Post by notacoward »

will_brown wrote: post #70
notacoward wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if the tool/service is by its very nature both discriminatory Is it, in this case? Ad targeting has a zillion legitimate use cases, including some that are outright humanitarian. Yes, it can also be used in a discriminatory way, but Facebook already tried to address that in the cases HUD only nominally cares about. Phone numbers and ZIP codes can also be (and often are) used as proxies for race. Should HUD go after…

I Agree certain ads can legitimately target on the basis of age, sex, race and religions. However, as a multi billion dollar ad company FB knows these options are illegal in other instances. I’m not even sure those other companies you mention are ad companies or give advertisers the option to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race and religion like Facebook. Last I used FB ads, the process included a submission…

> I’m not even sure those other companies you mention are ad companies

Why limit it to ad companies now? Two posts ago you mentioned any service that is "by its very nature both discriminatory..." without such limitation.

> the onus shifts to them

All of it? One hundred percent? Even though they are now taking measures to weed out these illegal ads? Again why is HUD only going after Facebook and not any other company or the advertisers themselves?

> it’s hard for them to bury their head in the sand

They haven't. They've already taken action on this exact matter, meeting the approval of ACLU and the Fair Housing Alliance. Since when does HUD really have a higher standard than those?

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#84

Post by cr0sh »

mcguire wrote: post #55
bilbo0s wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's likely WHY they announced they were getting rid of extremists. They would have had knowledge of these charges today, as well as knowledge of other things the government is looking into vis-a-vis their business. So I'd imagine their lawyers are preempting a lot of things because they seem to be entering an age where there is potential to be charged even if you are secondarily associated with criminal activity.…

" ...you never know what some person you provided a service for might do. " Well, you are in the business of knowing everything inferrable about all people, everywhere.

> knowing everything inferrable about all people, everywhere.

Which makes me wonder if the FAANGs and others will go this route - basically robo-ban people from their services who meet certain criteria (or maybe no criteria at all - maybe some kind of neural network or something decides who should be allowed to use the service and who shouldn't).

Make the ban based on various obvious and non-obvious metrics. Like credit score, comments or whatnot made using the service, how they treated other people or products in their comments - as well as things like how they typed, or moved their mouse around, or other info from their browser (or even side-channel info if that can be done from a browser - which it probably can).

So once banned - even if they tried to go back with a completely different computer, home address, IP, etc - they'd still eventually get flagged as being banned in the past.

Then have a service that all of them use to make a centralized "blacklist".

It wouldn't surprise me if they don't already have this in testing in some manner.

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#85

Post by ams6110 »

Brain_Thief wrote: post #9

It's important to keep in mind that FaceBook is an enterprise founded by an individual who appears to have many of the traits of sociopathy, and that an overwhelming amount of shady, anti-privacy, socially-destructive, and downright exploitative behavior has been credibly attributed to them over the years. The second sentence of TFA claims that the HUD's opinion of FaceBook is that the company "...enables and encoura…

I agree. Facebook is no doubt a great place to learn about building software at massive scale while earning a ton of money. But at some point you have to step back and look at the impact of what you are doing.

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#86

Post by ams6110 »

randyrand wrote: post #78
jlmorton wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that it doesn't matter whether Facebook was involved in the creation of the ads, whether they support the ads, or anything else. They have a duty not to allow their platform to be used in this way, and until recently, they were failing to do that.

Maybe. Or maybe not. Can you find/cite the law that requires that? edit: ah. tunnel vision. yes the other parts of the statute would cover FB as partially culpable here. particularly the 'publish' part.

It's right above in this subthread.

"To make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed, or published"

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#87

Post by dustindiamond »

notacoward wrote: post #58
bobydonahue wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree, if the tool/service is by its very nature both discriminatory and a 'black box', the company who made/provides it is responsible for what it does. You can't just make millions selling an ethically questionable service and shift the blame to your customers who you kept in the dark.

> if the tool/service is by its very nature both discriminatory Is it, in this case? Ad targeting has a zillion legitimate use cases, including some that are outright humanitarian. Yes, it can also be used in a discriminatory way, but Facebook already tried to address that in the cases HUD only nominally cares about. Phone numbers and ZIP codes can also be (and often are) used as proxies for race. Should HUD go after…

“ZIP codes can also be (and often are) used as proxies for race. ”

It is called ‘redlining’.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#88

Post by 40acres »

Big tech is going to have to learn how to balance automation with social history. Race based housing discrimination has a long history in America, it's hard to believe that no one in a position of power to question these methods brought up how these ads could be used to discriminate.

The biggest benefit that diversity will have on big tech is alternative views that prevent these embarrassments from occuring. Seems every few months another company comes to the realization that it's models simply don't have the social context to be effective.

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#89

Post by BaronVonSteuben »

briandear wrote: post #63
bilbo0s wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> interestingly enough I never saw an ad that explicitly listed race... ??? That must've just been Virginia? Where I lived in Houston, they listed unacceptable races all the time. (I suppose they didn't have to though, it was always the same two races listed.)

> Where I lived in Houston, they listed unacceptable races all the time. Definitely going to need a citation for this. I grew up in Houston and never saw an add specifying "unacceptable races" -- perhaps 50+ years ago maybe. My parents were in the rental business and we spent a lot of time looking at (and placing) ads -- never was race listed on an ad that I've ever seen for as long as I can remember (since the mid 1…

> there'll need to some proof that ... a city [is] racist

Not anymore. An accusation these days is the proof that a person/place/thing is racist. But if that's not enough, just look at how many people in Houston politically disagree with me. That's enough proof that they are racist because anyone who disagrees with me can't possibly have a different, valid perspective. The only possibility is that they are racist and evil and just want to hurt people. Therefore, Houston is racist. If that's still not enough, as a person of some color, I feel like Houston is racist, and that is definitely enough proof.

Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads

#90

Post by rock_hard »

Sebguer wrote: post #76
randyrand wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did Facebook cause this to be made? The wording implies that it's meant to address the administrators that demanded such an ad be made. The ones who decided to make it. Who caused it to be made. Facebook is just the hardware store in this sense. They provide tools. And you make the billboard. They did not cause this to be made. edit: They still may be responsible for publishing it, which is illegal. I would think…

Facebook likely restricts and prevents other kinds of illegal ads. Why shouldn't they be responsible for restricting and preventing this kind of illegal ad?

It's unreasonable to require a private company to do the governments job of policing and enforcing laws.

Nobody would consider forcing hammer manufactures to police their customers not to hurt people with said hammers either

Post reply on HN