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

Mark Zuckerberg: The Internet needs new rules. Let’s start in these four areas

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 266 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: The Internet needs new rules. Let’s start in these four areas

#51

Post by austincheney »

marcrosoft wrote: post #17

The four points being: * harmful content * election integrity * privacy * data portability I think Zuckerberg's intent is to dilute the real issue (privacy) with these other three points. FB has a bad record when it comes to privacy and they are actively taking measures against it. For example, they lobby against privacy laws [1]. They create shadow profiles and they make it difficult or impossible to delete your acc…

The problem is even more simple than that. Simply, is the web public or private? The answer in practice is that the web is what ever the service provider needs it to be, which is a shitty answer and why these kinds of problems are present in the first place. The answer to these problems is also simple, but likely more aggressive than Facebook would prefer.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: The Internet needs new rules. Let’s start in these four areas

#52

Post by hesk »

Let's address these one by one.

Data portability is kinda useless if all your contacts are on a single network. What we really need are federated social networks.

If Facebook loves the GDPR so much why did they move all non-EU users out of its scope when it came into force?

A simple fix to get rid of targeted political ads would be to scrap the ad network altogether. Of course, this is anathema to Facebook because they would stop making money.

Finally, the problem with harmful speech is not that there are multiple services but that the definition of harmful speech differs around the world. What good are independent bodies in the US that regulate Facebook when other countries want different standards?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: The Internet needs new rules. Let’s start in these four areas

#54

Post by humanrebar »

Barrin92 wrote: post #50
aestetix wrote: post #40

"Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity." -- Mark Zuckerberg[1], defending Facebook's "Real" Name policy. Based on his total disregard for privacy and his clear thirst for power, I want nothing coming from him or his company to ever influence actual policies. [1] http://www.siliconbeat.com/2014/01/30/quoted-mark-zuckerberg...

I agree with Mark as far as social networks are concerned. The 'social' part of the name is important, and social relationships cannot function without some sort of stake. Having a unified identity guarantees that people are held accountable for what they say, it reduces fraud, trolling, and it means people have 'skin in the game' when participating in a social environment, it's the basis for trust.

> ...social relationships cannot function without some sort of stake...

Depends on what you mean by "function". Enjoying cat photos or playing a round of a video game doesn't take any stake at all.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: The Internet needs new rules. Let’s start in these four areas

#55

Post by int_19h »

Barrin92 wrote: post #50
aestetix wrote: post #40

"Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity." -- Mark Zuckerberg[1], defending Facebook's "Real" Name policy. Based on his total disregard for privacy and his clear thirst for power, I want nothing coming from him or his company to ever influence actual policies. [1] http://www.siliconbeat.com/2014/01/30/quoted-mark-zuckerberg...

I agree with Mark as far as social networks are concerned. The 'social' part of the name is important, and social relationships cannot function without some sort of stake. Having a unified identity guarantees that people are held accountable for what they say, it reduces fraud, trolling, and it means people have 'skin in the game' when participating in a social environment, it's the basis for trust.

But in social networks IRL, it doesn't really work that way - because real life bubbles mostly don't intersect, it's as if the person had a separate identity in each. Online social media effectively pushes all the bubbles together, which transforms accountability into witch hunts, where a singular misstep is quickly propagated and results in outrage mobs across all the bubbles. Thus, the scope of social ostracism is rarely proportionate to the transgression.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: The Internet needs new rules. Let’s start in these four areas

#56

Post by fromMars »

morley wrote: post #49
marcrosoft wrote: post #17

The four points being: * harmful content * election integrity * privacy * data portability I think Zuckerberg's intent is to dilute the real issue (privacy) with these other three points. FB has a bad record when it comes to privacy and they are actively taking measures against it. For example, they lobby against privacy laws [1]. They create shadow profiles and they make it difficult or impossible to delete your acc…

I think HN in particular is too focused on "loss of privacy" as an issue. It seems to me that loss of privacy, while concerning, hasn't caused a fraction of the tangible, measurable problems in the west that misinformation and echo chambers have caused. Loss of privacy hasn't caused anti-immigrant fear-mongering, or conspiracy theorists harassing school shooting victims, or people not vaccinating their children. In a…

I agree. I am not sure that any substantial "loss of privacy" has even occurred.

Just to posit an example, Banks and Credit Bureaus have long tracked extensive information about us including where we have lived, worked, and what we have purchased.

Should we be able to have our credit history erased from Credit Bureau and Banks in the name of privacy?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: The Internet needs new rules. Let’s start in these four areas

#57

Post by humanrebar »

marcrosoft wrote: post #17

The four points being: * harmful content * election integrity * privacy * data portability I think Zuckerberg's intent is to dilute the real issue (privacy) with these other three points. FB has a bad record when it comes to privacy and they are actively taking measures against it. For example, they lobby against privacy laws [1]. They create shadow profiles and they make it difficult or impossible to delete your acc…

> Election integrity is a media hysteria. Nobody is forcing anyone to vote in a particular way.

And, importantly, all the 'solutions' I've seen amount to either public or private censorship with little direct accountability to the public and insufficient due process (1). That doesn't seem like a clear improvement over the status quo.

(1) Yes, even private governance needs due process protections.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: The Internet needs new rules. Let’s start in these four areas

#58

Post by fromMars »

duxup wrote: post #31
tus87 wrote: post #9

Translation: the deep state is very concerned the internet allows people to bypass the establishment media and create influence that affects the outcomes of democratic elections in ways that upset the elite.

What do you mean by "deep state"? I've seen it used so casually and often that feel like that has become a meaningless phrase that amounts to "anything established in any way, anywhere, that I don't like and I wish to add a negative connotation to those things, people, or whatever I don't like".

There are too many code words in that post to take it seriously. What did he mean by "elite", etc.?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: The Internet needs new rules. Let’s start in these four areas

#59

Post by moomin »

Barrin92 wrote: post #50
aestetix wrote: post #40

"Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity." -- Mark Zuckerberg[1], defending Facebook's "Real" Name policy. Based on his total disregard for privacy and his clear thirst for power, I want nothing coming from him or his company to ever influence actual policies. [1] http://www.siliconbeat.com/2014/01/30/quoted-mark-zuckerberg...

I agree with Mark as far as social networks are concerned. The 'social' part of the name is important, and social relationships cannot function without some sort of stake. Having a unified identity guarantees that people are held accountable for what they say, it reduces fraud, trolling, and it means people have 'skin in the game' when participating in a social environment, it's the basis for trust.

Having separate identities is literally “being a woman on the internet 101” so forgive me if I don’t think it’s a solution to trolling.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg: The Internet needs new rules. Let’s start in these four areas

#60

Post by cjhopman »

hesk wrote: post #52

Let's address these one by one. Data portability is kinda useless if all your contacts are on a single network. What we really need are federated social networks. If Facebook loves the GDPR so much why did they move all non-EU users out of its scope when it came into force? A simple fix to get rid of targeted political ads would be to scrap the ad network altogether. Of course, this is anathema to Facebook because th…

> What we really need are federated social networks.

If you care about privacy and how your data is used and who has access to it, federated networks are probably the worst. You do get some benefits for the loss of those things, though.

Post reply on HN