Earlier quoted context omitted.
Privacy in any unencrypted cloud service is an illusion.
What if someone in the group reported it ?
I suppose it's possible but unlikely. I'd be shocked if that were true.
Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal
371–380 of 444 posts
Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal
#372I've known several people that would no longer work for Facebook, but the Cambridge Analytica isn't the biggest concern. It's the fact that they are censoring people, even within private groups. I have a friend that jokingly said (in a private group) that men are vile pigs. We knew she was joking - it was good natured. Yet, Facebook issued her a warning and removed her post and threatened her with a ban. First they c…
How did FB find out about her post?
I have no idea. I would guess they have an algorithm that checks every post and makes determinations.
I would have thought a private group would be immune, but apparently not.
Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal
#373I've known several people that would no longer work for Facebook, but the Cambridge Analytica isn't the biggest concern. It's the fact that they are censoring people, even within private groups. I have a friend that jokingly said (in a private group) that men are vile pigs. We knew she was joking - it was good natured. Yet, Facebook issued her a warning and removed her post and threatened her with a ban. First they c…
For a detailed nuanced piece about how FB handles some of this complexity check this out: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/02/men-are-scum-inside-... FB has its problems, but I generally find the negative press overstated and wonder if Zuck's approach to interact with the press and congress actually backfires (compare to the other companies which largely ignore them). I appreciate how often he talks to the press…
>For a detailed nuanced piece [...]
I don't see any nuance, I see invented complexity masquerading as something sophisticated.
This article is written as if they're trying to suss out the perfect boundaries along which to apply censorship. That frame of thinking is a con. They will never have a perfect censorship implementation because there is no win state.
Let me back up: As you read this, facebook has a censorship policy. What would it take for facebook to be know they're done arguing over what does or doesn't get deleted? How do they know when the censorship policy isn't good enough? Advertiser pressure, press pressure and political pressure. i.e. fashion.
It should have been obvious to everyone present at (or read about) the meeting in this article where Facebook attempted to invent a principled stance that allows casual misandry while banning similarly-tempered casual misogyny. But I'm perfectly willing to believe Facebook can't see it. I can explain.
Facebook's stance towards nudity has a very clever property (that is almost certainly unintentional). It allows users to lie to themselves. Facebook could automatically hide nudity to everyone who isn't an opted-in adult, and still throw it behind a twitter-style click gate so there is no accidental NSFW at W. But they don't. They'd have to add an "I'm not a prude" checkbox. And THERE'S the rub. The lack of such an option lets people uncomfortable with nudity tell themselves that they're not the kind of person that's uncomfortable with nudity. The want to think they're sex-positive enough to have nudity, and just a reasonable person who doesn't mind if it happens to be banned. Even more importantly, it lets people them avoid thinking about the question "am I so uncomfortable with nudity that the idea of other people - the WRONG PEOPLE - seeing it makes me uncomfortable?"
Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal
#374Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google has your data and uses it for themselves. Facebook has your data and gives it (or leaks it) to anyone with money.
They both sell ads and offer advanced targeting options. Very similar businesses.
Facebook didn't get in hot water for selling ads.
Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal
#375I'm not sure how the journalist fact checked this, but in 2016 CMU sent 12 people to Facebook[1]. In 2018 CMU sent 27 people to Facebook[2]. [1] https://www.cmu.edu/career/documents/2016_one_pagers/scs/scs... [2] https://www.cmu.edu/career/documents/2018_one_pagers/scs/1-P...
Those are just SCS numbers. The CNBC article cites all of CMU. Facebook recruits from the math, engineering (EE), and info systems programs as well.
Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is also an issue with the 'evaporative' effect. If no one who works there is seen as 'ethical', then you'd expect the people that do work there to be unethical/dubious. So, trying to get a promotion is then more cut-throat, the lunch crew has a few more 'jerks', the HR is a bit more biting, etc. Your hackels get raised and you are more suspicious of the motivations (however begnin) of others. Better to just not…
Can confirm. Worked there. Deeply disenchanted with the ethics of many people especially in the product, marketing, and (as you would guess) senior leadership groups.
Thanks for the input! I know you're on a throwaway account, but any stories or context for a Friday morning?
Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal
#377Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and then lost its way sometime between 2009-2012. Tahrir Square was the high water mark of the old school techies. The failure of tech to effect real and lasting change really hasn't been understood by the techies, even still. That optimism about the future and tech's role in it, is gone.
When you spend enough time in the future, you forget all the shitty things about the past that tech has changed and only notice the problems that stand out today. Not sure if you're specifically referencing Tahrir Square with your second sentence, but tech has definitely led to real, lasting and immensely positive change worldwide.
Oh yeah, but I think all the wind went out of the sails after Tahrir Square.
Before, there was such optimisim about tech. Nothing could stop it. Everything would be just better.
Look, the oppressed are rising up together! Look, medicine is getting better! Look, we're talking at each other, not shooting and hurting!
The arab spring was the high point, the proofed pudding.
After the failures there, sure, yes, tech has helped, has advanced the world. But that optimisim that was in Tahrir Square never came back. FB was a way to talk with each other and be a 3rd space, now it's a Skinner box. Wikipedia was the nascent Enclycopedia Galactica, now it's just mostly good and sometimes suspicious. Google wasn't evil, now it works with China to make Orwell sigh.
Things are chugging along, yes. But before people actually thought they could change the world for the better, now tech just has mortgages.
Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal
#378They are still php based business.
Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't forget about WhatsApp. It was the main channel of dissemination of fake news in Brazilian Election. Now we have a global warning denier in the presidency and Amazon deforestation is reaching record levels. Sure there isn't any company in the FAANG that is an altruistic enterprise, but to be only pure evil one is Facebook. What really impresses me is that there's still a lot of talented people working there.
> Don't forget about WhatsApp. It was the main channel of dissemination of fake news in Brazilian Election. How would you solve this problem?
Some suggestions: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/17/opinion/brazil-election-f...
Re: Facebook has struggled to hire talent since the Cambridge Analytica scandal
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
That seems obvious. If you don't use Facebook you're pretty much outside of the Facebook tracking network with a few exceptions wrt Facebook cookie tracking which you can kill with a browser plugin like Facebook Disconnect. With Google, the tracking surface area is orders of magnitude more ubiquitous - everything from Search to YouTube to Chrome to Email to Android and on and on. Facebook is almost (but not quite) ne…
> If you don't use Facebook you're pretty much outside of the Facebook tracking network Not if any of your friends use Facebook.
That's a pretty considerable exaggeration. There is a big difference between "I have friends that use Facebook" and "I have friends who take pictures of me and upload them to Facebook" or "I have friends that upload their contact list to Facebook" and even then, the amount of data that Facebook can extract from you in that way is pretty minimal relative to just about any other activity people commonly engage in online.