221–230 of 620 posts
I have a hotkey in i3wm: bindsym $mod+backslash exec "xcalib -i -a" which inverts all colors (btw, I have to `killall redshift` because of a bug). When colors are inverted, I feel almost undisturbed at any gruesome content (for me it's like seeing screenshots of Quake 2 with buggy GPU drivers), yet I can still easily recognise whether the content is disturbing. And when it's a video, I play it at ≥2x speed so that it…
This was a valuable article to read. Facebook is enormously valuable. They made something like $15B in net income in the last four quarters. Content moderators are a necessary condition for that profit. If kiddie porn, gore and animal cruelty flooded the network, it would cease to be a destination visited by people that advertisers will pay to reach. And yet, there are two sets of entry-level knowledge workers at Fac…
I thought the same thing -- that once content is moderated, it should be trivial to block exactly the same content from being posted and moderated again. What a waste.
Neither the text nor the image themselves would be ban worthy but in combination it is boot-worthy. Extrapolating has Scunthorpe problem issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that's kinda how free markets work.
Except we don't have those Ayn Rand-ian free markets for a reason. We have a whole host of workers rights in the U.S. because society realized that leaving everything up to free markets to take advantage of what they can may lead to bad outcomes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I imagine many people wouldn't. It's potentially shortsighted to have that sort of myopic utility maximizing mindset when it causes you to debase other values like social stability. But in a society that advocates the hustle, I gotta get mine, right? /s
Isn't that something that should be resolved at the social or government level? As opposed to Walmart? The market is good at some things, and that which the market does not naturally provide... we morally expect/beg for? Doesn't a situation like this ask for social or government intervention?
As I've spent the last few years pissing away absurd amounts of time on the platform, gotten in countless fruitless arguments, and seen the truly vile and toxic elements of my communities exposed and worn like a badge, this is an idea I've been thinking an awful lot about. After reading this article, I've never been more certain of that statement.
I would have thought they would have the best filtering AI and dataset the world has to offer, to avoid having those moderators to work like this.
The only reasonable explanation I can imagine is that Facebook is doing everything they can to avoid having to implement a "Content ID" system like YouTube. Now why exactly they don't want to do that can only be speculated.
It’s strange how quiet the pro-Facebookers become on threads like these. Yesterday, we saw a lot of energy around Libra on both sides of the Facebook spectrum. I’d love to hear an argument from someone defending this company that isn’t “everybody does it.”
Just a warning - I found even a short description of some of the videos they had to watch fairly disturbing. I don't think I could do that job for very long - let alone in a badly run, high pressure environment with low wages.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Queue up the next Verge article in 6 months: "Facebook discriminates on the basis of mental health"
I mean they really should be in this case. This is not a normal job.
That way the company presented the job as is. And if the candidate takes the job, they own some of the responsibility for the consequences.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Can anyone at Facebook speak to whether engineers are aware of the working conditions of moderators, and agitate to improve their lot? They are passively aware but mostly don't care. The engineers who express frustration are in the vast minority. Most engineers are just super happy about their own situations, very focused on PSCs, and try to keep to their own stuff. Any internal frustrations are channelled towards…
PSCs?