Earlier quoted context omitted.
Neither of those require years of education and training.
Does being a Facebook moderator?
The comment was in regards to paying Engineers $30k/yr.
Facebook moderators break NDAs to expose working conditions
601–610 of 620 posts
Re: Facebook moderators break NDAs to expose working conditions
#602Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s fundamental that some members of the public are problems. By prohibiting the content but keeping the people around, they are curating a culture where predators are allowed to roam on the platform as long as they don’t cross a specific line. They do this because acknowledging and dealing with bad users would also mean impacting fake users that make them money with ad fraud, growth metrics and ginning up engagemen…
I don’t get the point of animal torture videos. The asking of meat consumed in the world is ludicrous. Eating meat is supporting animal torture in a way. Just saying.
Eating meat is part of life, no one is torturing them. Torture is for a reason or for fun. There is a reason some animals are raised and used for food and its not to have fun torturing them.
I let you live your way, don't try to force others to live your way by using "scare tactics".
Re: Facebook moderators break NDAs to expose working conditions
#603Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are plenty of invasive species that I'm 100% in support of eradicating from their invaded territories. This is no justification for cruelty of any kind, nor promoting cruelty, which this video and Facebook does by leaving it posted. No assumptions needed. Assume that you are 100% correct, the species is undesirable invasive and that is the proper procedure. Repeatedly bashing their head while the creature is ob…
User's account is new and the name is "iBasher" (iguana basher?). Proceed with caution.
Oops, yup, I don't even usually check user names, not accustomed to trolls on here.
Some of the responses and voting patterns are indeed starting to indicate that an infestation of trolls is starting...
Re: Facebook moderators break NDAs to expose working conditions
#604Earlier quoted context omitted.
A local healthcare system has a similar policy: PTO (paid time off) is not differentiated between sick days vs. other days off. They don't offer any sort of maternity/paternity leave, aside from what the US Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) requires, which is six weeks unpaid time off. Even worse, they require employees to burn up all of their accrued PTO days before taking any unpaid FMLA time. So you have new parents…
FMLA is 12 weeks unpaid.
[deleted]
Re: Facebook moderators break NDAs to expose working conditions
#605Earlier quoted context omitted.
"We have met the enemy and he is us." https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/49/Pogo_-_Earth_... Shutting down FB will just create this problem in the next popular social media platform. This is a problem that needs to be solved, and shutting companies down won't do it.
That's like saying there's no point in putting out house fires, because there's always going to be somewhere else that catches on fire. When a social gathering (whether its a party at a club or a riot in the streets) exceeds capacity and becomes dangerous, destructive, and out of control the police shut it down for the good of public safety.
That's the opposite of what I'm saying. I'm saying you need to put out the fire not just let it burn down and build a new house. Houses burn, find a way to put them out, don't just plan on creating new ones.
Re: Facebook moderators break NDAs to expose working conditions
#606Earlier quoted context omitted.
It makes me aware of a curious dichotomy about content moderation on Facebook. On one hand, they have publicly committed to stem the flow of "Fake News", whatever that means, on their platform. Now on the other hand, we have this article about the suffering of contractors who's task is to block content that is too real. I guess this places Facebook's platform into a category with theme parks like Disney Land, where t…
Very few people want to see real videos of animals being tortured. In fact it's their very realness that makes them especially horrifying.
Of course no one wants to see horrifying things. But current events force us to admit that Facebook is a platform for vast quantities of political speech. And if we're going to entertain political speech, we should be grown-ups and face reality; if we don't allow the horror to inform our discussions, if we turn away, then the horror will only grow.
Re: Facebook moderators break NDAs to expose working conditions
#607Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're view will change when you start putting numbers on it. I'm going to talk about the games in the app store example because it's the instance of the problem that I first thought about and it is easier to put a monetary value on an app than on a comment. Let's suppose Apple wants to make sure every game in their store gets at least 5 ratings. To do this they are going to pay people to play each game for 5…
I don’t understand your argument at all. Is 900k/year to curate a store that’s on almost all of their products (or even one) supposed to be a lot for Apple? Seems like a rounding error to me. Not too mention that the real benefit isn’t from finding gems but from not allowing rotten content to spoil your platform. If they(FAANGs) can poach neuroscientists with 7 figure salaries like we saw yesterday, they can afford t…
The confusion arises because I'm not at all talking about filtering rotten content (aka facebooks instance of the problem). I'm talking about sorting for good content, possibly identifying a niche hit in a stack of shovelware. On the surface these are very different tasks but they are both manifestations of what I'm calling the fundemental problem. The task of curating, that is identifying the content of incoming data to either sort or filter it, must still be done by hand and thus rarely if ever pays for itself. Sure 900k is a rounding error to Apple, but how much do they make off that 900k? And keep in mind the 900k figure was a bare minimum just to accomplish 5 ratings.
The issue is that if you want to identify content as "fun", "offensive", "dramatic", "tense", "crass" or any other of the myriad of labels that haven't been machine learned, very quickly the labor to generate these labels will cost more than the value generated by these labels.
Re: Facebook moderators break NDAs to expose working conditions
#608Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why I mentioned an appeals process for requesting human review. As long as this exists and actually leads to human review, I'd much rather wait a while for my videos to be posted if it means easing the burden on 15.000 people having to watch highly damaging content.
Why wouldn't the people who upload violent/pornographic content not always appeal their videos? It's not like they're accidentally posting banned content. This would lead to nothing more than a slight delay before it gets banned by a moderator, solving nothing.
> It's not like they're accidentally posting banned content.
They simply hope it ain't going to be flagged by another Facebook user or their AI.
Re: Facebook moderators break NDAs to expose working conditions
#609Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Said problem is that warehousing and distributing content scales insanely well but curation does not I don't think it's a problem any more than weather is a "problem" that required the invention of the roof. As far as user-generated content goes, it's easy to invent the hose, but the faucet is much more complex. It's irresponsible to provide only acceleration ("reach," "virality," etc.) for information without also…
I think you're view will change when you start putting numbers on it. I'm going to talk about the games in the app store example because it's the instance of the problem that I first thought about and it is easier to put a monetary value on an app than on a comment. Let's suppose Apple wants to make sure every game in their store gets at least 5 ratings. To do this they are going to pay people to play each game for 5…
Why would they keep all the other numbers the same? They could raise the cost to list an app. They could charge extra for a "verified by Apple" designation. Charging monthly fees to be listed in the app store at all. Any of these would raise the bar on mere submissions to the app store, and beyond that supply a positive signal to the end user. There are plenty more options along these lines, too, but conventional business practice is to preserve the illusion that the internet is $free.
I don't care how much it costs, though, and I don't think Zuck cares either. If FB remains unmoderated it will invariably turn in to a shithole and people will go elsewhere rather than wading through a bunch of racist anti-vax cartoons just to find out where their friends are meeting for lunch next week. FB has plenty of money to pay as many human moderators as it would take to stop complaints, in all languages, but they won't. Where FB might go bankrupt if they don't implement brakes on reach, they'd just as soon prefer to go bankrupt rather than hire humans to do the work.
Re: Facebook moderators break NDAs to expose working conditions
#610Earlier quoted context omitted.
>In the meantime, it should be illegal to operate a social network So what about the countless number of people whose livelihoods depend on social media in some capacity? They're supposed to just be fine with being irrevocably fucked over until the moral panic about social media subsides? (or, in your words, "we decide what is good for us all") Where does the small business owner who depends on a social network facto…
I hear you saying you don't believe social media is addictive. Will you please kindly open the "digital wellbeing" app (or whatever it's called on iOS) on your phone and share the number of hours you've used social networks over the last week?
I couldn't help but notice that your comment doesn't address the other parts of his argument, nor did you choose to respond to the earlier reply you received (by dragonwriter) outlining the legitimate flaws in the reasoning you provided with your initial opinion.
Social media has a lot of problems - even this article on just Facebook outlines a number of them [0] but I agree with the above poster in saying that you can't have a societal post-mortem analysis of the effects of social media given its very much _not dead_ state. Advocating that society just presses a 'shut down' button until "we collectively decide how we should proceed" is an entirely unrealistic scenario.