The title of this article literally reads "Why do those with unlimited power not take steps to limit their power?".
Also, name ONE company with INFINITE resources.
Why do companies with unbounded resources still have terrible moderation?
11–20 of 159 posts
Re: Why do companies with unbounded resources still have terrible moderation?
#12It's like the difference between porn and art. You know it when you see it, but writing a rule for it is impossible.
You might not even know it if you see it! It might be dog whistles that you don't even understand until it's pointed out to you.
Check out old Mae West movies where she adheres to the letter of the Hayes Code yet always finds a saucy way to get her point across. A couple classics:
Reporter: "What do you think of foreign affairs?" West: "I'm all for 'em!"
"Is that a gun in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?"
Language is infinitely malleable. Algorithms don't stand a chance.
Re: Why do companies with unbounded resources still have terrible moderation?
#13There are two classes of users: normal people who want to use your service and people who actively weaponize it for their own ego. Those latter users have all the time in world and can defeat any attempt to stop them. This is because, online, time is the only resource that matters. You have a limited amount of this resource. Your company has a limited amount of this resource. Your normal users have a limited amount of this resource.
There is a discussion below about Flat Earthers having every right to speak -- and I agree. And in fact, I doubt anyone would truly care about Flat Earthers having their Flat Earth forum or even adding an occasional Flat Earth comment whenever NASA posts a round Earth photo. That's never been the problem. The problem is that some users don't stop there -- they're on a mission to change the world. They going to abuse your platform to the extreme to promote their views. Most big platforms right now have a huge mess of people tossing free bytes at each other.
If a small group of dedicated people wanted to ruin Hacker News for the rest of us, I have no doubt in my mind that they could. No amount of moderation could stop them. I've seen it first hand a few times with other services.
Re: Why do companies with unbounded resources still have terrible moderation?
#14[flagged]
Re: Why do companies with unbounded resources still have terrible moderation?
#15[flagged]
Why not ban both? I can't see the social utility in allowing either in a private forum.
Re: Why do companies with unbounded resources still have terrible moderation?
#16Moderation is indeed difficult, but automating moderation is a bar we need not even get to yet, when even policies that are relatively easy to enforce keep getting watered down. Just today, for example, it was revealed that Facebook is no longer going to prohibit false factual claims in paid political advertisements -- even if those falsehoods are determined by generally-respected fact checkers. See, e.g., https://po…
The problem is, "respected fact checkers" are anything but. The HN discussion you linked to actually mentions some interesting things that these fact checkers omitted.
Factcheck.org claims: "there is no evidence that Hunter Biden was ever under investigation or that his father pressured Ukraine to fire Shokin on his behalf."
However, the fired Ukranian prosecutor testified in court that "the truth is that I was forced out because I was leading a wide-ranging corruption probe into Burisma Holdings, a natural gas firm active in Ukraine and Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, was a member of the Board of Directors." [1]
Testimony taken under penalty of perjury is evidence, and factcheck.org was wrong to claim that there is no evidence.
[1] https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/463307-solomon-these-on...
Re: Why do companies with unbounded resources still have terrible moderation?
#17Simple answer: because moderation doesn't move the business needle.
Re: Why do companies with unbounded resources still have terrible moderation?
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are objective truths. It doesn't matter if you think the earth is flat. It's not. And I really wish this was a contrived example
The person who believes (or says they do) that the earth is flat, has every right to do so. I agree with you, they're objectively wrong. I find it arrogant to say they have no right to speak because of that, and will not.
Ok, but now replace flat earthers with people advocating and organizing meetings for people interested in joining ISIS.
Why do we want a world where platforms protect videos promoting and glorifying beheadings, exactly?
Re: Why do companies with unbounded resources still have terrible moderation?
#19Moderation is indeed difficult, but automating moderation is a bar we need not even get to yet, when even policies that are relatively easy to enforce keep getting watered down. Just today, for example, it was revealed that Facebook is no longer going to prohibit false factual claims in paid political advertisements -- even if those falsehoods are determined by generally-respected fact checkers. See, e.g., https://po…
The problem is, "respected fact checkers" are anything but. The HN discussion you linked to actually mentions some interesting things that these fact checkers omitted. Factcheck.org claims: "there is no evidence that Hunter Biden was ever under investigation or that his father pressured Ukraine to fire Shokin on his behalf." However, the fired Ukranian prosecutor testified in court that "the truth is that I was force…
I agree that there might be evidence, and Factcheck.org may have gotten that wrong. But perfection isn't the bar we're aiming for, nor is it practically attainable - "usually correct" is reasonable.
Moreover, let's not confuse testimonial evidence with fact. They are not identical. In our judicial system, the jury is the finder of fact; they weigh the evidence to make conclusions.
We also can't let a minor technical error in a tangential report invalidate the rest of what otherwise is a lie -- specifically the primary bold claim in the example advertisement that's at the heart of the article.
Re: Why do companies with unbounded resources still have terrible moderation?
#20My "truth" is not your "truth" is not someone else's "truth". None of us is wise enough to tell someone else that their truth is wrong, so expecting someone to write software that is would be asking a bit much. Filtering out opinions the majority doesn't want to pay to hear is simpler and more lucrative anyway.
There are objective truths. It doesn't matter if you think the earth is flat. It's not. And I really wish this was a contrived example
Which truths are objective? Who decides that?
From the spectrum of Math -> Physics -> Chemistry -> Biology -> Psychology, where do you draw the line? This isn't an easy question.