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

Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 275 posts

Re: Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets

#221

Post by take_a_breath »

dontdoitpls wrote: post #197
skohan wrote: post #184

Classic regulatory capture. Once you're big enough lobby effectively, get legislators to pull the ladder up from behind you. This reminds me: I was working at a small health services startup in 2009. We had a good relationship with a number of small-scale healthcare providers, and when the ARRA was passed mandating that all providers move to electronic health records, we evaluated the concept of getting into that bus…

Blows my mind how many people ignore this problem when they demand more regulations.

It blows my mind how many people talk about over-regulation but almost never target regulatory capture. Examples include liquor laws in Indiana and Texas not allowing Tesla to sell cars direct-to-customer.

Re: Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets

#222

Post by crocodiletears »

fbelzile wrote: post #146
blunderkid wrote: post #16

There should be only one regulation for fb, display following warning on all pages/screens: Statutory Warning: This product is specifically designed to cause behavioral addiction so you are guided down a slippery slope of over consumption & that is how this company makes money. Overuse of this product is known to cause - anxiety, depression, low self esteem, constant craving for attention, short attention spans, inab…

Instead of regulation, maybe have browsers give you a warning on how the site your about to visit treats your personal data? We already have warnings in one way or another for: expired SSL certificates, lack of HTTPS, potential malware sites, if your account may have been breached (at least in Firefox), requests for your location or to show notifications, etc. The next logical step is to have our user agent warn us a…

I don't like the idea of my browser trying to protect me from social problems. I'm fine with my browser warning me that a site may be a risk to my machine, but I wouldn't trust my browser to display content to me reliably if my vendor was using it as a platform for any activism that isn't narrowly focused on keeping web standards open.

Perhaps I'd tolerate it as an opt-in, but even then, I'd be leary and start looking to switch because I think it's a bad precident to set, and (slippery slope warning) could go toward normalizing similar warnings for other issues.

If there's going to be a warning, I think it ought to be produced server-side.

Re: Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets

#223

Post by Seenso »

zimbatm wrote: post #191
Seenso wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> There should be only one regulation for fb, display following warning on all pages/screens: Statutory Warning: This product is specifically designed to cause behavioral addiction so you are guided down a slippery slope of over consumption & that is how this company makes money. Overuse of this product is known to cause - anxiety, depression, low self esteem, constant craving for attention, short attention spans, i…

Sounds great to me! We need more competition in the browser market.

> Sounds great to me! We need more competition in the browser market.

I'm almost certain that a Facebook browser would end up being Chromium with tight Facebook integration and extra-invasive data collection.

If Microsoft made the decision that it was too much work to maintain an independent browser engine and they already had one, I find it highly unlikely that Facebook would come to a different decision, given they're starting even farther behind.

Re: Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets

#224

Post by take_a_breath »

ch4s3 wrote: post #125
Dumblydorr wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does matter, look at who is in power after democratic elections where FB aided and abetted foreign nations to lie and deceive voters.

As much as I dislike FB I think this gives their ad platform far too much credit. How do you go about connecting ads viewed to votes, or even poling data? Of those views how many users engaged with the content?

Some people are obviously making a connection between the two or else there wouldn't be political spending on Facebook.

Re: Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets

#225

Post by banads »

threatofrain wrote: post #164
blunderkid wrote: post #16

There should be only one regulation for fb, display following warning on all pages/screens: Statutory Warning: This product is specifically designed to cause behavioral addiction so you are guided down a slippery slope of over consumption & that is how this company makes money. Overuse of this product is known to cause - anxiety, depression, low self esteem, constant craving for attention, short attention spans, inab…

If FB is addictive then you need the medical community in on this, but the fact that they aren’t means you’re left alone making medical arguments about the affects of FB. Maybe my speech, this very one, is designed to give you the flu. But when we’re talking stakes like serious medical claims, then we should have serious medical consensus.

FB has many jobs that require degrees in psychology, and there are also many scientific studies showing negative mental health effects of FB use

https://www.glassdoor.com/Jobs/Facebook-psychology-Jobs-EI_I...

Re: Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets

#226

Post by [deleted] »

coding123 wrote: post #136
blunderkid wrote: post #16

There should be only one regulation for fb, display following warning on all pages/screens: Statutory Warning: This product is specifically designed to cause behavioral addiction so you are guided down a slippery slope of over consumption & that is how this company makes money. Overuse of this product is known to cause - anxiety, depression, low self esteem, constant craving for attention, short attention spans, inab…

It might sound crazy but the govt DID this for cigarettes. Have you read the warning on cigarettes? I mean just look at the suggested box design here: https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/labeling-and-warning-st... I mean really look at that, and fully take in the notion that our government required that. That, that takes balls.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets

#227

Post by snarf21 »

scarface74 wrote: post #195
snarf21 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a new thing. The government chooses lots of things for us. What things are legal to buy, eat, etc. are decided for us. Sometimes people need to be protected from themselves. This is why we are going to lose on privacy. Fear-mongering over pedophiles will sway people instead of them looking into the laws and their effect on their lives.

And the government also "chose" that it is "good for us" if people of different races (miscengenation) weren't allowed to get married up until the 60's and that people shouldn't be allowed to have sex with someone of the same sex (sodomy) until the 80s. So now you're trusting the same government "to protect your privacy" that would like nothing more than if companies were forced to have backdoors to read secure messa…

That's a fair point and some things take time. But government officials change over time. New ideas come in. I'm not sure who I trust less, FB or the government but government moves more slowly. Companies can (and have... and continue...) to manipulate us on a constant basis. I trust them less.

Re: Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets

#228

Post by riffic »

Dumblydorr wrote: post #121
gargron wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The next generation of social networks is already here. It's decentralized and open-source. Mastodon, Pleroma, PeerTube, loads more, all part of the same network, the fediverse.

I'm a regular HN user, deleted FB three years ago, I've never even heard of any of those sites.

good opportunity for you to learn about something new then. ActivityPub is a W3C recommendation and is the protocol powering a diverse and healthy ecosystem of social networking sites.

Re: Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets

#229

Post by scarface74 »

snarf21 wrote: post #227
scarface74 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the government also "chose" that it is "good for us" if people of different races (miscengenation) weren't allowed to get married up until the 60's and that people shouldn't be allowed to have sex with someone of the same sex (sodomy) until the 80s. So now you're trusting the same government "to protect your privacy" that would like nothing more than if companies were forced to have backdoors to read secure messa…

That's a fair point and some things take time. But government officials change over time. New ideas come in. I'm not sure who I trust less, FB or the government but government moves more slowly. Companies can (and have... and continue...) to manipulate us on a constant basis. I trust them less.

Companies don’t have the power of law to enforce anything. The government does.

How hard is it to click “logout”? Do you really need Big Government intruding in every little area of our life?

Re: Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets

#230

Post by 52-6F-62 »

fbelzile wrote: post #146
blunderkid wrote: post #16

There should be only one regulation for fb, display following warning on all pages/screens: Statutory Warning: This product is specifically designed to cause behavioral addiction so you are guided down a slippery slope of over consumption & that is how this company makes money. Overuse of this product is known to cause - anxiety, depression, low self esteem, constant craving for attention, short attention spans, inab…

Instead of regulation, maybe have browsers give you a warning on how the site your about to visit treats your personal data? We already have warnings in one way or another for: expired SSL certificates, lack of HTTPS, potential malware sites, if your account may have been breached (at least in Firefox), requests for your location or to show notifications, etc. The next logical step is to have our user agent warn us a…

Just adding my two cents regarding the DDG extension/add-on. I use it with Firefox and it works pretty brilliantly.
Post reply on HN