Unless something is illegal, Facebook or any website should allow the content. There will always be people who don't like a person or a viewpoint. It's a slippery slope to start moderating content that is not illegal.
Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees
41–50 of 174 posts
Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees
#42> I believe our platforms can play a positive role in helping to heal the divisions in our society, Facebook systematically promotes and propogates the most inflammatory content posted on its platform. Why? Because it is the most engaging. This is part of the intentional design of Facebook, and is the fundamental reason there are so many problematic things happening on the platform. Mark's "thoughts" on the topic do…
>Facebook systematically promotes and propogates the most inflammatory content posted on its platform. Why? Because it is the most engaging. This is part of the intentional design of Facebook, and is the fundamental reason there are so many problematic things happening on the platform.
Remove the word "Facebook" and change it with MSM. How is that okay?
Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees
#43> I believe our platforms can play a positive role in helping to heal the divisions in our society, Facebook systematically promotes and propogates the most inflammatory content posted on its platform. Why? Because it is the most engaging. This is part of the intentional design of Facebook, and is the fundamental reason there are so many problematic things happening on the platform. Mark's "thoughts" on the topic do…
The problem is on all monetized platforms, esp those governed by ML. It will always degenerate into the worst of everything because of humanity ⓧ money equals sadness.
Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees
#44> I believe our platforms can play a positive role in helping to heal the divisions in our society, Facebook systematically promotes and propogates the most inflammatory content posted on its platform. Why? Because it is the most engaging. This is part of the intentional design of Facebook, and is the fundamental reason there are so many problematic things happening on the platform. Mark's "thoughts" on the topic do…
Facebook is hands down the most toxic platform I've encountered. It doesn't get as much flak as twitter because not every 'post' is visible to everyone, but go to your local town's facebook group. Boy oh boy is the stuff you find there is horrid.
Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees
#45> I believe our platforms can play a positive role in helping to heal the divisions in our society, Facebook systematically promotes and propogates the most inflammatory content posted on its platform. Why? Because it is the most engaging. This is part of the intentional design of Facebook, and is the fundamental reason there are so many problematic things happening on the platform. Mark's "thoughts" on the topic do…
The vast majority of FB users use it for staying in touch with friends and family. The cynical framing we encounter on HN isn't actually representative of the experience of most FB users.
Just because you haven't been radicalized on FB doesn't mean it's not a real problem.
Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees
#46> I believe our platforms can play a positive role in helping to heal the divisions in our society, Facebook systematically promotes and propogates the most inflammatory content posted on its platform. Why? Because it is the most engaging. This is part of the intentional design of Facebook, and is the fundamental reason there are so many problematic things happening on the platform. Mark's "thoughts" on the topic do…
Precisely. The business of fb is measured in MAU and DAU. These are their key metrics. The only things that drives these metrics are engagement. It’s basically the core of their business. And controversial items generate the most engagement. Unless it’s crossing the line in black and white terms for example like a beheading and most items don’t do that because the world is shades of grey they are good for business as they have the potential to generate more engagement. It’s basically good for business. What’s good for business may not be good for society. Sometime it is. Sometimes it’s not. Some people are ok with this and some are not.
Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees
#47Can I ask an honest question:
For those of your that aren't satisfied with his response, what do you want Facebook to do?
I haven't really been following this particular news story but I've been seeing a lot of anger against Facebook here and even on my LinkedIN feed.
Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees
#48"We're going to review"
"We're going to review"
"We're going to review"
"We're going to work on"
"We're going to review"
There's an old joke in Washington - when you want to look like you're doing something without doing anything at all, you commission a study (you review it).
Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
The vast majority of FB users use it for staying in touch with friends and family. The cynical framing we encounter on HN isn't actually representative of the experience of most FB users.
Just because you haven't been radicalized on FB doesn't mean it's not a real problem.
Yeah, same goes for books. You know how many people have been indoctrinated and persuaded by books? Let's burn those while we're at it.
Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees
#50I would love to see a set of (enforced) policies that are blind to the user in question, if such a thing could be. For example:
1. If a post is flagged for review, the account name/owner, social score, social graph, ad revenue, all of it, is hidden from the review person, team, or algorithm. The only history they would have access to is violation history, influencing some kind of recidivism penalty.
2. The duration and severity of the consequences of the violation is applied to the account automatically, and the "judge" is unaware of any backlash from the user / community.
3. Any protest or appeal is sent through the process, blind again.
I realize this is isn't nuanced or realistic in the slightest. What about mistakes? What about gamification of moderation processes? What about revenue impact? How could #1 be cleaned enough to fool anyone...
Still.