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

Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 174 posts

Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees

#61

Post by SamReidHughes »

flyinglizard wrote: post #18
iandanforth wrote: post #9

You can unilaterally make critical decisions that favor conservative supporters, but to make common sense decisions that protect democracy you need to set up review boards? If you still participate in this pestilential quagmire of a social network, delete your account today.

As a non-user of Facebook (and a non-American), I'm curious to hear what kind of critical decisions favored conservative supporters? It seems like giving any voice to conservatives is considered a PR suicide right now. I'd be surprised if FB did that. (whether this is only within the tech world or a broader point of view in America will soon be discovered come elections time)

They don't do as much censorship of conservatives as liberal censors would like.

Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees

#62

Post by tamaharbor »

coliveira wrote: post #5

Nothing is really being announced. He said they will discuss a few things but what will come out of these discussions is not guaranteed. Great way to say you're doing something without doing anything.

Kind of like naming a street “Martin Luther King Jr Blvd”.

Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees

#64

Post by lazyant »

> I have confidence in the election integrity efforts we've implemented since 2016. We've played a role in protecting many elections and now have some of the most advanced systems in the world.

You have to be f kidding me. Voter suppression (asking for paid fines, takin out poll places in particular communities), gerrymandering, foreign interference etc etc

Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees

#65

Post by harikb »

chrisco255 wrote: post #49
slantedview wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If the cost (monetary and one’s credibility) of publishing a Social post matched that of publishing a book, we wouldn’t be here discussing this.

If we allow anyone with opposing thumbs to spew garbage online, platform have some responsibility to have some limits or require making source/author public

Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees

#66

Post by DevX101 »

greatwhitenorth wrote: post #41

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.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_T%C3%A9l%C3%A9vision_Lib...

Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees

#67

Post by omgJustTest »

chrisco255 wrote: post #49
slantedview wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Books don't learn your preferences, dont actively expoloit your addictions or allow you to instantly find a group of people who claim those addictions are normal.

Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees

#68

Post by chrisco255 »

runarberg wrote: post #54
greatwhitenorth wrote: post #41

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.

Most platforms do some kind of moderation, and when a platform is as pervasive as facebook, it becomes essential. We’ve already seen how a lack of moderation on facebook influenced the 2016 election. So it is not hard to argue that facebook’s negligence is already causing significant harm to our democracy.

This is how you moderate your feed on Facebook: if you don't like someone and what they have to say, unfriend them. Problem solved.

Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees

#69

Post by bagacrap »

greatwhitenorth wrote: post #41

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.

Isn't "slippery slope" considered a logical fallacy? Until fb deletes something and by doing so clearly causes harm to society, let's not assume that any-moderation-whatsoever is evil.

Re: Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees

#70

Post by saltedonion »

greatwhitenorth wrote: post #41

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.

Facebook moderates a lot of content already. Read their community guidelines and almost anything that’s non advertiser friendly is not allowed.

I agree fb should not moderate content too heavily handedly such that it wrongfully suppresses free speech, and consumers should choose a platform that is healthy for society, but it might be too much to ask for the average consumer.

You also need to realized fbs recommendation engine corners people into ideological echo chambers.

Post reply on HN