Zuckerberg: I just shared the following note with our employees • Hacker News Board

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

#171

Post by belorn » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 6:15 PM UTC

_y5hn wrote: post #165

belorn wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can define Nation X as the US and Target Y as US citizen and go down different scenarios and see when it becomes the right kind of violence. A peaceful protest (this should be universally agreed on as a very bad target for military use). Rioters that burn cars and loot stores. White supremacists marching in the street. Exact same actions as any above but we call it terrorism. US citizens doing terrorism but which…

X=Y Target is not people, but actions in specific time and place. Measures need to be justified and scrutinized.

When people talk treating everyone equal and banning speech that incite imminent violence, they don't talk about how they want exceptions when it is justified and scrutinized to incite imminent violence.

What is justified is also very subjective, an aspect which a lot of people brings up in discussions. Who get to decide when violence is justified? Is it the people, and if so, how should should we count the votes?

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

#172

Post by _y5hn » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 8:22 PM UTC

belorn wrote: post #171

_y5hn wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

X=Y Target is not people, but actions in specific time and place. Measures need to be justified and scrutinized.

When people talk treating everyone equal and banning speech that incite imminent violence, they don't talk about how they want exceptions when it is justified and scrutinized to incite imminent violence. What is justified is also very subjective, an aspect which a lot of people brings up in discussions. Who get to decide when violence is justified? Is it the people, and if so, how should should we count the votes?

It is not decided by direct democracy and not by dictatorship. If people involved are unable to act responsibly, they are the wrong people for the job.

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

#173

Post by rdiddly » Sat, Jun 06, 2020, 9:50 PM UTC

"We have work to do" in the last paragraph is exactly what he's said in every public apology for this or that.

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

#174

Post by runarberg » Sun, Jun 07, 2020, 1:17 AM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #169

runarberg wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My personal feed is not the issue here. The issue is how reactionary material keeps popping up in the feed of people who are susceptible into rallying behind it. The target area is so vast the you are bound to influence a lot of people. And the nature of the material only belonging to personal feeds makes scrutinizing by third parties impossible. All of this culminates into a really dangerous propaganda machine, espe…

This reading is not the most charitable, but what I read is basically this: You personally do not have a problem, but other less smart people are susceptible to this effect, and because each person is seeing only their own feed no one of their betters can check up on them. That sounds to me more like arrogance and exactly the kind of issue people rebel against when they mention they don't like experts.

Sorry, that was my fault. What I meant—and what I should have said—is: “No ones individual’s feed is the problem”, but I felt it was stronger to take a personal stance.

Giving the advice that you can be you can curate your own feed, and that is somehow a solution to the fact that millions of people are bombarded with reactionary misinformation is disingenuous at best.