We can have democracy or we can have Facebook • Hacker News Board

Re: We can have democracy or we can have Facebook

#231

Post by nopriorarrests » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 2:07 PM UTC

solaarphunk wrote: post #222

nopriorarrests wrote: post #190

Honestly, americans who are thinking in all seriousness that "we can have democracy or we can have Facebook" are just deluding themselves. I wonder why facebook usage isn't "sowing discord" in Netherlands or, say, Germany, or other EU countries? From what I know, Facebook makes some real euros there, so adoption rate is quite high, but still, democracy is not "under attack" in these countries because of "automated ne…

Russia, and many populist/extremist political campaigns, literally manipulate European elections by employing content farms to push out controversial content. Internet Research Agency, Cambridge Analytica, etc. How do you think populist leaders gain such a large voice so quickly in those EU countries? You're kidding yourself, if you don't think the same tactics are being deployed in Europe, and amplified via platform…

>How do you think populist leaders gain such a large voice so quickly in those EU countries?

There are two options here.

1. People are not really happy with current status quo so they are looking to choose alternative leaders via elections, just as expected in democratic countries.

2. Some bad guys post bad stuff on Facebook and, like, 30% of german voters read it and march to election booth like zombies to vote the way bad guys said them to vote (for Alternative for Germany).

Well, you can pick which theory survives the Occam Razor test better.

EDIT: And oh, wrt to "a large voice so quickly" -- when a lot of stuff happens quickly (i mean, between 1 or 2 elections) -- yes, a lot of people can change their minds quickly. Turbulent times, you know. In stable times people change their minds slowly.

Re: We can have democracy or we can have Facebook

#232

Post by fwsgonzo » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 2:09 PM UTC

nopriorarrests wrote: post #190

Honestly, americans who are thinking in all seriousness that "we can have democracy or we can have Facebook" are just deluding themselves. I wonder why facebook usage isn't "sowing discord" in Netherlands or, say, Germany, or other EU countries? From what I know, Facebook makes some real euros there, so adoption rate is quite high, but still, democracy is not "under attack" in these countries because of "automated ne…

What makes you say that Facebook isn't doing those things in other countries? It really is. It's so easy to get caught in a web of scary news that agree with something you were already thinking, and never letting go.

I have friends and family members who will blame random problems on completely unrelated things like "new walk-way in large city" or "beheading in france". Meanwhile they will vehemently deny or state that real issues are overblown.

Re: We can have democracy or we can have Facebook

#233

Post by kerng » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 2:10 PM UTC

nopriorarrests wrote: post #190

Honestly, americans who are thinking in all seriousness that "we can have democracy or we can have Facebook" are just deluding themselves. I wonder why facebook usage isn't "sowing discord" in Netherlands or, say, Germany, or other EU countries? From what I know, Facebook makes some real euros there, so adoption rate is quite high, but still, democracy is not "under attack" in these countries because of "automated ne…

Europe isn't that different and its quickly getting worse in nearly every country, and of course also beyond country borders with things like Brexit.

Re: We can have democracy or we can have Facebook

#234

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 2:10 PM UTC

My first reaction was rather visceral based on the title, but I calmed down significantly after I read the article as the interviewee's position is a little more nuanced. Clearly, the article editor's made the title more clickable than it had to be. Guy is arguing that monopoly powers are bad and FB appears to match that definition.

Most importantly, the interviewee states "I think monopoly is a worldview." And I happen to agree as I have a tendency to believe that too much power in too few hands tends to make things worse.

The question naturally is.. is FB a monopoly?

Re: We can have democracy or we can have Facebook

#235

Post by Renaud » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 2:11 PM UTC

lldbg wrote: post #170

Renaud wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's banned (not just in France) because there is are existing laws against face-covering and religion is not above that. There is also a perfectly rational thinking behind a reciprocity of rights: if you can see me but I can't see you then we're not equal. There are also fierce debates around the role of women, ensuring equal opportunities in society, and the fact that ideology (whether religious or not) should not…

The french debate on the face-covering ban was well broadcasted internationally, and it was clear to me then that it was about burqas and niqabs. The law came in place when there were thousands of people wearing religious face coverings, not before. I do not agree with the sentiment of your first paragraph, in fact it seems to me that you are being either intentionally misleading or ignorant. https://www.theguardian.…

There were existing rules against covering your face in some situations but you are perfectly right that the law in 2010 was triggered by the rise of radical islam and the (perceived or real) problem that full head coverage place on Republican values[1].

>And he said that somehow it's not a religious symbol. The full sentence: "It's not a religious symbol, but a sign of subservience and debasement."

Basically, "some think it's a religious sign, but we don't agree". And most Muslims in France don't either as the wearing of burqas and niqabs was quite uncommon in the first place (some estimates placed the number of women wearing them at around 2000).

We can argue on the merit of forbidding full-covering or whether there was really a need for all that noise but there is a reasoning and much public debate on the matter.

From your original comment, you seem to disagree, but in France people are free to practice any religion they wish, as long as it is done within the boundaries of the country's values and laws. So your statement of "Religion is already banned in places such as France" -without further characterisation- is clearly inflamatory and false.

[1]: Deepl makes a decent translation of this: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/dossierlegislatif/JORFDOLE000...

Re: We can have democracy or we can have Facebook

#236

Post by CaptainZapp » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 2:11 PM UTC

gjulianm wrote: post #215

nopriorarrests wrote: post #190

Honestly, americans who are thinking in all seriousness that "we can have democracy or we can have Facebook" are just deluding themselves. I wonder why facebook usage isn't "sowing discord" in Netherlands or, say, Germany, or other EU countries? From what I know, Facebook makes some real euros there, so adoption rate is quite high, but still, democracy is not "under attack" in these countries because of "automated ne…

> I wonder why facebook usage isn't "sowing discord" in Netherlands or, say, Germany, or other EU countries? From what I know, Facebook makes some real euros there, so adoption rate is quite high, but still, democracy is not "under attack" in these countries because of "automated newsfeed". Yes it is. Polarization is increasing in a lot of countries, and there is heavy criticism. But while US news are exposed to the…

Brexit?

I certainly can't prove it, but I'd be willing to bet that it wouldn't have happened without Facebook.

The thing is that it's the first time were you can really microtarget bigots, racists and xenophobes. And that's what makes it frightening. Especially when everybody nowadays has his own brand of reality.

Note: Despite the fact that I think Brexit is a devastatingly bad idea I don't mean to imply that leave voters are bigots or racists. Brexit is just a great example about undue influence on a referendum.

E: Removed redundancy

Re: We can have democracy or we can have Facebook

#237

Post by giantg2 » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 2:13 PM UTC

So the premises to support the title are that Facebook 'steals' revenue from traditional news publishers and allows user generated content to proliferate, which can contain conspiracies.

I don't know that breaking up Facebook will actually fix these issues or 'save' democracy. Conspiracies will still spread on other sites (Reddit: The Frontpage of the Internet, anyone?). Ad revenue will continue to go to electronic platforms and use tracking (Google is huge in this space too).

I can see that Facebook has engaged in anticompetitive behavior, such as buying some competitive companies. I don't see them as a full monopoly. There are plenty of other sites (some of them large) that allow you to connect with others, share content, and create an online identity. Just look at LinkedIn, Reddit, TikTok, etc. There are other large ad services too, like Google.

A strong democracy requires an educated and diligent citizenry. We can break up Facebook, but that won't fix the root problems in our society. We could start by teaching basic logic in schools. And I'm sure this will be controversial, but I do think we should make a citizenship test part of school curriculums so that the citizens know their rights, the structure and function of our government, etc. Then we still need to hope that voters do their homework.

Re: We can have democracy or we can have Facebook

#238

Post by fwsgonzo » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 2:13 PM UTC

nopriorarrests wrote: post #231

solaarphunk wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia, and many populist/extremist political campaigns, literally manipulate European elections by employing content farms to push out controversial content. Internet Research Agency, Cambridge Analytica, etc. How do you think populist leaders gain such a large voice so quickly in those EU countries? You're kidding yourself, if you don't think the same tactics are being deployed in Europe, and amplified via platform…

>How do you think populist leaders gain such a large voice so quickly in those EU countries? There are two options here. 1. People are not really happy with current status quo so they are looking to choose alternative leaders via elections, just as expected in democratic countries. 2. Some bad guys post bad stuff on Facebook and, like, 30% of german voters read it and march to election booth like zombies to vote the…

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-43301643

Especially Russia would have a lot to gain from Trump being re-elected. It would have been crazy if they didn't put all hands on it. And the same can be extended to friendly candidates in other countries.

Re: We can have democracy or we can have Facebook

#239

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 2:14 PM UTC

rmrfstar wrote: post #225

nopriorarrests wrote: post #190

Honestly, americans who are thinking in all seriousness that "we can have democracy or we can have Facebook" are just deluding themselves. I wonder why facebook usage isn't "sowing discord" in Netherlands or, say, Germany, or other EU countries? From what I know, Facebook makes some real euros there, so adoption rate is quite high, but still, democracy is not "under attack" in these countries because of "automated ne…

> Don't blame the mirror for what you see in it. Agreed, Facebook is just exploiting weaknesses that already exist in American minds. Those problems exist elsewhere, but have not advanced as far. There will be a silver lining in the Facebook case though. We're going to see a lot of emails and depositions that end the "Mark Zuckerberg is a uniquely competent person who earned an empire through ability" myth. That's go…

Thank you for saying that. The deposition will definitely be illuminating. Unlike his performance in front of congress, it will not be judged by public opinion ( and technically inept congressmen ) and will have real consequences should he chose to lie.

Re: We can have democracy or we can have Facebook

#240

Post by api » Fri, Dec 11, 2020, 2:15 PM UTC

nopriorarrests wrote: post #190

Honestly, americans who are thinking in all seriousness that "we can have democracy or we can have Facebook" are just deluding themselves. I wonder why facebook usage isn't "sowing discord" in Netherlands or, say, Germany, or other EU countries? From what I know, Facebook makes some real euros there, so adoption rate is quite high, but still, democracy is not "under attack" in these countries because of "automated ne…

Very good point. There are a ton of legitimate criticisms of Facebook, but you can’t blame FB for American anti-intellectualism, rampant gullibility, and the failings of the two party system.

Americans have for decades been gullible fools who never read below headlines and fall for tabloid trash. This “post-reality” thing that is culminating with stuff like Qanon has also been cooking for decades, nurtured by trash TV, dumbed down religion, and new age word salad.

In the past only mass media had the privilege of being able to lead this mass of morons. Now that has been democratized, allowing DIY YouTube and Facebook personalities to take advantage of America’s rampant foolishness.

The solution has to start with an broad spectrum social movement to raise the quality of discourse in the culture, a kind of big tent anti-bullshit movement. We need to replace hard line partisan intolerance with intolerance for intellectual junk food. Liberals, conservatives, and anyone else should start promoting all content of any perspective so long as it is well written, well reasoned, and credible, and rejecting BS from their own side as well as others.