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

Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

techtransparencyproject.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 969 posts

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#91

Post by ruffrey »

ardy42 wrote: post #84
efwfwef wrote: post #21

If people had called one another to prepare this, would we say that the phone was responsible for the attack? And would we try to ban phones?

> If people had called one another to prepare this, would we say that the phone was responsible for the attack? And would we try to ban phones? That's a moot point, because an attack like this can't realistically be organized via one-to-one communication. It needs a broadcast medium, which the phone network isn't.

It’s certainly easier with social media, but before that people used phones and in person meetings.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#92

Post by at_a_remove »

I recently found out that on May 30th, there were numerous Secret Service members injured in a BLM/antifa attack (oh, scratch that, "peaceful protest") on the White House. I briefly wondered why I hadn't heard about that, then I chuckled at my own naivete. Of course, one might ask how that was coordinated, but then it was a peaceful protest, so who cares?

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#93

Post by ryandrake »

beefee wrote: post #45

It's chilling how quickly the tech industry has coalesced around oppressive and biased social media censorship policies. A scant few years ago, the tech industry was a beacon of free expression.

You know what’s also chilling? Major tech platforms choosing to publish, amplify, and normalize: white supremacy, antisemitism, serious calls to violently overthrow democracy, conspiracies about the deep state cabal of satan-worshiping pedophiles, the health benefits of drinking bleach, denial of well understood scientific facts, etc.

These things are fine for the town square, since people have free speech, but nobody should be handing them a megaphone that reaches 7 billion people.

Free speech does not mean you are entitled to have your speech broadcast to a global audience.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#94

Post by simple_phrases »

beefee wrote: post #45

It's chilling how quickly the tech industry has coalesced around oppressive and biased social media censorship policies. A scant few years ago, the tech industry was a beacon of free expression.

Weird, I distinctly remember Twitter, Facebook and Google removing Islamic religious content under the guise of stopping terrorism a decade ago. What I don't remember is the current free speech absolutist crowd objecting to such censorship. In fact, I remember them cheering those companies on.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#95

Post by bananabreakfast »

cccc4all wrote: post #55

The unequal treatment is the primary issue with the Parler deplatforming. Facebook and Twitter and Google has hosted much more and much worse content, from all sides. Yet, they are protected by the central authorities and mainstream popular media. Facebook, Twitter and Google should all be deplatformed for equal treatment under mob rules.

"All sides" is not a valid argument when we're talking about a specific group that specifically planned and tried to overthrow the government.

This is not a "both sides are the same" world.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#96

Post by JMTQp8lwXL »

standardUser wrote: post #85
JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the negative externalities are the same in both cases, then this isn't an excuse. Just because Facebook has proportionally fewer posts that violate its policies doesn't mean it should get a free pass. The fact that up to 15,000 people have PTSD is the societal cost we pay, even if the vast majority of FB users are using the platform as expected. Facebook gets a free pass because Facebook is an influential organiza…

"Facebook gets a free pass..." No, Facebook devotes significant resources to moderation and makes good faith attempts to uphold their policies. Parler did not. That is the difference. "If the negative externalities are the same in both cases, then this isn't an excuse." No one is trying to rid the world of all negative externalities, only to make reasonable efforts to mitigate them. There may never be a perfectly mod…

You're right, Facebook won't get a free pass. Congress will drag Zuckerberg back into Congress, give him a scolding, and then largely things will remain the same. Whether or not they moderate enough is certainly a gray question.

All sorts of industries have negative externalities (e.g., fossil fuels). But are Facebook's worth it if they destabilize the democracy in which allowed Facebook to grow and exist?

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#97

Post by Nextgrid »

standardUser wrote: post #72
JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure public support for removing Facebook from app stores wouldn't be too different than Parler. If we are principled people, and FB is failing to moderate, then any reasonable person who supported Parler's removal would support Facebook's. What would be different between the two decisions is the sheer magnitude of money on the line, in the case of Facebook's removal -- in capital markets, in employment, etc.

"If we are principled people, and FB is failing to moderate, then any reasonable person who supported Parler's removal would support Facebook's." Is Facebook failing to moderate, or failing at moderation? If the standard is perfect moderation, there is no social media. If the standard is a good faith efforts at moderation, Facebook should be tolerated (if not compelled to do better) and Parler should be punished (unl…

Is Facebook actually moderating in good faith though?

Consider that divisive, offensive and false content is guaranteed to generate engagement and thus contribute to their bottom-line, while content that doesn't have these traits is less likely to do so. So they're already starting off the wrong way here, when their profits directly correlate with their negative impact on society.

Consider that there is plenty of bad content that violates their community standards on Facebook and such content doesn't even try to hide itself and is thus trivially detectable with automation: https://krebsonsecurity.com/2019/04/a-year-later-cybercrime-...

Consider that Instagram doesn't remove accounts with openly racist & anti-Semitic usernames even when reported: https://old.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/kz10nw/i_mean_if_...

Is Facebook truly moderating in good faith, or are they only moderating when the potential PR backlash from the bad content getting media attention greater than the revenue from the engagement around said content? I strongly suspect the latter.

Keep in mind that moderating a public forum is mostly a solved problem, people have done so (often benevolently) for decades. The social media companies' pleas about moderation being impossible at scale is bullshit - it's only impossible because they're trying to eat the cake and have it too. When the incentives are aligned, moderation is a solved problem.

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#99

Post by ceejayoz »

trident5000 wrote: post #86
bananabreakfast wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's chilling how quickly radical terrorist groups have coalesced around using social media to coordinate their hatred and their attacks. A scant few years ago, America actively fought terrorists instead of encouraging and facilitating them.

Yes, the terrorists who caused 1-2 billion in damage this summer and destroyed peoples livelihoods with a dozen deaths over a false narrative according to public and easily accessible FBI statistics, and also the terrorists who stormed the capital. Both sets of terrorists who are coordinating on all of the platforms.

Where is this $20B number coming from? It doesn't appear to reflect reality.

https://www.axios.com/riots-cost-property-damage-276c9bcc-a4...

Re: Capitol Attack Was Months in the Making on Facebook

#100

Post by yonaguska »

Nextgrid wrote: post #66
cccc4all wrote: post #55

The unequal treatment is the primary issue with the Parler deplatforming. Facebook and Twitter and Google has hosted much more and much worse content, from all sides. Yet, they are protected by the central authorities and mainstream popular media. Facebook, Twitter and Google should all be deplatformed for equal treatment under mob rules.

Facebook and pretty much all the advertising-supported platforms made billions while directly contributing to this incident by pitting people against each other and showing them divisive, offensive and often false/misleading content. Parler in comparison doesn't seem to be making any money off this yet.

Parler did have plans for generating revenue.

I'm not sure what your point is. Facebook and Google were operating at a loss initially as well. It seems like you are arguing that deplatforming Parler is more ok, because they never got to the point of being entrenched tech hegemonies? Or are you arguing that Parler is somehow more quilty because they weren't making money yet, so their intentions are bad?

Post reply on HN