Facebook shuts down the Socialist Workers Party in Britain • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook shuts down the Socialist Workers Party in Britain

#101

Post by DonaldFisk » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 11:32 PM UTC

29athrowaway wrote: post #86

IndySun wrote: post #70

This shut down story is another tale in the impending international regulation, and maybe breaking up, of what is comically called 'big tech' ('big' does not begin to describe the sizes involved, the naivety is staggering). As newspaper barons before them, the internet has not policed itself adequately enough, according to the governments of the world, and now they will act in unity to take back some control. And the…

That is already somewhat the case in China. Meaning, it is not a possible dystopian future... it is the present in some parts of the world.

You can use a VPN in China to gain access to content blocked by the Great Firewall.

Re: Facebook shuts down the Socialist Workers Party in Britain

#102

Post by the-dude » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 11:32 PM UTC

mcbuilder wrote: post #83

ffggvv wrote: post #39

glad no one can be mad because they are a private company :)

Well I actually align with this opinion My politics are certainly by US standards left wing. I supported the recent right wing purge on social media because I thought it was their right to do so, and I support the right of FB to ban whoever they want. The one thing that must not be censored is the internet itself. If someone wants to wants to throw up a pro Neo-Nazi site on their own server, that must be allowed to s…

> If someone wants to wants to throw up a pro Neo-Nazi site on their own server, that must be allowed to stand.

That rings hollow. Your datacenter, ISP, CDN or registrar will boot you.

Re: Facebook shuts down the Socialist Workers Party in Britain

#103

Post by throwawaygh » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 11:32 PM UTC

stretchcat wrote: post #85

throwawaygh wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, "organizations should take responsibility for misclassifications generated by code that they own and operate." But also, "the computer was told to do the buggy thing" is misleading because it suggests mens rea.

I don't think mens rea is particularly relevant when it comes to the actions of corporations. It's not at all clear to me what it would mean for a corporation to have intent. We could certainly say a 'corporation intended' to do something if we found an email from the CEO commanding it, that much is trivial. But what if we think of a corporation as a 'slow AI' or 'China brain'? Might the corporation, viewed that way,…

> I don't think mens rea is particularly relevant when it comes to the actions of corporations. It's not at all clear to me what it would mean for a corporation to have intent.

But we do distinguish in regulated engineering disciplines. A contractor that intentionally uses shoddy materials in a bridge or tunnel is treated differently from a contractor who simply fails to implement legally required QC is treated different from a contractor who implemented legally required QC but laid bad concrete due to operator error that wasn't captured by that legal requirement.

> At the end of the day, does it really matter?

Yes, and the reason it matters is immediate when you try to answer the following questions.

> Whether you subscribe to functionalism or intentionalism in that case, the horrible end result is the same and people need to be held accountable for it.

1. Held accountable how?

2. Toward what end?

--

Facebook has good engineers, but they're not gods. It is not possible to write a perfect -- or perhaps even passably good -- "political extremism" filter.

Shifting blame from "the algorithm" to "the engineers" or "the corporation" completely misses the whole fucking point: there is no spec for "perfectly functional political extremism filter". 0.000% of the people calling for "politically neutral moderation" have any god damn clue how to define the thing that are asking for, even in a natural language, let alone a language precise enough to implement.

Just look at the rhetoric used. People blame in passive voice "corporations" and "engineers", while criticizing others for using passive voice to blame "the algorithm". I'm not saying that we don't need a base level of QC and corporate responsibility. I even think Software people should be folded into Professional Engineering with all of the personal responsibility that entails! But we need to be very realistic about the fact that engineers are not Gods who can Solve Politics.

Hell, even if you erase inherent political tension this is still an impossible task. Can you write down a filter that's perfectly biased toward liberal speech? No.

So, again, Held accountable how? Toward what end? Unless your answer is "purposefully kill all social media including HN", mens rea matters.

Re: Facebook shuts down the Socialist Workers Party in Britain

#104

Post by konjin » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 11:32 PM UTC

ralston3 wrote: post #96

konjin wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Citizens will require a personal licence to access the internet, and anonymous use will be illegal. I mean you already do. What do you call a signing up to an ISP?

Yes but I can take my laptop to my friend's place and use their internet, seemingly as someone who lives in that house. I think OP is talking more so about an ID (like driver's license type of thing) to use the internet. So that one might be able to say person X visited site Y (again, we have something similar to that now, but not exactly)

You can also ask to use your friends social ID. The only reason why you'd find it odd is that you're not used to it.

Re: Facebook shuts down the Socialist Workers Party in Britain

#105

Post by TheAdamAndChe » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 11:32 PM UTC

ralston3 wrote: post #92

IndySun wrote: post #70

This shut down story is another tale in the impending international regulation, and maybe breaking up, of what is comically called 'big tech' ('big' does not begin to describe the sizes involved, the naivety is staggering). As newspaper barons before them, the internet has not policed itself adequately enough, according to the governments of the world, and now they will act in unity to take back some control. And the…

> and anonymous use will be illegal. Super interesting that you mention this. I was just thinking the other day about what an absolute dumpster fire "the internet" is due to anonymity (obviously that's not the _only_ reason, but it's a non-trivial reason). This idea that "Let's give people the ability to be anonymous, and somehow, that's gonna make us all bond together and be better" is pretty hilarious in hindsight.…

And yet you typed this on a pseudoanonymous message board. And yet you still see incredible vitriol on facebook, which requires your real ID.

The culture of a site is largely determined by engineering and moderation decisions made by its owners. Nothing more.

Re: Facebook shuts down the Socialist Workers Party in Britain

#106

Post by clusterfish » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 11:33 PM UTC

konjin wrote: post #88

IndySun wrote: post #70

This shut down story is another tale in the impending international regulation, and maybe breaking up, of what is comically called 'big tech' ('big' does not begin to describe the sizes involved, the naivety is staggering). As newspaper barons before them, the internet has not policed itself adequately enough, according to the governments of the world, and now they will act in unity to take back some control. And the…

>Citizens will require a personal licence to access the internet, and anonymous use will be illegal. I mean you already do. What do you call a signing up to an ISP?

You're just paying for a service that needs to know your address in order to function. Nobody will even check your id.

Alternatively, you can use free wifi or a burner SIM with data. That possibility is not the case in every country, nor will it necessarily remain open in the future.

Re: Facebook shuts down the Socialist Workers Party in Britain

#107

Post by im3w1l » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 11:33 PM UTC

Veen wrote: post #12

mhh__ wrote: post #9

I assume this is a mistake, although I think they're mad I don't think the SWP are malicious a la some political sects

Yes, it seems unlikely this is deliberate. The SWP is about as likely to forment a revolution or incite violence as Judi Dench. They're a bunch of harmless eccentrics.

According to the article, it was not just the page that was removed. That could have been a mistake, I suppose. But Facebook also banned "dozens of leading SWP activists". That sounds like a very deliberate action to me.

Re: Facebook shuts down the Socialist Workers Party in Britain

#108

Post by starkd » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 11:33 PM UTC

IndySun wrote: post #70

This shut down story is another tale in the impending international regulation, and maybe breaking up, of what is comically called 'big tech' ('big' does not begin to describe the sizes involved, the naivety is staggering). As newspaper barons before them, the internet has not policed itself adequately enough, according to the governments of the world, and now they will act in unity to take back some control. And the…

They've opened up pandora's box. Who knows what will come out of this.

Re: Facebook shuts down the Socialist Workers Party in Britain

#109

Post by Swizec » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 11:33 PM UTC

ralston3 wrote: post #92

IndySun wrote: post #70

This shut down story is another tale in the impending international regulation, and maybe breaking up, of what is comically called 'big tech' ('big' does not begin to describe the sizes involved, the naivety is staggering). As newspaper barons before them, the internet has not policed itself adequately enough, according to the governments of the world, and now they will act in unity to take back some control. And the…

> and anonymous use will be illegal. Super interesting that you mention this. I was just thinking the other day about what an absolute dumpster fire "the internet" is due to anonymity (obviously that's not the _only_ reason, but it's a non-trivial reason). This idea that "Let's give people the ability to be anonymous, and somehow, that's gonna make us all bond together and be better" is pretty hilarious in hindsight.…

You don't know my name in the street and I don't know yours. We manage to be perfectly civil to each other.

And my reputation does not follow between groups either. I can even have completely distinct friend groups for different activities. Nobody at boxing class knows anybody I work with and the people that hang out with me at a bar can be a completely new set all over. I could even use different names in all these groups! :O

Yet we're all perfectly civil.

The same works online. I choose to use `swizec` everywhere, but is `ralston3` the same as `@r_ralston3` on twitter? Who knows. Does it matter? Not in the least. Look at us being perfectly fine fellows to each other.

On the other hand, you have to show government ID to walk into a bar and yet people are kicked out for bad behavior all the time.

Re: Facebook shuts down the Socialist Workers Party in Britain

#110

Post by Veen » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 11:33 PM UTC

splistud wrote: post #53

HarryHirsch wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People generally misunderstand Hanlon's Razor. It's immaterial if someone is evil or just stupid, the only thing that matters is that they should not be making decisions about other people. (Charles Williams' All Hallows' Eve is an extended meditation about just that.)

Well if it's stupid, and not evil, they weren't making a decision, right?

They were making a decision, but it’s not malice because they’re incapable of foreseeing the outcomes of their decisions. In either case, they shouldn’t be in charge of anything important.