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

Is content moderation a dead end?

ben-evans.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–309 of 309 posts

Re: Is content moderation a dead end?

#301

Post by johnnyanmac »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #299
johnnyanmac wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Do we simply need to recognise that as all society is online we now need online police? Online Community support officers (UK police adjuncts (think teaching assistants). International issues would get in the way. As much as it sucks, most police won't act on a death threat made from some 12 year old in Brazil towards a normal US citizen. It's a lot of resources for no benefit on their end. it wouldn't be enforceabl…

International issues get in the way of policing now. We have some extradition and similar agreements for the worst crimes. I am not convinced "online police" are the right solution, but if we want to avoid walled gardens everywhere, if we want public spaces, we need public peacekeepers. In most cases, a quiet word from a police officer, who s enough to move the situation on, usually enough to prevent it escalating an…

>if we want public spaces, we need public peacekeepers.

that seems to be what moderators/admins do currently. I know many focus on the worst, most toxic communities, but for many a simple warning will diffuse some small quibble. It seems this article and other individuals argue that this isn't sufficient, however.

Re: Is content moderation a dead end?

#302

Post by asciident »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #251
asciident wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strongly disagree. Bad credit (sometimes even wrongly attributed) can block you from jobs, mobile plans, bank accounts, credit/debit cards, renting, etc. I'd rather be blocked from Facebook than be told I can't rent an apartment or be disqualified from a job.

Each time I am offered a job, I go through extensive background checks, including my credit history. You wrote: "Bad credit (sometimes even wrongly attributed) can block you from jobs..." Is this really true? I have see this phrasing a few times on the Internet, but I have never once read a blog post about someone specifically being denied a job due to poor credit history. My point: They can "check" all they like. In…

I know someone who was denied a job as a luggage handler at an airline due to a failed background check (though not a credit check). But I think the credit checks may matter more for people hired in positions of power, where being in debt is something you can be blackmailed for. If there's no use of the credit check, then why do companies pay money and impose extra process?

Re: Is content moderation a dead end?

#303

Post by darkerside »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #253
darkerside wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to agree with you without an effective counterexample. How many lives have been saved, improved, or created by the staggering economic benefits of a car based economy?

My guess is the economy would have grown but just in a different direction. Singapore has similar GDP per capita to the US but about a fifth of the number of cars. Most of Europe is at half the number in the US.

And how much of that growth was on the back of the US consumer economy?

Re: Is content moderation a dead end?

#304

Post by edrxty »

Tiktaalik wrote: post #296
edrxty wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, if that logic is applied with the same intensity everywhere, the world would be painfully bland. Obviously we've made some mistakes and possibly have gone too far in one direction on that axis, but particularly with regard to personal safety, people need to be willing to draw a line as to what is "good enough". Cars at this point are extremely safe by any reasonable metric, even if the absolute totals feel la…

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here. Cars are not safe. They're the number one killer. In contrast, how many people are killed by the automobile alternatives of cycling, public transit? Seems that those are safe to me.

Something will always be the number one killer. Doesn't mean it isn't safe.

Re: Is content moderation a dead end?

#305

Post by tonyedgecombe »

darkerside wrote: post #303
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess is the economy would have grown but just in a different direction. Singapore has similar GDP per capita to the US but about a fifth of the number of cars. Most of Europe is at half the number in the US.

And how much of that growth was on the back of the US consumer economy?

The bulk of Singapore's trade is in Asia, America isn't as economically important as it used to be.

Re: Is content moderation a dead end?

#306

Post by sthnblllII »

croutonwagon wrote: post #268
sthnblllII wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a Christian community you can't deny Christ. In a Dungeons and Dragons community you cant call everyone a nerd and tell them to play Call of Duty. In the Black community you can't be a white woman with hair extensions and claim be to be the victim of discrimination. Communities exist specifically because they exclude people from them. Sometimes thats good and sometimes its bad but attacking the very concept of a g…

>In a Christian community you can't deny Christ. There are plenty that do. Maybe some of the fundies dont...But the entire point of Christianity is to welcome non-believers and convert them. And plenty of Protestants and even most Roman Catholic congregations I have seen are very much that way. Especially when a school is involved. > In a Dungeons and Dragons community you cant call everyone a nerd and tell them to p…

Ok. This has nothing to do with what I said.

Re: Is content moderation a dead end?

#307

Post by darkerside »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #305
darkerside wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how much of that growth was on the back of the US consumer economy?

The bulk of Singapore's trade is in Asia, America isn't as economically important as it used to be.

Emphasis on used to be, as in it used to be and was critically important in bootstrapping that economy.

Re: Is content moderation a dead end?

#308

Post by seppin »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #245
ddingus wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know a few myself. To the point of having real conversations. Those who are working for smaller shops, or who are freelancing are in a very different place than people working within or dependent on the big media machine. What beat you cover matters too. Some topics come with more permissive norms all around. Contrast social issues with economics and foreign policy. How much agency one has to both report in an inve…

"Access journalism". I feel the same about most reporting about non-public tech companies. "If you play nice, we give you a good 'story' (really PR) to print. If not, get lost." In Japan, "access journalism" is also a serious problem with political reporting. But to be fair, so is the United States, but more subtle / less obvious. Example: Can Fox News really get a long-form interview with President Biden? (I am not…

> Example: Can Fox News really get a long-form interview with President Biden? (I am not trolling.)

Obama sat with Bill O'Reily for long than that.

Re: Is content moderation a dead end?

#309

Post by throwaway2037 »

asciident wrote: post #302
throwaway2037 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Each time I am offered a job, I go through extensive background checks, including my credit history. You wrote: "Bad credit (sometimes even wrongly attributed) can block you from jobs..." Is this really true? I have see this phrasing a few times on the Internet, but I have never once read a blog post about someone specifically being denied a job due to poor credit history. My point: They can "check" all they like. In…

I know someone who was denied a job as a luggage handler at an airline due to a failed background check (though not a credit check). But I think the credit checks may matter more for people hired in positions of power, where being in debt is something you can be blackmailed for. If there's no use of the credit check, then why do companies pay money and impose extra process?

Thank you to share your anecdata. If I might speculate... perhaps the person's background check showed a previous trust issue. Example: Recently (last 3-5 years) convicted of theft. Or dismissed from a job for theft. If the person was convicted of something unrelated to trust -- had a fight at a bar or drink driving -- it could be overlooked. (Or more charitably, if the trust issue [theft] was related to a drug addiction many years ago, and the person had received treatment, it could be overlooked.)

I agree: Many items in the background check are ridiculous. Many years ago, I worked at a company where many of the Big Shots were regular, recreational cocaine users (confirmed by juniors who went bar hopping with them once a week). All new employees were required to pass drug tests. It was absurd. In that era, even marijuana was enough to have a job offer withdrawn.

Post reply on HN