121–130 of 654 posts
And this is why Facebook has no business being part of fact checking. While it may look different, this is no different than two folks on the phone getting interrupted by ATT and being told they are incorrect on their assumptions about topic X. Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter are the carrier, and should be treated as such.
I bet there are a minority of accounts that are responsible for a lot of spam/fake news. Time for Facebook to start shadow banning?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Zero damage? No way. Millions of people would lose contact with friends and family that they have no other connections with. Companies that depend on Facebook advertising would disappear. People would be locked out of OAuth accounts on thousands of websites. It would be catastrophic.
> Millions of people would lose contact with friends and family that they have no other connections with. Not at all. > Companies that depend on Facebook advertising would disappear. Good. > People would be locked out of OAuth accounts on thousands of websites. OK? If you were federating your auth via Facebook it was only a matter of time until you were locked out for one arbitrary reason or another. This just seems…
Some people rely on their relationships with other people. They build support systems, form groups, and take comfort in the company of others. Being cut off suddenly and with no means to reconnect would isolate many people. This would be extremely damaging from a mental health perspective alone.
In addition, so many people have reconnected with old friends, family, teachers. One friend of mine used Facebook to find her birth parents. That avenue disappears completely.
I don't know why you would say it's "good" for these companies to disappear. These aren't megacorps. It's small, local companies that rely on FB advertising. Bed and breakfasts, wineries, anything that depends on tourism. They're always hit the hardest. Walmart isn't going to care if they can't advertise on FB anymore.
Your comment shows a lack-of-understanding and compassion for your fellow human.
And this is why Facebook has no business being part of fact checking. While it may look different, this is no different than two folks on the phone getting interrupted by ATT and being told they are incorrect on their assumptions about topic X. Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter are the carrier, and should be treated as such.
> Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter are the carrier, and should be treated as such. It's more nuanced than that because ATT doesn't repeat a phone call it has deemed interesting to millions of other people.
The CDC has already lied multiple times to the American people in egregiously obvious ways, so I don’t see this as unexpected.
Text classification with Transformers is hard. Humans are expensive. My guess is also that the link got flagged because of who shared it, but that's just a guess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter are the carrier, and should be treated as such. It's more nuanced than that because ATT doesn't repeat a phone call it has deemed interesting to millions of other people.
We need to differentiate the recommendation algorithm parts of these products from the communication parts. If Facebook is recommending something, that's on them, and if they want to not recommend my content to anyone, so be it; but I should be able to post something seen only by the people who opted in to following me without them getting in the way.
The claim is that this algorithms are neutral. But we know many contain ways for the owner to artificially boost preferred content. And algorithms tend to have the biases of their creators in them.
Controlling what people see is an important power and one that should be regulated.
The CDC has already lied multiple times to the American people in egregiously obvious ways, so I don’t see this as unexpected.
Relevant article/thread from a day ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27984908
