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

Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 549 posts

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#71

Post by notacoward »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #27

I will jump on this bandwagon and say color me not surprised. The issue is emblematic of a bigger issue though. General trust in our society is generally down. It stretches beyond the sectors normally understood as BS ( advertising, HR come to mind ), but moved to corrupt just about everything else out there. We are a point, where the only organization that is somewhat trusted is military. That is not a good state of…

> the only organization that is somewhat trusted is military

Only in certain quarters. The US military has been subject to deliberate infiltration by both evangelicals (especially Air Force), white supremacists, and proto-insurrectionists for decades. More recently, there has been a seemingly endless parade of officers committing public acts of insubordination, or even incitement to mutiny/sedition. At this point, trust in the military is mostly limited to people who share those agendas.

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#72

Post by tristor »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #26
sdrawkcabmai wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is the most explicitly duplicitious sociopathic company in the tech sector. Many companies are sociopathic, especially as you get into pure finance companies like PE firms, but few are as duplicitous as Facebook.

That's why they're on my "wouldn't work for them if they wee the last tech company in the entire world" list. That list isn't long, but, FB is near the top of it.

Agreed. I have a similar list, it's not super long, but most of the FAAMG are on it, and Facebook is #1 on the "will never" list. Everybody has a price, but some things are non-negotiable.

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#73

Post by junon »

donatj wrote: post #54
MattGaiser wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect it is automated. A computer can easily flag calling someone a loser. Not sure if FB has burning animals as a automated flag yet.

I had the option to have the post re-reviewed, which took two days. I mean it could just be theatre, but I assumed on the second round a human reviewed it. From the support response: > The post was reviewed, and though it doesn't go against one of our specific Community Standards, you did the right thing by letting us know about it. Setting squirrels on fire and watching the poor things scurry around I guess is cool…

> Setting squirrels on fire and watching the poor things scurry around I guess is cool with Facebook's Community Standards.

Unfortunately nothing else you can do about it, either. Who do you even report this to? There's no LEO agency that would spend resources on that even though this is a well known pre-cursor to homicide.

Shit like that reminds me how failed society is - to be able to literally torture animals and face little to no repercussions, and get tons of clout and maybe even some money (ad revenue or whatever) in the process.

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#74

Post by actually_a_dog »

aero-glide2 wrote: post #34
rvz wrote: post #4

Facebook IS the problem. Discuss.

Perhaps it's just me, but reddit front page is much more toxic and filled with misinformation compared to most Facebook groups. (Niche subs are really good though).

That depends heavily on what subreddits you subscribe to, though. If you unsubscribe most of the news and politics subs, it can be pretty nice.

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#75

Post by hirako2000 »

donatj wrote: post #54
MattGaiser wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect it is automated. A computer can easily flag calling someone a loser. Not sure if FB has burning animals as a automated flag yet.

I had the option to have the post re-reviewed, which took two days. I mean it could just be theatre, but I assumed on the second round a human reviewed it. From the support response: > The post was reviewed, and though it doesn't go against one of our specific Community Standards, you did the right thing by letting us know about it. Setting squirrels on fire and watching the poor things scurry around I guess is cool…

Yes. Precisely. I think it is because the community of squirrels have no ability to retaliate. If we observe the trend, the pull down are proportionate to the strength of the retaliators. Being against say LGBT isn't the same as being anti christian. Hit a particular group of people or ideology, the bans are well automated at this point.

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#76

Post by gilj »

napolux wrote: post #31
yann2 wrote: post #13

The elite use facebook?

This is a very good question. What if I'm an Hollywood superstar or an NBA player or a billionaire and I want to chat and share stuff privately with my "colleagues". Did the really use fb or instagram like we all do? I always see "official pages" for people like Bill Gates, but where/what do they share in their day to day life?

Ask yourself what you would use if you didn't want the general public to see it, while allowing your friends to see it? You would use anonymous accounts, or you would use use the privacy tools these platforms offer, or you would just use direct messaging apps.

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#77

Post by msteffen »

It seems like no one has figured out a good system for moderation on the internet.

IIUC, Facebook hired contractors to do it, then realized that that didn't work and created XCheck to cover the visible cases, and is now in trouble because XCheck also doesn't work and rubber-stamps everything. Even before this there were news stories about the horribleness of those contract moderator jobs. Reddit tried to federate moderation, but it's since become clear that all top subreddits are moderated by the same people. Even HN only works because dang busts ass to keep it good, and that has obvious limits (what happens when dang goes on vacation or retires?)

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#78

Post by brodouevencode »

hirako2000 wrote: post #66
gordon_freeman wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to do victim blaming or shaming here but why would you use any fb product knowing well about their awful business practices like these?

Because of its network effect. Removing facebook, in a way is removing members of our connection circles.

> removing members of our connection circles

Does it really? Whatever happened to just a friendly weekly email?

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#79

Post by [deleted] »

donatj wrote: post #54
MattGaiser wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect it is automated. A computer can easily flag calling someone a loser. Not sure if FB has burning animals as a automated flag yet.

I had the option to have the post re-reviewed, which took two days. I mean it could just be theatre, but I assumed on the second round a human reviewed it. From the support response: > The post was reviewed, and though it doesn't go against one of our specific Community Standards, you did the right thing by letting us know about it. Setting squirrels on fire and watching the poor things scurry around I guess is cool…

[deleted]

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#80

Post by cratermoon »

dogleash wrote: post #21

>“We are not actually doing what we say we do publicly,” said the confidential review. Why do we even have the collective fiction where corporate messaging around a sore topic is treated as trustworthy? Especially with companies that we know lie all the fucking time?

Further, why do we continue to accept the fiction that rules and laws apply to the elite as for the masses? Even the not-so-elite, the Stanford swimmer who brutally raped and assaulted Chanel Miller, though convicted, was given light sentence because of his "bright future", according to the judge.
Post reply on HN