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

Senators Blast Facebook for Concealing Instagram's Risks to Kids

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 71 posts

Re: Senators Blast Facebook for Concealing Instagram's Risks to Kids

#31

Post by myfartsarefoul »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #15

"She said Facebook takes "the privacy, safety and well-being of all those who use our platform very seriously, ..."" The magic incantation. Flawed reasoning: "We take X seriously" therefore there are no problems with X. Contrast "seriously" with "seriously enough". There must be more to it. There must be some science behind the use of the "take X seriously" statements. "We've committed to not retaliating for this ind…

When they try to change the way they’re viewed instead of bringing up relevant facts, you know that they know that they don’t have a leg to stand on.

I say we do to Facebook what JFK wanted to do to the CIA.

Imagine social media without a profit motive. Decentralize, distribute and encrypt the fuck out of it. I don’t want curated feeds, I want to keep in touch with people I know.

Re: Senators Blast Facebook for Concealing Instagram's Risks to Kids

#32

Post by dragonwriter »

myfartsarefoul wrote: post #31
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #15

"She said Facebook takes "the privacy, safety and well-being of all those who use our platform very seriously, ..."" The magic incantation. Flawed reasoning: "We take X seriously" therefore there are no problems with X. Contrast "seriously" with "seriously enough". There must be more to it. There must be some science behind the use of the "take X seriously" statements. "We've committed to not retaliating for this ind…

When they try to change the way they’re viewed instead of bringing up relevant facts, you know that they know that they don’t have a leg to stand on. I say we do to Facebook what JFK wanted to do to the CIA. Imagine social media without a profit motive. Decentralize, distribute and encrypt the fuck out of it. I don’t want curated feeds, I want to keep in touch with people I know.

> I say we do to Facebook what JFK wanted to do to the CIA.

Use it to invade Cuba?

Re: Senators Blast Facebook for Concealing Instagram's Risks to Kids

#33

Post by paxys »

burlesona wrote: post #24
literallyaduck wrote: post #18

Instead of "blasting" how about regulating it? Social media has proven time and again they are unwilling to do the right thing. They perform human experimentation and must be regulated for public safety. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/06/28/facebook... It is an on going activity.

The challenge is what, exactly, to regulate. Here are some ideas: Ban algorithmic content curation. If a product is going to have a "featured" section or "watch next" or whatever, that should have to come from a human editor who can be held accountable for their choices. This would force huge changes in a lot of services, but ultimately I think we've learned that engagement algorithms drive toxic feedback loops and e…

Or, how about we do none of these things and people who don't like social media just don't freaking use it.

Re: Senators Blast Facebook for Concealing Instagram's Risks to Kids

#34

Post by ssss11 »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #15

"She said Facebook takes "the privacy, safety and well-being of all those who use our platform very seriously, ..."" The magic incantation. Flawed reasoning: "We take X seriously" therefore there are no problems with X. Contrast "seriously" with "seriously enough". There must be more to it. There must be some science behind the use of the "take X seriously" statements. "We've committed to not retaliating for this ind…

Isn’t the magic just that humans sometimes believe what is said rather than what is done? You need to watch what people do, and whether they actually do what they say.

Re: Senators Blast Facebook for Concealing Instagram's Risks to Kids

#35

Post by jimt1234 »

Sounds like social media platforms might end up like cigarette companies, where they finally acknowledge the harm of their product and add a disclaimer to avoid liability: "This product is designed to manipulate you. It will probably make your life worse." Or, like the drug companies: "If you have depression, suicidal thoughts or find yourself screaming at some rando on the internet, stop taking Facebook and consult a therapist."

Maybe that's already in the EULA??? :shrug:

Re: Senators Blast Facebook for Concealing Instagram's Risks to Kids

#36

Post by krisoft »

ceejayoz wrote: post #2

https://twitter.com/morroweric/status/1443628623576109065 > Sen. Blumenthal asks Facebook "Will you commit to ending Finsta?" > Facebook's safety chief has to explain that Finsta is slang for a fake account. Sigh.

What is strange to me why did the Facebook person try to explain the term to the Senator? I’m no lawyer, and this is just my first reaction about what she answered based on what little I know.

These Senate hearings are not jovial chats among friends. They are in the same ballpark as depositions, or interviews with law enforcement officiers. You are not there to make the opposition’s work easier. (Assuming you with counsels decided that the best option for you/your company is to appear.) You have to be curteous, and truthfull. But you absolutelly should not go into “guessing what the question might be”.

When he asks “Will you commit ending finsta?”

I would answer “At facebook we have no feature or setting named finsta. We cannot commit to end what we don’t offer.” And let him explain what he thinks finsta means to him.

In casual conversations we often try to answer the question we think we should have been asked. This is not such an occasion.

Re: Senators Blast Facebook for Concealing Instagram's Risks to Kids

#37

Post by bilekas »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #15

"She said Facebook takes "the privacy, safety and well-being of all those who use our platform very seriously, ..."" The magic incantation. Flawed reasoning: "We take X seriously" therefore there are no problems with X. Contrast "seriously" with "seriously enough". There must be more to it. There must be some science behind the use of the "take X seriously" statements. "We've committed to not retaliating for this ind…

don't forget :

> "I want to be clear: This research is not a bombshell."

It's not, because you knew about it.

Re: Senators Blast Facebook for Concealing Instagram's Risks to Kids

#38

Post by mbesto »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #15

"She said Facebook takes "the privacy, safety and well-being of all those who use our platform very seriously, ..."" The magic incantation. Flawed reasoning: "We take X seriously" therefore there are no problems with X. Contrast "seriously" with "seriously enough". There must be more to it. There must be some science behind the use of the "take X seriously" statements. "We've committed to not retaliating for this ind…

Sidenote:

> "We take X seriously" therefore there are no problems with X.

This is my favorite response doing Tech DDs. I meet execs who say "we take security seriously" all of the time. I enjoy the follow-on of "ok show us then"...

Do you backup your DB? Do you test it? No?

Do you encrypt everything at rest? No?

Are you using MFA for all services that are accessible by developers? No?

etc. etc.

Then no, you don't take security seriously.

Re: Senators Blast Facebook for Concealing Instagram's Risks to Kids

#39

Post by rsj_hn »

krisoft wrote: post #36
ceejayoz wrote: post #2

https://twitter.com/morroweric/status/1443628623576109065 > Sen. Blumenthal asks Facebook "Will you commit to ending Finsta?" > Facebook's safety chief has to explain that Finsta is slang for a fake account. Sigh.

What is strange to me why did the Facebook person try to explain the term to the Senator? I’m no lawyer, and this is just my first reaction about what she answered based on what little I know. These Senate hearings are not jovial chats among friends. They are in the same ballpark as depositions, or interviews with law enforcement officiers. You are not there to make the opposition’s work easier. (Assuming you with co…

This whole thing is a performative display, so might as well take the opportunity to make the Senator look out of touch in their photo-op.

Hearings were originally intended to be fact finding sessions. During an era in which 'Newspapers' were an experimental new technology, it was still a good idea to get all the lawmakers into a room and bring in witnesses to present different sides of an issue.

And that might have been the case in the 19th Century, but in the post-war administrative state, Senators do not actually hold hearings to gather information as they have teams of full time aides that do that for them with modern technologies like the internet and the telephone that have obviated the need for hearings.

In the modern world, hearings are an opportunity to give speeches in front of cameras, to ask questions that embarrass your enemies and make your allies look good. Therefore Facebook is correctly using the hearings in their modern form, by trying to make the questioners look bad by pointing out how out of touch they are.

Re: Senators Blast Facebook for Concealing Instagram's Risks to Kids

#40

Post by [deleted] »

astockwell wrote: post #20
literallyaduck wrote: post #18

Instead of "blasting" how about regulating it? Social media has proven time and again they are unwilling to do the right thing. They perform human experimentation and must be regulated for public safety. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/06/28/facebook... It is an on going activity.

This. “Senators blast” everyone under the sun. Do something.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN