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

Facebook whistleblower says she wants to fix company, not harm it

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 627 posts

Re: Facebook whistleblower says she wants to fix company, not harm it

#101

Post by lokar »

snowwrestler wrote: post #87

Facebook is going to become a hollowed out shell of itself if they do not change. They’ll get hollowed out by litigation, legislation, investors, or all of the above. They need new leadership. The tactics that got them here will not carry them further. There are tons of examples of the positive impact of new leadership, on companies like Apple, Microsoft, Uber, Disney, Ford, etc. And there are certainly plenty of exa…

By the Matt Levine definition of securities fraud, they seem to be I trouble:

- say one thing in public

- know in private the thing is false

- have that result in a lower stock price

-> securities fraud

Re: Facebook whistleblower says she wants to fix company, not harm it

#102

Post by nradov »

snowwrestler wrote: post #87

Facebook is going to become a hollowed out shell of itself if they do not change. They’ll get hollowed out by litigation, legislation, investors, or all of the above. They need new leadership. The tactics that got them here will not carry them further. There are tons of examples of the positive impact of new leadership, on companies like Apple, Microsoft, Uber, Disney, Ford, etc. And there are certainly plenty of exa…

What litigation or legislation would hollow out Facebook? I would like to see stronger legislation around consumer data privacy, but that would only marginally reduce Facebook advertising revenue.

Re: Facebook whistleblower says she wants to fix company, not harm it

#103

Post by exolymph »

erklik wrote: post #100
snowwrestler wrote: post #87

Facebook is going to become a hollowed out shell of itself if they do not change. They’ll get hollowed out by litigation, legislation, investors, or all of the above. They need new leadership. The tactics that got them here will not carry them further. There are tons of examples of the positive impact of new leadership, on companies like Apple, Microsoft, Uber, Disney, Ford, etc. And there are certainly plenty of exa…

> Yes I know Zuckerberg cannot be ousted by typical corporate maneuvering Why is that? I am not aware of Facebook's corporate structure so I am curious. - Yes, this is a LMGTFY question, but I find that people can often provide a better answer, that's easier to understand especially when the question is more of a curiosity rather something I wish to find the answer of rapidly.

He controls the voting shares.

Re: Facebook whistleblower says she wants to fix company, not harm it

#104

Post by mrxd »

I think misinformation and conspiracy theories on these platforms are a huge problem. A few years ago, some bad actors were successful in convincing Congress of a crazy conspiracy theory that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The results were far-reaching. The US violated the UN charter and launched a disastrous war in Iraq where millions of Iraqis were killed, injured and displaced. They used a platform called The New York Times to spread their lies.

All of the problems of Facebook and social media are just problems of the media in general. Misinformation? Conspiracies? Social comparison? Outrage-driven content? Body image issues? All rampant in the mainstream press, but no journalists are calling for regulation of their industry.

If you were to propose federal regulation of the New York Times, journalists would object and talk about the first amendment, the 4th estate and the need for a free and independent press. It's an elitist double standard with content controls for the masses and first amendment rights for the graduates of Princeton and Columbia with jobs at prestigious publications.

Re: Facebook whistleblower says she wants to fix company, not harm it

#105

Post by theptip »

xqcgrek2 wrote: post #47

This individual is not a 'whistleblower'. Nothing revealed is illegal or fraudulent.

To quote Matt Levine, “everything is securities fraud”. If FB is representing to the public that they are doing better than they actually are on fighting these issues, and the truth damages their share price, then they have committed securities fraud and will be sued by shareholders.

Re: Facebook whistleblower says she wants to fix company, not harm it

#106

Post by sk2020 »

wesleywt wrote: post #59
iammisc wrote: post #30

The biggest conspiracy theory and insurrection attempt was the fake Russian conspiracy and the conspiracy to affect the election outcome conveniently described by time magazine. I'm completely uninterested in a ragtag group of curly haired shirtless weirdos who stormed congress. I am concerned about large corporations, rich interest groups and large multi media conglomerates that have actual power to affect political…

Do you not care about people attacking your biggest symbol of power. Within in reach of many of your representatives. Driven by years of hate and misinformation? You should care. Russian interference is well documented by American intelligence agencies and private individuals.

Some people forcibly entered the Capitol to protest during Justice Kavanaugh’s nomination. A few people got arrested. Life went on.

Personally, I think the mortal fear politically active leftists have of any sign of opposition, no matter how trivial, speaks volumes about how they feel about their own position.

Re: Facebook whistleblower says she wants to fix company, not harm it

#107

Post by Karrot_Kream »

dragonwriter wrote: post #16
_moof wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook might be a factor in the division we see today in America but don't kid yourself: we were pretty f*in' divided during the Bush years—the Supreme Court had to decide that election, and the 9/11 unity lasted about a day and a half—and the GOP stopped at nothing to go after Clinton. This has been going on since the 1980s. Facebook may be an accelerant, but it didn't start this fire—not by a long shot.

> we were pretty f*in' divided during the Bush years, and the GOP stopped at nothing to go after Clinton. Its quite weird, because the exact same narrative of unprecedented polarization has been used under Clinton (during the bipartisan neoliberal policy consensus), Bush, Obama, and Trump (with Biden, its at least usually acknowledged as a continuation of that under Trump, not new), with most major voices just seemin…

I think it's pretty obvious to anyone familiar with US history that the seeds of these "culture wars" started in the '60s with the hippie movement. While I wasn't old enough, I know several older liberals who talked about Reagan the way many younger liberals talk about Trump (and probably worse!), and older conservatives who talked about Carter similarly to how younger conservatives talk about Obama. Reagan was known as the Teflon President because none of the gaffes he made could ever stick to him and he remained quite popular throughout his rule.

The problem is, the internet, the web, and now social media has accelerated this divisiveness to a whole new point. As the GP says, it's an accelerant. Like a small cooking fire can turn nasty with the addition of gas, the acceleration of the culture wars thanks to the winner-take-all outcomes of today mean that everything is getting more heated _faster_.

EDIT: While I know it's faux pas, I am curious where/why the downvotes are coming (from) simply because this seems fairly non-controversial, and also because it started out with a few upvotes first.

Re: Facebook whistleblower says she wants to fix company, not harm it

#108

Post by nradov »

bamboozled wrote: post #97
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #25

We have seen this story before. Person joins Facebook thinking they can "help". Then quits. Facebook is a public company whose purpose is serve advertisers. Online ads is the only way they can generate revenue. It is not some woo-woo about connecting the world, giving people a voice, or whatever. That's what the internet enables, not a single website controlled by someone else. Facebook tries to take credit for what…

Facebook is a public company whose purpose is serve advertisers. Online ads is the only way they can generate revenue. It is not some woo-woo about connecting the world, giving people a voice, or whatever. That's what the internet enables, not a single website controlled by someone else. Facebook tries to take credit for what is good about the internet. I truly think it could move away from that model by innovating ?…

Innovating is hard. Companies get attached to existing revenue streams. That's the classic innovator's dilemma.

https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=46

Re: Facebook whistleblower says she wants to fix company, not harm it

#109

Post by btown »

ineedasername wrote: post #72
fredgrott wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the solution is re thinking the business model, we already have a successful model its called Discord. No ads, just premium services for users.

Discord doesn't appear to be profitable yet. Or, at least they don't appear to have ever said they were, and have taken about $500m in funding w/ about $220m in revenue since 2016. They seem to be on a solid path, but I think it's too soon to hold them up as an archetype of a social networking service that can be massively successful on a freemium/subscription revenue model. I also can't think of any company close to…

If Discord ever did need to become ad-supported (not that I ever want it to!!), it could actually strike an interesting middle ground.

Facebook's problem is not that it controls which ads a person sees based on their content and communities, but rather quite the reverse: it controls what content and communities a person sees in order to increase their engagement with ads!

Discord, if it were to maintain a strong commitment to a "one way flow" of information towards ad targeting (without leaking that information to advertisers, of course, which is easier said than done) and not towards content promotion, could find a sweet spot where it is not possible for them to ever enter the business of being incentivized to promote misinformation - except insofar as paid ads are the misinformation, which is still a problem but at least a more traceable and manageable one. People would still discover and choose their communities organically, and the mods and participants of communities would control their outbound edges of the discovery graph.

Of course, not being able to optimize the bulk of a user experience for engagement is somewhat anathema to both the data scientist and product management instincts in me... but I honestly would much rather work on any B2B recommender system, or even an ad system like the aforementioned one, than blindly write code that has now been proven to do harm.

Re: Facebook whistleblower says she wants to fix company, not harm it

#110

Post by sk2020 »

rocketpastsix wrote: post #90
kcplate wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps I am of the minority opinion, but I damn sure was never worried about a bunch of selfie-taking unarmed rednecks destroying the United States of America. My faith in this country goes a little deeper than that.

I wonder if your opinion would be different if those unarmed rednecks were able to get to Speaker Pelosi, Leader Schumer, Minority Leader McConnell or VP Pence? Those "unarmed rednecks" were able to do something not even the various armies of the Confederacy couldn't: get inside the capitol. People are not terrified enough, because this group of people saw they could do it and I have a strong feeling they will try ag…

Are you suggesting this country is better off with Nancy Pelosi or Mitch McConnel in it? Think about what you’re saying.
Post reply on HN