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

321–330 of 627 posts

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

#321

Post by tablespoon »

poopypoopington wrote: post #276
robbrown451 wrote: post #124

Whether or not what Facebook did was illegal and she technically qualifies as a "whistleblower", I salute her for what she has done and is doing by telling this story. People need to know about this, because it is harmful. This doesn't mean it should be illegal. But it is something people should consider if they go to work for Facebook (or other companies), and hopefully it will inspire people to do something about t…

I don't think we should want good people to stop working for Facebook. That never made sense to me. Facebook isn't going anywhere, and as such it should be improved, and the only way that will happen is if good people keep going to work there and trying to make it better.

> I don't think we should want good people to stop working for Facebook. That never made sense to me. Facebook isn't going anywhere, and as such it should be improved, and the only way that will happen is if good people keep going to work there and trying to make it better.

I wish I remember the article that explained this to me, but "participate, but try to change it from the inside" pretty much simplifies into just "participate." So all those good people will end up doing (from the inside) is help Facebook achieve Facebook's existing bad goals.

The best thing a "good person" can do to Facebook is leak and hope an external entity takes it down, but most of those good people won't have access to anything that's worth leaking.

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

#322

Post by MaxikCZ »

peter_retief wrote: post #310
slowmovintarget wrote: post #278

The real takeaway: Parents protect your children from social media. Talk to them. Give them rules to keep them safe. Say "No." Don't wait for Zuckerberg to do it. Don't wait for Congress to do it. Get yourself away from it, and get your children off it. Find some other way to share pictures with grandma and grandpa. We need regulation, yes, but this is the same as people smoking themselves into an early grave, but on…

Teenagers are not interested in facebook at all.

So because the name of the social app is different today the OP's point makes no sense?

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

#323

Post by cblconfederate »

code_duck wrote: post #301

>Frances Haugen: So, you know, you have your phone. You might see only 100 pieces of content if you sit and scroll on for, you know, five minutes. But Facebook has thousands of options it could show you. >The algorithm picks from those options based on the kind of content you've engaged with the most in the past. This is the primary reason I stopped using Facebook. I did everything I could to signal I did not wish to…

that's also the reason why facebook's moderation should be considered political manipulation: Facebook's raw material, user posts, cover all sides of the political spectrum, giving facebook the ability to shape the discussion to whichever direction they like

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

#324

Post by propergentle44 »

Sorry but nothing she shared is incriminating. It’s just the challenges internally that Facebook has to deal with given their scale and how much content is shared every second. She makes a false choice that somehow Facebook can 100% make it safe but they just choose not to. It doesn’t matter who regulates it, who is in charge, the technology aspect of figuring out what is “dangerous” content and what isn’t is still impossible. Facebook has far more internal discussions and open debates about how to solve this problem than any other company. They are right. They are the best at this but they are still failing in many ways. But it doesn’t mean they aren’t trying and that they haven’t made progress.

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

#325

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#326

Post by doktorhladnjak »

AlbertCory wrote: post #219
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…

The simplest solution is the one FB will never accept, and yet the harm to the public would be virtually zero: Eliminate all news, politics, and other public policy groups and apps. Return to being just a way to connect with friends and family. No one needs to get their news from Facebook. There are plenty of other sites on the Web for that. Same for all these other "engagement" services. Of course, this would cut th…

What you describe is basically Instagram

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

#327

Post by Fricken »

aemreunal wrote: post #182
yumraj wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, it is naive to separate FB and Zuckerberg. FB is morally corrupt because of Zuckerberg. In fact it is quiet telling that none of the FB cofounders were there long enough, probably because they saw who he is early on.

I believe it was Ben Thompson who recently suggested that it's possible a platform like Facebook is fundamentally incompatible with human nature as well. Maybe, at least, incompatible with society as it exists today. I've been thinking a lot abut that. Edit: Not a defense of Facebook. Regardless of what I said, I still don't think Facebook is trying to be a good company (morally and ethically) and I don't like them

The media theorist Marshall McLuhan accurately out the dangers of "Peer to peer electronic media" in the 1970s, as thought experiment. His theories on media were pretty good.

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

#328

Post by michaelmrose »

bagels wrote: post #298
k4lk wrote: post #230

It's an unfortunate but inevitable outcome of the attention economys race to the bottom. This area needs better regulation. The best approach is to stay out of technical implementation and focus on what principles companies should adhere to. As James Williams argue: it should be a civil right to have "freedom of chance". We already knew all too well what it does to our democracy that a large part of the public only g…

Many people are saying "regulation" What would that regulation actually require social media companies to do?

This is not palatable but trivial. Your login tied to your actual ID. Sites that won't participate can't take US funds or do business with entities that also want to do business with the US.

Call for violence or threaten people go to jail. Spread malicious lies you knew are false for political gains go to jail.

Spread others harmful crap unwittingly that would tend to lead to others deaths get a ticket for actual money and a strike. 3 strikes you can't play on social media this year. Get banned 3 years in a row get a 10 year vacation from social media.

The internet and society would be better off within a year. Within 3 most of the real pieces of work would be conspiring with each other via tor unable to reach 90% of the population.

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

#329

Post by taurath »

bagels wrote: post #298
k4lk wrote: post #230

It's an unfortunate but inevitable outcome of the attention economys race to the bottom. This area needs better regulation. The best approach is to stay out of technical implementation and focus on what principles companies should adhere to. As James Williams argue: it should be a civil right to have "freedom of chance". We already knew all too well what it does to our democracy that a large part of the public only g…

Many people are saying "regulation" What would that regulation actually require social media companies to do?

I made a few suggestions elsewhere in the thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28743057

Real deep regulation would mean breaking up the network effect, and forcing a federated system so either people have a choice or people have tools to manage what’s on their social streams.

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

#330

Post by michaelmrose »

poopypoopington wrote: post #276
robbrown451 wrote: post #124

Whether or not what Facebook did was illegal and she technically qualifies as a "whistleblower", I salute her for what she has done and is doing by telling this story. People need to know about this, because it is harmful. This doesn't mean it should be illegal. But it is something people should consider if they go to work for Facebook (or other companies), and hopefully it will inspire people to do something about t…

I don't think we should want good people to stop working for Facebook. That never made sense to me. Facebook isn't going anywhere, and as such it should be improved, and the only way that will happen is if good people keep going to work there and trying to make it better.

Why can't we just fine it 100% of revenue not profit until they can't keep the lights on or pay a lawyer to sue.
Post reply on HN