Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy • Hacker News Board

Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy

#561

Post by ectopod » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:02 PM UTC

teawrecks wrote: post #236

handrous wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't want Facebook fixed and I do want Facebook harmed. I don't want the government to meddle with what types of things people can say online, I want them to ban the business model of stalking people online and selling intimate details of their lives. If the problem is Facebook choosing profits over public good, then cut off the profits. This is obvious. Bingo. Make stalking at scale the same as stalking by cree…

> Tracking everything people do isn't a "business model"—it's a crime. Um, no it's not?

To stalk a single person is a crime; to stalk a billion is a business model.

Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy

#562

Post by epgui » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:05 PM UTC

_-david-_ wrote: post #489

epgui wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you feel this way, have you ever considered that you may be a victim of or participating in the dissemination of misinformation or disinformation?

The problem is sometimes these groups are wrong. It was misinformation to say that the virus COULD have come from a lab. Obviously we don't know for certain, but to even suggest it may have been from a lab was called misinformation. If you think that is misinformation than you are the one who is a victim of or participating in the dissemination of misinformation or disinformation.

> It was misinformation to say that the virus COULD have come from a lab.

No, and in my experience this is not how things were presented. It _is_ misinformation to suggest that that is the likeliest explanation or to imply that we have a good reason to think so.

At a higher level, there's also the question of context, and the question of what the appropriate forum for such discussion is, and what is productive or non-productive geopolitically.

But it's not misinformation to float the idea and explore the possibility.

Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy

#563

Post by ODILON_SATER » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:06 PM UTC

They always bring the kids when they want to control the flow of information. Don't fall for it. She is clearly planted, voluntarily or involuntarily.

Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy

#564

Post by NoGravitas » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

kypro wrote: post #172

thepasswordis wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whistleblowers are anti-authoritarian, which is typically a right wing/conservative position in contemporary politics. To the people downvoting me here: can you list some figures who have been protesting authoritarianism who are left-coded in contemporary American society? I'm thinking of wikileaks, edward snowden, glenn greenwald. These people have all been "accused" of being right wingers. The people protesting loc…

I think you're being downvoted because historically anti-authoritarianism has been associated with the left and that was where I always found myself politically. However, these days I would agree that a lot of people who consider themselves "anti-authoritarianism" are on the right. I don't think this is what OC meant though, but I've certainly found over the last few years my anti-authoritarianism positions have had…

Edward Snowden is absolutely a leftist (see this recent Twitter post, for example: https://mobile.twitter.com/Snowden/status/144519346396045721...). Russel Brand is a leftist, though he sometimes speaks in ways the cultural left would rather he didn't.

Glenn Greenwald and Julian Assange both certainly used to be leftists, and may still be at heart, but they've both let personal grudges define their alliances for them and offend a lot of allies on the left. They're certainly not meaningfully right-wing, though.

Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy

#565

Post by xboxnolifes » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

samstave wrote: post #532

xboxnolifes wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s not “unknown” to technologists. I think the odd bit is that if this information isn't unknown to anyone in technology, even those not working on similar systems, then how is this "whistleblowing". It's like calling informing people about marginal tax rates "whistleblowing" because so many people don't understand how they work.

It is important to discuss because its the INTENT behind what is being done, not so much HOW they are doing it technically - we 'technologists' love to know the how, but everyone needs to know the 'WHY' -- especially non-technical users. Just because most people are non-technical does not make them stupid... and it doesnt remove their humanity, which, as unpopular as it may seem, throughout human's entire history the…

I agree it's important to discuss the WHY in things, but I don't see how that applies to my confusion around the usage of the term "whistleblower" at all.

Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy

#566

Post by haswell » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

janed0pecod wrote: post #550

haswell wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a thought experiment, apply the same sentiment to big tobacco. "Has big tobacco really caused that much suffering to you? Seriously, just don't smoke if you're worried about the resulting health problems." > For most people, it's just a social network where they post innocuous stories and stay connected This is where things go south. Rewind to the period of time before we understood just how bad cigarettes are for…

Except social media has a lot of upsides along with all the bad while the tobacco industries have literally none...only downsides (well if you don't count jobs created and all that but that is a low bar since any unethical thing can create job). But ultimately you're not doing a fair comparison here.

It's easy to conclude that now that we understand just how bad tobacco is. But if you rewind a bit, I think people would have said the upsides of smoking were:

- It helps you relax and makes you feel good

- Promotes socialization with the other smokers you know

- Helps you look sophisticated / cool

- I don't have the citation handy, but I recall seeing old advertising campaigns that touted all kinds of benefits

Now we know that none of those perceived benefits matter since the more likely outcomes are severe health issues and death. Doesn't matter if it fosters community if that community will die because of it.

The other part of the comparison that gets a bit messy is that the existence of social media isn't necessarily the primary issue - it's the application of engagement algorithms that prioritize specific types of content. That is what I'd argue has no inherent value (aside from monetary), or dubious value at best.

I'm not saying this is the choice that must be made, but it is conceivable that the harm caused by the current state of the product is enough to mitigate the positive factors.

Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy

#567

Post by mschuster91 » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:08 PM UTC

slg wrote: post #458

RandomLensman wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blaming Facebook for societies' problems is far too easy. People manage(d) to get into civil wars, genocides, etc. without it quite well. Domestic US political issues will not be resolved by making Facebook disappear (why does it not seem to have similar impact everywhere?) - it might be an amplifier, but in the past folks have found all sorts of other ways to amplify or not even needed amplification because they cou…

>Blaming Facebook for societies' problems is far too easy. People manage(d) to get into civil wars, genocides, etc. People die eventually anyway, why should we blame murderers? The obvious answer is that speeding up a negative result is still bad even if that result is eventually inevitable. > Domestic US political issues will not be resolved by making Facebook disappear (why does it not seem to have similar impact e…

> One of the things the whistleblower mentioned in her 60 Minutes interview is that European political parties complained that Facebook incentivizes taking more extremism political positions.

Not much love for Facebook from me, but literally all of the European political parties complaining are just looking for a cheap scapegoat for their own failures. Strings of corruption and lobbyism scandals (especially in the conservative and long-establishment parties), other personal utter failures to lead a party or country as well as failure to see and act upon the side effects of three decades of rabid globalization and unregulated hyper-capitalism past the fall of the Soviet Union are what led to the erosion of the classic European Social Democrat and Christian Democrat-type parties.

Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy

#568

Post by _ivvf » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:09 PM UTC

NoGravitas wrote: post #540

_ivvf wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except what you are saying is not really true. Most conservatives want to reduce government power, not extend it. The left, on the other hand, universally wants to extend government reach. I would recommend reading "The Authoritarian Moment" which goes into detail as to how the left are basically winning: https://www.amazon.com/Authoritarian-Moment-Weaponized-Ameri... To quote from the book's introduction: "There are…

Conservatives want to increase the power of those government institutions that are the least accountable, and are most connected to the use of violence: the police and the military. They want to reduce the power of any government institutions that would serve to provide public accountability to other power centers in US society, mainly corporations and the wealthy. Corporations and the wealthy need police: to protect…

> Conservatives want to increase the power of those government institutions that are the least accountable, and are most connected to the use of violence: the police and the military.

That's just not true. Conservatives want to balance the need for police to enforce the law with the risk that the police acquire too much power. Also, conservatives recognize far more correctly than the left that we need military strength. It was the leftist call for demilitarization prior to WWII that contributed to Hitler's success. The left-leaning Jimmy Carter found his policies wholly inadequate for dealing with the Soviet Union. In contrast, it was Winston Churchill that saved Britain in WWII, and it was Ronald Reagan's expansion of military spending that bankrupted the Soviet Union. Leftists have grand ideas of defunding the police and military that simply don't work in reality.

> The Left ultimately wants to abolish government power and create a stateless, classless society

The left think they can create utopias. Again, their grandiose visions never work in reality. Where has this stateless, classless, society ever succeeded? The 20th century is littered with the bodies of those slain in pursuit of false utopias.

> The Democratic Party is far from being controlled by leftists:

Biden's administration is by far the most leftist we have seen in history. It makes Obama's administration seem almost reasonable. 6-10 trillion in projected socialist spending on socialist programs, unconstitutional eviction moratoria, authoritarian health mandates, and woke agendas with regards to race, gender, and public education, all provide a wealth of evidence that your current view on the democratic party may not be grounded in reality either, at least when it comes to what they are actually doing.

Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy

#569

Post by handrous » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:11 PM UTC

NoGravitas wrote: post #483

coliveira wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are completely missing the direction in which this happens! The US government itself has little power, it is a shell that represents the interests of several capitalists. The best known are: the oil industry, the financial industry, the war industry (which works together with the other two), the pharmaceutical industry, along with several rich families like the Koch family, the Walton family, etc. These powerful…

Yes; another way of looking at it is that the US government represents the "dictatorship of Capital". Its job is to represent the interests of the capitalist class as a whole . This includes managing conflicts between individuals, firms, or industries that might otherwise threaten the stability of the system, even if they have to step on particular individuals, firms, or even industries in order to do so. That's how…

> Yes; another way of looking at it is that the US government represents the "dictatorship of Capital".

When you consider that the driving question of the conflict behind the American War for Independence, and so essentially the founding idea of our state, was, "should aristocrats have most of the political power, or should rich businessmen have most of the political power?" this is what one would expect, really.

Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy

#570

Post by PaulDavisThe1st » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:11 PM UTC

adolph wrote: post #528

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And so ? If you are going to be a "whistleblower" about something like this, and you want to be effective, are you really going to try and plan out your actions alone?

If the whistleblower is a directed by an organization that sees political advantage in attacking the whistle's subject, is that person still a whistleblower or just a whistle? I have no information about the whistleblower but I am open to the possibility that the motives are more complex than a simple case of altruism. Understanding the motivation of the whistleblower is significant to understanding the completeness…

I put the term "whistleblower" in quotes because I think it has been the wrong term right from the beginning.

I also don't think that "simple case of altruism" ever describes whistleblowing. To do something that will likely cost your job at least, and see you incarcerated at worst, requires a level of conviction about certain things that most people do not share. Even the whistleblowers that almost nobody questions any more (e.g. Daniel Ellsberg of the Pentagon Papers) had viewpoints that most people would have said "tainted" their behavior beyond mere altruism. They wanted the world to be different.