Live data from Hacker News

Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy

npr.org

601–610 of 719 posts

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

#601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do want Facebook harmed So much hate... Has Facebook really caused that much suffering to you? Seriously, just don't use it if you don't like it. For most people, it's just a social network where they post innocuous stories and stay connected with their friends.

It is not about the suffering that FB is causing to him, but more to people and democracy in general. You can be harmed even if you don't use FB. Safe harbor is acceptable for websites whose social interaction is not the core business or is just a passive add-on, but FB must be held responsible of all the consequences of hate speech and disinformation on their platform because their algorithms are promoting them.

>It is not about the suffering that FB is causing to him, but more to people and democracy in general. You can be harmed even if you don't use FB.

Which was proven once and for all on Jan 6th 2021

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

#602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why it's a 3/4 truth. They don't offer "pay us to see John Doe's religious affiliation", instead they offer "show your ad to Catholics". It's more similar to a Catholic TV station selling commercial slots. That said, it can be far more targeted and powerful than a TV commercial, e.g. "show your ad to 18 year old Catholics with post-secondary education in Flint, Michigan".

Thanks for replying and not simply downvoting and moving on. I can see what you (or the parent) was getting at and somewhat agree that it's not a "full" truth, and there is some nuance at play. Although, with just a few of those variables (age/gender/poltiics/religion/geography) you can likely narrow down your target audience to a few tens of people, making those people identifiable. I recall a few years ago a report…

> I can see what you (or the parent) was getting at and somewhat agree that it's not a "full" truth, and there is some nuance at play.

The nuance is important, consider the statements:

1. DSA Direct sells data it has collected on you to Facebook.

2. Facebook sells data it has collected on you to advertisers.

These two statements appear to be the same but they are describing different things. The first statement describes the sale of data in a sense that a non-technical person would understand: Facebook gives DSA Direct money, and DSA Direct gives them data on individuals.

The second statement is deliberately crafted to look like the first (so as the ignite the same emotions) but describes something completely different. DSA Direct cannot buy data from Facebook. I cannot buy data from Facebook. People will go to great lengths (eg. "If I target a single person with ads, I can probe their information gradually") to equate the two, but they are not the same.

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

#603
post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they worked really hard to become indispensable and get people "hooked". You could make the same arguments about cigarettes, oxycontin or gambling.

No, frankly, you couldn't. To start with, the scientific evidence for the medically addictive and harmful properties of nicotine, opiates, and gambling is on a different planet compared to the nebulous correlations and self-reported survey "X% of teens tell us they don't feel good about themselves" results that have been beaten to death about social media. And on the most fundamental level, drugs and gambling provide…

As I understand it the issue is with their recommender system and ad driven business model, not the alt right figures who want to cry about free speech and cancel culture because they can't be racist online while at the same time trying to whipe anything vaguely related to "critical race theory" from existence.

The allegations are that Facebook knows that there are people addicted to their products and who have mental issues due to what the platform decides to show them but they refuse to do anything about it because it's good for their real customers.

I wrote more about this here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28763413

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

#604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't discussing Biden, I'm sure he's said plenty of racist stuff (although the second one was clear a slip of the tongue). "Only black people could live like that" when describing Chicago does not seem like a slip of the tongue, and seems more blatantly racist than either of the two things you've mentioned. “He once asked me if I could name a country run by a black person that wasn’t a ‘shithole'", etc. etc.

That's hearsay from Michael Cohen, Trump's disgruntled, disgraced ex-lawyer. Trump has disputed the claim so we have no idea who's telling the truth. We should assume Trump innocent until Cohen proves it. But we have Biden on tape and audio saying people aren't black if they don't vote for him. One is a rumor, one is a fact. That's my point.

Well he hasn't disputed the claim under oath :)

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

#605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And for others, it radicalizes them to conspiracy theories. "Just don't use it" isn't nice advice when you're mom's become an antivaxxer because facebook kept telling her about it and made it seem like local common consensus.

If somebody is going to believe in crackpot stuff, then it doesn't matter who or what the source is. I don't agree with the idea that we need to coddle the masses.

It does matter, because FB (social media such as Reddit and Twitter as well) create echochambers which amplify crackpot stuff and encourages people to act out in destructive ways (see basically all of the RL anti-mask agitation) in a way that was not happening before social media.

Social media creates literal mobs, with literal (tiki) torches if not pitchforks.

Yes, the difference between two cranks bitching over coffee alone versus the amplification which happens over social media IS FUCKING HUGE! (sorry for caps, but seriously -I've lived through both and the difference is fucking huge)

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

#606

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…

Big tobacco has caused millions of deaths. I'm yet to see any evidence that FB has caused harm. For instance, do you have data showing that there are more antivaxxers because of FB? Yes, antivaxxers discuss on the platform, so what? they would be discussing in cafes and at family meetings like they've always done. I do believe we need to use social medias with moderation, especially teenagers. However, I really have…

> Big tobacco has caused millions of deaths

And if some of the allegations and concerns are correct, the current trajectory companies like Facebook are taking us on are poised to cause far worse. We've already seen Facebook used to facilitate genocide, and there are very concerning trends that indicate it's impacting how entire societies engage each other. It's forcing increased polarization in politics and resulting in extremist candidates.

That good also exists is certainly important. But gauging the harm is not exactly straight forward, and we're only just beginning to understand the 2nd and 3rd order effects.

> I'm yet to see any evidence that FB has caused harm.

But that is quite literally the focus of the leaked research. There is growing evidence that the algorithmic prioritization of hateful/polarizing material is directly eroding the public's trust in civic institutions, and has facilitated the kind of mob mentality that led to the events of Jan 6 (for example).

Again, the issue is not social media. The issue is the application of ranking algorithms that manipulate and amplify certain kinds of dialog on a global scale.

Switching analogies, video games aren't inherently a bad thing. Microtransactions in video games aren't inherently a bad thing. Specific kinds of gamified microtransactions turn out to be strikingly similar to gambling, and are arguably extremely problematic.

I’d argue this is similar to what's happening here. Social media isn't inherently bad, and in some cases is actually quite good. But if participating in social media automatically means that all of my worst tendencies are validated and amplified by the platform, the platform is no longer a neutral factor and instead has become actively harmful.

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

#607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False equivalence is an easy fallacy to fall prey to -- this is not the same thing. It is similar and in the same domain, but hardly equal.

Do you wanna elaborate? I am interested

Sure. Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt and any other celebrity do not employ the same nefariously data driven agenda on a scale that begins to come anywhere close to that of Facebook; They are not comparable in this context. Scale is a highly differentiating factor. A more genuine comparison would be to the likes of Robert Mercer, Roger Ailes, etc.

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

#608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time I swipe my credit card, an intimate profile of who I am and what I do is updated. I don't see the difference between verifying my identity to use a service, and the thousands of other electronic activities I perform on a daily basis that succinctly outline what I do. This nonsense that one more organization asking for ID is somehow the straw the broke the camels back is decades too late. You say you are un…

I still fail to see how this makes the idea of trusting Facebook or any other social media company with my ID any better. What's clear as a bell to me is that, given how Facebook is known to behave reprehensibly , giving them more data is not something we should even be considering. It's a lot like saying "well now, this boat is full of holes, so rather than start patching them, let's just open several new ones".

> let's just open several new ones

I see it as the exact opposite: the gambler's fallacy. "This time we'll protect our privacy! I got a lucky feeling!!"

Doors open. Horse is gone. ID is actually smarter in this case because it will prevent fake accounts, which is a huge problem given their failures at policing the horrible things being done behind anonymity.

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

#609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To the people downvoting me here: can you list some figures who have been protesting authoritarianism who are left-coded in contemporary American society? Noam Chomsky?

Georg Orwell Not sure about "left-coded in contemporary American society" but he was an anarchist / social-liberal / social-democratic - albeit in terms of early 20 century western europa.

Orwell is a fantastic example. He's also a profoundly amusing example, since quoting him is inversely correlated with (1) actually agreeing with his politics, and (2) familiarity with (dystopian) fiction outside of a 10th grade English class.

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

#610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you’re getting downvotes by saying “it’ll never happen” which I find unfortunate Fatalism is how Bad Things survive in a committee-government such as ours. :-\

Clarification: I agree fatalism is bad, but that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t have a conversation around the rest of the comment.

The fatalist comment from GP distracted entirely from the value-add content and I added to that distraction. Blurg. :-\
Post reply on HN