Facebook Whistleblower Leaks Thousands of Pages of Incriminating Internal Docs • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook Whistleblower Leaks Thousands of Pages of Incriminating Internal Docs

#331

Post by mcguire » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:48 PM UTC

mdoms wrote: post #223

farcebook wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One, most of the mainstream news has at least basic editorial processes in place that do a rudimentary check on truthiness. Facebook, along with some of the sketchier news outlets, are the opposite: they profit off (and optimize for) disinformation. Two, it's a matter of scale. Facebook reaches a far larger audience and has far more detail into their preferences and can nano-target personalized stories for them and c…

> One, most of the mainstream news has at least basic editorial processes in place that do a rudimentary check on truthiness. Come on, man. There are just so many counter examples, from the "paper of record" NYT (1619 Project) to MSNBC (Russia nonsense) to Fox News (literally everything) to Rolling Stone (A Rape on Campus) I could sit here all day listing outright lies and untruths published in the pages of mainstrea…

1619 Project? "The 1619 Project is an ongoing initiative from The New York Times Magazine that began in August 2019, the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of our national narrative"?

I mean, sure, some historians objected (https://web.archive.org/web/20200814135117/https://www.nyboo... [1], https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/12/historians...). But if "cynicism" is a sin, everyone here on HN (and not the least you) are due for some unpleasant cigars in hell.

[1] I note that I, non-historian that I am, could poke some logical and (from primary sources) historical holes in that speech.

Re: Facebook Whistleblower Leaks Thousands of Pages of Incriminating Internal Docs

#332

Post by JohnFen » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:48 PM UTC

aierou wrote: post #162

JohnFen wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are they false? The similarities being talked about center around those companies specifically leveraging the mechanisms of addiction in order to make more money in spite of the fact that doing so harms people. I think a very good argument can be made that Facebook (among others) are doing this very thing.

Let me put it this way: how would you go about measuring the harm that Facebook or any other social media company causes? With cigarettes, oxycontin, or weapons manufacturers, you can look directly at the physical harm they cause. We have statistics and studies that require little effort to interpret. With social media, it is nearly impossible to connect physical or psychological harm to a platform over the course of…

The misbehavior of Facebook has been well documented and has been going on for many years. Facebook has been shifty and deceptive in their responses, and there is literally no reason to give them the benefit of any doubt at this point.

Your comments about hard data are well-taken, but you talk as if we have no, or very little, evidence that harm has been (and continues to be) done. I think that we have a lot of evidence to indicate that there's a real problem here -- and one that Facebook continues to downplay. None of that evidence is as clear-cut and solid as physical injury is, but that's to be expected with social harm.

> Why, in this case, do we seem eager to throw scientific rigor and frankly due process out the window?

I'm not eager for that at all. On the other hand, the evidence we do have very strongly indicates (but does not prove) that there's a real, serious issue here. Are you suggesting that we should ignore that? If we waited until there was zero uncertainty on things before taking action, the world would be unacceptably dangerous.

Facebook could have helped on this front by being honest and taking the issue as seriously as they take profit-generation. But they chose not to, and now, after so many years of deceptive and abusive behavior, we have no reason to trust them anyway.

Re: Facebook Whistleblower Leaks Thousands of Pages of Incriminating Internal Docs

#333

Post by jeffrallen » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:49 PM UTC

an-allen wrote: post #323

015a wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't like Oxycontin, just don't use Oxycontin, Dilaudid, or Fentanyl. Don't know why so many people here think adults are not capable of regulating themselves.

Chemical Addiction != scrolling facebook

Facebook's researchers found the opposite...

Re: Facebook Whistleblower Leaks Thousands of Pages of Incriminating Internal Docs

#334

Post by unethical_ban » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:49 PM UTC

plandis wrote: post #282

If you don’t like Facebook just don’t use Facebook, WhatsApp, or Instagram. Don’t know why so many people here think parents and adults are not capable of regulating themselves and their kids. It’s honestly condescending to think you know better than your fellow citizens if you’re arguing for government intervention.

We haven't banned cigarettes or alcohol, but we have put labels, restrictions and public ad campaigns into place to govern the behavior of their sellers, and to inform the public of their dangers.

I think it is a terrible place where government does not have a responsibility, as the union of the people, to help inform citizens of the dangers of addictive products and to regulate unethical behavior of the sellers of such products.

Your perspective completely ignores the intentionally addictive design of the products, and the network effects of having everyone and every business you know also using it.

Re: Facebook Whistleblower Leaks Thousands of Pages of Incriminating Internal Docs

#335

Post by asdff » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:49 PM UTC

cratermoon wrote: post #254

oarabbus_ wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lets tax the hell out of social media companies to generate local revenue just like sin taxes. Very interesting idea, actually. There is evidence Social Media causes harm to some individuals' mental health (in a widespread manner causing some measurable societal harm), so a proposed tax on all social media companies with revenue going towards mental health programs seems worth exploring. Generally I'm not much in f…

> There is evidence Social Media causes harm to some individuals' mental health (in a widespread manner causing some measurable societal harm) And they do so by exploiting human weaknesses using the same psychological techniques used by casinos and other forms of gambling.

Yes, and we have regulations and taxes and laws around these industries, but evidently facebook gets off scott free.

Re: Facebook Whistleblower Leaks Thousands of Pages of Incriminating Internal Docs

#336

Post by finfinfin » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

haroldp wrote: post #316

cutemonster wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a misleading comparison. From what I read, trafficking / sex slavery was (is) happening via some places on FB, the company knew about it, did nothing. For example. Edit: the article from this HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28741532 , search for "traffickers" and "drug cartels". /Edit. Understaffed moderation teams, although FB had lots of money

Sex slavery is being facilitated by telephone conversations. What is the phone company's obligation to do about that?

Would you agree that it would be wrong for telephone companies to amplify sex slavery conversations? Like they would call you directly and just let you participate in the conversation because that would generate more engagement?

Re: Facebook Whistleblower Leaks Thousands of Pages of Incriminating Internal Docs

#337

Post by _hyn3 » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

woeirua wrote: post #77

I think a lot of people are choosing to ignore that a lot of companies have done things in the past that were not illegal at the time of action. However, those actions were later decided to be made illegal because the behavior was deemed to be antithetical to our values. For example, Standard Oil did not break any laws in its ruthless consolidation of the nascent oil industry. In fact, it exploited the law to allow i…

> a lot of companies have done things in the past that were not illegal at the time of action. However, those actions were later decided to be made illegal because the behavior was deemed to be antithetical to our values.

What you are saying is literally the opposite of hundreds of years of the rule of law.

If FB did break the law as written, then prosecute them for that in a fair trial by a jury of their peers, but yours (or anyone else's) personal feelings about "our values" should never be able to override the plain language of the law, especially retroactively.

Re: Facebook Whistleblower Leaks Thousands of Pages of Incriminating Internal Docs

#338

Post by _tom_ » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

jimkleiber wrote: post #183

woeirua wrote: post #77

I think a lot of people are choosing to ignore that a lot of companies have done things in the past that were not illegal at the time of action. However, those actions were later decided to be made illegal because the behavior was deemed to be antithetical to our values. For example, Standard Oil did not break any laws in its ruthless consolidation of the nascent oil industry. In fact, it exploited the law to allow i…

I really appreciate this point. I often see it as written rules (laws) and unwritten rules (ethics). If something breaks the unwritten rules we have about how people are supposed to interact with each other, then we often codify that rule into law. Many people will say "I didn't break the law" but where many people would say that person did break an unwritten law. > There should be no question, that what FB is doing…

Then there is the case of things are illegal, but are not enforced. Leading to the question of what is the law? What is written, or how it is enforced?

How many of you went above the speed limit today?

I suspect that much of what goes on in the stock market is similar.

Re: Facebook Whistleblower Leaks Thousands of Pages of Incriminating Internal Docs

#339

Post by asdff » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

jmcgough wrote: post #275

asdff wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My nintendo DS from 15 years ago gave me an eye strain warning every time i started it up and it doesn't always cause eye strain, only misuse does and I know that thanks to the informative banner.

I love that Nintendo is very aware of the potential negative effects of their products and games and tries to inform users / mitigate. Even when it comes to encouraging positive play between users - in the new Pokemon MOBA (games known for their toxicity) there's no text chat, only communication with a few emotes you can show. Some of their decisions make for arguably worse games for "hardcore" gamers (like the way t…

I thought pictochat was great too and a lot of fun. They could have opened it up and made it into a global network, but the beauty is that it operates on local networks so it was more of an in person social network, plus no way for advertisers and commercial companies to break in.

Re: Facebook Whistleblower Leaks Thousands of Pages of Incriminating Internal Docs

#340

Post by nuerow » Tue, Oct 05, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

vladd wrote: post #296

finfinfin wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like you are willfully ignoring Facebook’s own findings. They know that polarizing content is more engaging yet harmful… and they choose to amplify it anyway. The same old argument that it’s hard therefore let’s not do anything is not applicable. Facebook is not a neutral platform that just shows all posts from your friends in a chronological order. They are actively manipulating the stream and are fully respon…

Walmart is "manipulating" the placement of products on the shelf so that it's more likely for you to engage in bulk buying when you visit their stores. Both Facebook and Walmart have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to create value for them. The difference is that, with user generated content, the idea of black and white "bounds" of the law is no longer applicable and you have to devise a system of checks and b…

> Walmart is (...)

Whataboutism advances no discussion. Either Facebook's problems are discussed based on Facebook's circumstances and decisions and consequences, or we're better off not posting any message at all.