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

Facebook Whistleblower Leaks Thousands of Pages of Incriminating Internal Docs

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 734 posts

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

#431

Post by dionidium »

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…

It really bums me out to see these sentiments at the top of HN. What to do about "misinformation" is an interesting question for private actors to think about, if they wish, but what the government should do about it is not an interesting question. The debate has been had for a couple hundred years, already. It's over. One side already won.

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

#432

Post by parineum »

mynameisash wrote: post #175
parineum wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sin taxes How about we don't let the state decide what I get to do with my body (and mind)?

That's not what a sin tax does. You are still free to smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol, and were we to tax social media usage, you would still be free to use or not use that. But a sin tax ostensibly accounts for the economic externality*. We know that cigarettes impose a cost on society beyond the individual smoker. I'm all in favor of making people pay for things that we know cause damage to society more broadly.…

> We know that cigarettes impose a cost on society beyond the individual smoker

What's that cost?

From what I've read, all economic costs smokers impose on society are more than made up for in their dying early, they actually cost less [1]. I guess everyone should smoke to save the state money!

[1] https://pantagraph.com/news/fact-check-do-smokers-cost-socie...

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

#433

Post by cddotdot »

akudha wrote: post #315
bilbo0s wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that without laws, what would those "standards" be? You have to do more than the law? But how does any business in the future know what that is? The great things about law are predictability and flexibility. If the law is not enough, we can change it. Then everyone is held to that new standard. But having a standard that is not laid out, is the same thing as having no standard at all. Going into an are…

You seem to be misunderstanding what I was saying (or I wasn't clear). I am not at all saying we shouldn't have laws - we absolutely should have laws and rules. I am not saying that we should sue companies based on unstated ethics or morals (how would that even work anyway?). All I am saying is we should, as a society, have a better attitude and higher standards than stuff like greed is good , the sole purpose of a b…

Humanity isn't that selfish. It is idealistic but to even have the conversation to know why is minimally ethical.

Taking the converse argument of 0 ethics except THE LAW is infuriatingly common. Is it okay to murder so long as the act of murder is technically legal? Assuming perfect proof intent with direct action indefensible confession murder. But also 100% legal. Breaking no law. Would society find that acceptable? Even for those that used the loop hole?

It seems like folks want to live in a 0 common ethical baseline reality. We're discussing the middle and if Facebook is wrong. Not if they will get away with it. They will. And only because they get away with it does not make it right. Can we stop with the definition arguments of legality or the accountability of large corporations for a moment?

Is knowingly proceeding with a damaging action acceptable? One could even argue social media isn't damaging. The study is wrong and Facebook paid for it. Not me. But at least it's not this manifest destiny morality bullshit.

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

#434

Post by Pyramus »

_hyn3 wrote: post #352
Pyramus wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enron is another fascinating example, there is an interview with the former CFO where he talks about what he calls "legal fraud" - practices that are highly dubious but technically not illegal [1]. [1] https://youtu.be/goQhGqQtFZ4

There's no such thing as "legal fraud". Fraud is always illegal.

In theory yes - in practice no.

Legal/illegal is only a binary variable in theory. In practice it's things that are clearly white, clearly black and lots of grey in between. There are many concrete examples regarding accounting rules mentioned in the interview.

The question is where does a court draw the line, and as parent rightly points out, sometimes code/case law changes after the fact.

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

#435

Post by chalst »

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…

My regular reminder that there is no fiduciary duty to behave unethically. Fiduciary duty is a class of highly specific legal obligations on directors to act attentively and not put their own financial interests above those of shareholders. It is not an obligation to maximise return on investment.

Cf. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20776770

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

#436

Post by iammisc »

dillondoyle wrote: post #231
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…

I agree with holding all media accountable. But the problem with what you say is that for millions and millions 'news' is actually BS opinion shows. On both sides but from my perspective Fox & Murdoch's empire abroad has done far more harm than say Maddow preaching whatever riles that audience up. The actual press, WaPo, NyTimes (which does great docs, so does Vice imho) have rigid editorial process. Yet I still on H…

> The actual press, WaPo, NyTimes (which does great docs, so does Vice imho) have rigid editorial process. Yet I still on HN people say NyTimes is liberal which I don't belive either.

The New York times and WaPo? You mean the ones that consistently do things like make up false allegations about children (Nick Sandmann... the kid who smiled) and take much more time to scrutinize the later proof of their wrong doing than they ever did for their initial reporting? This happens constantly. It's not a one time event. It's almost like they're pushing an agenda.

The 'right wing' bias of the NYT tends to be around being Warhawks, but the right wing isn't necessarily the sole wing of war hawks in this country. The last republican president was quite anti-war.

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

#437

Post by [deleted] »

cddotdot wrote: post #433
akudha wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be misunderstanding what I was saying (or I wasn't clear). I am not at all saying we shouldn't have laws - we absolutely should have laws and rules. I am not saying that we should sue companies based on unstated ethics or morals (how would that even work anyway?). All I am saying is we should, as a society, have a better attitude and higher standards than stuff like greed is good , the sole purpose of a b…

Humanity isn't that selfish. It is idealistic but to even have the conversation to know why is minimally ethical. Taking the converse argument of 0 ethics except THE LAW is infuriatingly common. Is it okay to murder so long as the act of murder is technically legal? Assuming perfect proof intent with direct action indefensible confession murder. But also 100% legal. Breaking no law. Would society find that acceptable…

[deleted]

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

#438

Post by iammisc »

colinmhayes wrote: post #384
sentinel wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. The mainstream news pushed numerous stories over the past years without those rudimentary truthiness checks. 2. I disagree with many points in that paragraph: - echo chambers: when was the last time you heard a nuanced "from the other aisle" opinion from a NYT reader; an opinion that wasn't covered in the NYT. Same echo chamber, just a different format. - news companies are small and irrelevant: Seems like this na…

I read the times almost everyday and have plenty of conservative opinions. The Times has multiple conservative columnists and consistently publishes conservative op-eds.

These 'conservative' columnists do not reflect the majority of conservative opinion in this country though. NYT columnists tend to be members of the political or cultural elite. There is a large strain of anti-elite sentiment running through the country right now, especially on the right. These people do not feel their views are expressed in the NYT. For that matter, I know plenty of working-class dems who feel disenfranchised with the NYT, the media elite, the democratic party, etc.

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

#439

Post by iammisc »

hatenberg wrote: post #379
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…

Have you ever watched fox? People die every day because of their anti vaccine crap. Basic editorial process.

I was just listening to hannity the other day and the man was constantly talking about how you should talk to your doctor about vaccines because it's the best way to prevent covid. Listening to Cavuto the other afternoon, and heard a similar sentiment on his show. Who are you listening to exactly? The majority of anchors, especially the biggest ones, seem to basically endorse the vaccine.

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

#440

Post by smolder »

handrous wrote: post #301
hunterb123 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify, can you specify exactly what law you would like made? What do you want to be done exactly ? I would rather take the stance of feed algorithms and moderation logs be PUBLICLY available. Transparency instead of censorship.

Make spying on people illegal, even when a computer does it to billions of people rather than one creep doing it to one person. If you have to collect info about people to provide a product or service, make it strictly illegal to transfer or sell that info or anything derived from it . Don't like it, get into another business. No one's making you collect people's info. Yes, this should apply to e.g. credit card compa…

> This'd need some fine points hammered out (don't laws always?) but it's not that crazy.

It sounds like you're suggesting GDPR style regulation. They're still figuring out how to enforce that but generally I support it. Too much money is against it to get anything passed in the US, though.

Another problem is that the US government seems to like when the tech sector gobbles up data on people. It gives them new powers for social control.

Post reply on HN