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

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

#701

Post by charwalker » Wed, Oct 06, 2021, 4:44 PM UTC

karaterobot wrote: post #381

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.

And yet, regulating off-label usage of opioids doesn't seem to be very effective at reducing addiction either. So perhaps this analogy doesn't work, and we should acknowledge that using social media and becoming addicted to opioids are substantively different?

The addiction process has a mental component that in some people is stronger than the physical addiction. This seems more a thread on addiction and bad habits vs aligning the technical specs of each issue.

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

#702

Post by smokey_circles » Wed, Oct 06, 2021, 4:52 PM UTC

B1FF_PSUVM wrote: post #544

chmsky00 wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how he’d speak of a supposedly even better educated society stealing the future of the next due to circular validation of our waste filled industrialism.

> stealing the future of the next How would the next generation like having a pristine Earth, without any infrastructure whatsoever? No roads, no buildings, no domesticated animals, no libraries, nothing but nature. No pyramids, no poems, all the oil and coal in the ground, "noble savages" all around.

I mean, I guess you could say the pyramids were built with green energy. It's a strange twist on slavery, but creative.

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

#703

Post by notacoward » Wed, Oct 06, 2021, 4:57 PM UTC

CountDrewku wrote: post #577

notacoward wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What @heartbreak said, but also far more. Vaccines aren't 100% so the continuing circulation of the virus will cause some number of those to get sick. Then there are variants. Kids being sent home because someone else tested positive. Travel restrictions. The list goes on. None of this should be news to anybody who has actually been paying attention, and such a person better not be saying "do your own research" to an…

> Vaccines aren't 100% so the continuing circulation of the virus will cause some number of those to get sick. Then there are variants. You're negating your own point. Full vaccination is not achievable just stop with this silly pointless rhetoric. >Travel restrictions. The un-vaccinated aren't restricting your travel. You've got a bit of stockholm syndrome going on.

> Full vaccination is not achievable

That's called the fallacy of the excluded middle (sub-species "argument by demanding impossible perfection") and it doesn't negate my own point at all. No, 100% elimination isn't possible, but every reduction helps and literally saves lives.

> The un-vaccinated aren't restricting your travel.

Simply untrue. There are still countries that won't let me in because I'm from a country with too-high case levels. There are more that I wouldn't go to because I don't want to be in a small confined space for hours on end with people whose oppositional defiant disorder has made them dangerous. I would have liked to visit family in New Zealand this year (from the US). At one time that might have been possible, but no, because of people who are too selfish and/or arrogant to do what's obviously right for public health.

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

#704

Post by quotemstr » Wed, Oct 06, 2021, 5:08 PM UTC

specialist wrote: post #690

quotemstr wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, actually, it's not any of these things. It's on HN that dang applies special rules to your comments if he doesn't like you. FB's algorithm is impersonal. Your list of criteria is legally inactionable. Neither you nor anyone else can write down what precisely it is that FB should be prohibited from doing. All I see is a bunch of unproductive rhetoric about how this is bad or that is bad. Blah blah, filter bubbles,…

Regulating Facebook, making it safe for human consumption, is trivial. No targeted advertising. No algorithmic news feed. Voila. Fixed. RSS feed readers can do it. So can Facebook. > dang applies special rules to your comments if he doesn't like you. What's FB's equivalent to HN's guidelines? When has @dang violated his own guidelines? Are you suggesting that automated curation, moderating is without bias ? > FB's al…

> No targeted advertising.

Strong disagree. Why the hell shouldn't I be able show ads to people who want to see them?

> No algorithmic news feed.

HN is an algorithmic feed.

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

#705

Post by mullingitover » Wed, Oct 06, 2021, 5:23 PM UTC

quotemstr wrote: post #704

specialist wrote: post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regulating Facebook, making it safe for human consumption, is trivial. No targeted advertising. No algorithmic news feed. Voila. Fixed. RSS feed readers can do it. So can Facebook. > dang applies special rules to your comments if he doesn't like you. What's FB's equivalent to HN's guidelines? When has @dang violated his own guidelines? Are you suggesting that automated curation, moderating is without bias ? > FB's al…

> No targeted advertising. Strong disagree. Why the hell shouldn't I be able show ads to people who want to see them? > No algorithmic news feed. HN is an algorithmic feed.

> Why the hell shouldn't I be able show ads to people who want to see them?

Nobody's stopping you. If you want to show ads to people interested in football, post ads on a football site. If you want to show ads to people interested in horses, show them on a horses site. If this type of non-invasive targeting to display ads doesn't make you as much profit, well that's a you problem.

> HN is an algorithmic feed.

You seem to be struggling with the idea of a 'bespoke' algorithm where everyone's algorithm is different, informed by an internet-wide surveillance system. This is the difference between HN and FB.

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

#706

Post by dillondoyle » Wed, Oct 06, 2021, 5:37 PM UTC

cyberpunk wrote: post #390

keneda7 wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found this site to be pretty fair when rating media bias. It lists all the three sites as having liberal bias. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ Also I want to point out Vice gave a known murderer a national interview for him to push his fake narrative. Meanwhile there was an actual video and pictures of the killing that completely blew away any notion this was anything other that a murder. Michael Reinoehl hide b…

Vice are an absolute shower of bastards, I don’t read anything there after they basically outed SexyCyborg even though she begged them not to, and then took her patreon down cutting off a lot of her funding… [0] Wankers. 0: https://thefederalist.com/2018/08/20/spat-chinese-hacker-vic...

their founder definitely is ;)

Definitely not on the level as NyTimes but I was just mentioning their weekly news and video I find really good. They have stories no one else covers.

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

#707

Post by dillondoyle » Wed, Oct 06, 2021, 5:37 PM UTC

barbacoa wrote: post #565

NineStarPoint wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New York Times is listed as center-left and high factual though. Orbiting the center and factual is really about as good as you’re going to get for less biased reporting. (Ignoring how even that is reductive, and that the NYT definitely has its own set of biases that don’t neatly fit on the left-right spectrum.)

The issue with the NYT is not around factual reporting but that they are shifting away from fact based reporting to opinions that are being presented as facts. I read an article about a voting bill that had passed in some Republican state. The whole article was about how this is voter suppression, how Republicans don't like minorities, what politicians on Twitter had to say. In the whole article there was only ONE br…

Yes I agree this is misleading especially online the small 'opinion' sub heading is really small like on Apple News. All the majors are guilty of this.

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

#708

Post by dillondoyle » Wed, Oct 06, 2021, 5:43 PM UTC

smsm42 wrote: post #673

dillondoyle wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have examples of importantly not opinion pieces which you consider liberal? to me their reporting is very flat and caged in a good way.

But you know what, don't believe me. I'm just some random dude on the internet, what do I know. Just ask their public editor: https://archive.ph/A26ZF You don't have to read long. Just read the first line.

It's opinion, from 2004, and mostly references 'big city' centric coverage. Call out to anti-gay marriage lol ;)

Which I guess I understand. If I tried to view from the perspective that I lived in Missouri, reading fashion reports like that piece illustrates would seem foreign to my world view and maybe scary like it's pushing some comical 'fly over state' vs the elites worldview.

But I don't know if I would concede that's liberal it's not my issue, like I know it's outdated but you can draw a line from gay rights as mentioned to trans rights today. I hate that some view this as 'political' to score points endangering people, versus I see it as basic human rights.

But thank you I do see more this viewpoint that culture has become very political today and that does help explain the strong reaction from the right.

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

#709

Post by charwalker » Wed, Oct 06, 2021, 5:49 PM UTC

ayngg wrote: post #423

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…

One fairly common pattern seen is that companies develop in a nascent space where there were few rules and were therefore able to basically outrun regulation/ the law that moves very slowly. When that regulation eventually comes it ends up solidifying the monopolistic advantage by essentially creating a moat and closing the door on practices that helped create such growth in the first place. I think when stakes are t…

Build the moat then break up the corps involved as needed.

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

#710

Post by CountDrewku » Wed, Oct 06, 2021, 6:01 PM UTC

notacoward wrote: post #703

CountDrewku wrote: post #577

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Vaccines aren't 100% so the continuing circulation of the virus will cause some number of those to get sick. Then there are variants. You're negating your own point. Full vaccination is not achievable just stop with this silly pointless rhetoric. >Travel restrictions. The un-vaccinated aren't restricting your travel. You've got a bit of stockholm syndrome going on.

> Full vaccination is not achievable That's called the fallacy of the excluded middle (sub-species "argument by demanding impossible perfection") and it doesn't negate my own point at all . No, 100% elimination isn't possible, but every reduction helps and literally saves lives. > The un-vaccinated aren't restricting your travel. Simply untrue. There are still countries that won't let me in because I'm from a country…

>That's called the fallacy of the excluded middle (sub-species "argument by demanding impossible perfection") and it doesn't negate my own point at all. No, 100% elimination isn't possible, but every reduction helps and literally saves lives.

It entirely negates your point since it's predicated on the the fact that un-vaccinated will supposedly continue eating up hospital resources. There is no future where this will stop until the disease has run its course. Therefore, your point is moot. Even more so because you have no objective number of vaccinations or hospital cases that MUST be met.

>Simply untrue. There are still countries that won't let me in because I'm from a country with too-high case levels.

You really seem to have an issue grasping that those restrictions are coming from the governments of those countries. They are not coming from un-vaccinated people. What's happening is that you've let them create a boogie-man and brainwash you into placing the blame away from the people who are causing your issues. This is how fascism and authoritarianism spreads. I'm sure you can think of a few times in history where certain leaders singled out specific groups for blame and how that worked out.

>There are more that I wouldn't go to because I don't want to be in a small confined space for hours

That's on you. No one else has a responsibility to protect you. If you don't trust science or the vaccination then it sounds like you have some major health anxiety that needs to be dealt with.

If you are vaccinated and you're going into a country like NZ there is ZERO logic in saying you cannot enter due to your country of origin having a higher case load. This absolute stupidity. Place the blame where it lies. NZ is full of anti-science morons, it has nothing to do with un-vaccinated people in the US.

Give me hard objective numbers that must be met for all restrictions/lockdowns to be dropped please. I'll save you some time. THEY DON'T EXIST. This means they will continue to string you along blaming all of their authoritarian tactics on specific group of people that aren't actually doing anything to you.

Let me guess... you also blamed the kid who talked too much in class when the teacher took your pizza party away? It wasn't the kid who took that from you.