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

Former Facebook staffers launch Integrity Institute

protocol.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 186 posts

Re: Former Facebook staffers launch Integrity Institute

#31

Post by rscoots »

barbazoo wrote: post #29
AlbertCory wrote: post #15

Long before the Internet, you could go through an airport and be unable to avoid the Moonies & the followers of Lyndon LaRouche. You could find the book "None Dare Call It Treason" and lots of people did. "The Daily Worker" (newspaper of the US Communist Party) was readily available. Any of those groups could take out ads in the newspaper, or hold demonstrations (like the Nazi Party in Skokie, IL). There were UHF sta…

I might obviously be wrong but I do think it's different. People didn't spend a good chunk of their day at newspaper stands waiting for new content. No one got "The Daily Worker" recommended to them because of their person (age/sex/income/location/communication/...). I feel like that fact often gets ignored. The problem isn't that "problematic" content exists but that FB is actively shoving it down people's throats i…

>The problem isn't that "problematic" content exists but...

Then you'll be disturbed to learn that members of the team are literally government operatives lobbying for more censorship on Facebook: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29001625

Re: Former Facebook staffers launch Integrity Institute

#32

Post by rajin444 »

sayhar wrote: post #2

Oh hi! That’s me! (And a bunch of other folks). Happy to answer any questions. I also really like this founders note that we wrote. It’s in our own words, etc: https://integrityinstitute.org/founders-letter We are recruiting new members! If you work on integrity / trust and safety / antispam / content quality / etc, let’s talk.

Are there any examples of sticking to your principles by standing up for socially and morally reprehensible groups? My initial impression is this is just another group pushing left leaning elite American values as "integrity".

Things like this: https://www.aclu.org/other/aclu-history-taking-stand-free-sp... go a long way.

Re: Former Facebook staffers launch Integrity Institute

#34

Post by jonny_eh »

strulovich wrote: post #28
tedivm wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The person created spyware for profit- something that clearly lacks of integrity. The fact that this is even a question shows why no one who worked at Facebook should be in charge of any integrity project.

So it’s a linguistic issue. You’re lumping integrity as “do people abuse our system” with “does person A follow the same morals as me”. Specifically, looks like your morals are that products that are free in exchange for anonymously analyzing your data are immoral. (Remember: Onavo gave free VPN to users) It’s a reasonable position to take, but it’s unclear it’s necessarily true and that everyone who doesn’t agree wi…

> Remember: Onavo gave free VPN to users

IIRC, it wasn't just a free VPN, it also did extra compression of data like images to speed up site loading on mobile. This eventually stopped working when https became more popular.

Re: Former Facebook staffers launch Integrity Institute

#35

Post by liuliu »

commoner wrote: post #13

A reminder that Facebook's VP of integrity (Guy Rosen)[1] co-founded the spyware company, Onavo, that Facebook acquired. Onavo made a VPN that collected user activity and delivered it to Facebook.[2] [1] First temporary ( https://gizmodo.com/facebook-exec-gets-new-title-as-vp-of-in... ), then long-term ( https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/17/22731214/facebook-disput... ) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onavo

Facebook Integrity team is about user's integrity of not abusing Facebook services. It doesn't manage Facebook's integrity towards its users.

There are overlaps (for example, some people may abuse the system by trick people to like a piece of content to promote misinformation). But the focus is about protecting Facebook services, not the user. Certainly not user's privacy in the realm of how Facebook uses it (how other actors use it may fall into "abuse" category).

Re: Former Facebook staffers launch Integrity Institute

#36

Post by e-clinton »

akyu wrote: post #33

>We respect your privacy. We will not share your data with anyone for marketing purposes. Yet the homepage has Google analytics and Squarespace cross site trackers. Not a great first impression.

They explicitly say “marketing purposes”… doesn’t mean they won’t share for other purposes.

Re: Former Facebook staffers launch Integrity Institute

#37

Post by JumpCrisscross »

AlbertCory wrote: post #15

Long before the Internet, you could go through an airport and be unable to avoid the Moonies & the followers of Lyndon LaRouche. You could find the book "None Dare Call It Treason" and lots of people did. "The Daily Worker" (newspaper of the US Communist Party) was readily available. Any of those groups could take out ads in the newspaper, or hold demonstrations (like the Nazi Party in Skokie, IL). There were UHF sta…

> "Oh, but now it's different!" the "integrity" people claim

Because it is. Our modern legal constructs of free speech came about in a semi-literate, printing-press pamphleteering age. It was revised in the era of broadcast television. "It was like this before, and so it should be forever after" is not an argument.

We're at a point where we have to talk in terms of first principles. Not ideologies or teams. That's tough, because we haven't done it properly--in America--in at least a generation.

Re: Former Facebook staffers launch Integrity Institute

#38

Post by qqtt »

strulovich wrote: post #23
commoner wrote: post #13

A reminder that Facebook's VP of integrity (Guy Rosen)[1] co-founded the spyware company, Onavo, that Facebook acquired. Onavo made a VPN that collected user activity and delivered it to Facebook.[2] [1] First temporary ( https://gizmodo.com/facebook-exec-gets-new-title-as-vp-of-in... ), then long-term ( https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/17/22731214/facebook-disput... ) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onavo

I see this mentioned on multiple threads. What is the accusation here? (FB employee, opinions are my own)

I think most would consider facebook’s usage of onavo pretty gross from an integrity perspective

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/facebooks-onavo-gives-socia...

The characterization as Spyware seems pretty accurate.

You are correct there is a balance between offering free services in exchange for data collection, and likely most people in tech misinterpret how the general public views this balance, but at the same time it’s reasonable to assume that the general public isn’t fully aware of the extent of these data collection practices.

There is a reason Facebook is constantly mired in controversy- especially compared to their social media peers.

Re: Former Facebook staffers launch Integrity Institute

#39

Post by ljm »

tedivm wrote: post #25

Anyone who was actually willing to join facebook is by definition unqualified to work on an integrity project.

I'm not so eager to jump to that kind of conclusion, because it's too facile.

You might personally decide that anyone who worked for FB has no integrity, but I don't think it makes for a good discussion on HN.

Re: Former Facebook staffers launch Integrity Institute

#40

Post by splistud »

strulovich wrote: post #28
tedivm wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The person created spyware for profit- something that clearly lacks of integrity. The fact that this is even a question shows why no one who worked at Facebook should be in charge of any integrity project.

So it’s a linguistic issue. You’re lumping integrity as “do people abuse our system” with “does person A follow the same morals as me”. Specifically, looks like your morals are that products that are free in exchange for anonymously analyzing your data are immoral. (Remember: Onavo gave free VPN to users) It’s a reasonable position to take, but it’s unclear it’s necessarily true and that everyone who doesn’t agree wi…

Were 'anonymously analyzing your data' either true, or the complete extent of the exchange, then you might have a point
Post reply on HN