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

Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 732 posts

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#141

Post by bgorman »

cromwellian wrote: post #134
refurb wrote: post #32

I’m kind of shocked this isn’t a bigger story. - Right before a presidential election a major story breaks about a Presidential candidate - FBI jumps in to say “it’s Russian disinformation” - Story suppressed across the media including online as “disinformation” - After the election story turns out to be 100% true

And a nothing burger. Amazing how a Coke addict who failed upwards to get a cushy c suite job like many, is supposed to sway the election but the Trump family running a fraudulent university and a fraudulent charity, paying millions in fines, isn’t literally a disqualification.

The simplest explanation is that Hunter was selling access to Joe Biden.

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#142

Post by WillPostForFood »

lokar wrote: post #125
t-writescode wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you write a book and I publish it and then due to public outcry, I stop publishing it. That is censorship.

No, it's not. I'm under no obligation to help you distribute your ideas, and I can change my mind whenever I please.

You can change your mind AND it is censorship.

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#143

Post by vlovich123 »

t-writescode wrote: post #118
EarlKing wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no net positive impact from social networking services, or indeed any other medium powered by advertising where the operators thereof have realized that hatred can be monetized. People have always disagreed with one another and clashed over political views... but only in the last 15 years have people been so polarized, and I think we can directly attribute it to conditioning as a direct result of participati…

Families around the world and across continents have been able to keep in touch due to social networks. For all the deserved hate, some good has come.

Believe it or not, but my family made a point of keeping in touch with distant relatives waaaay before social networks like Facebook. Heck, they did this back in the day when mail was the only mechanism (arguably mail & telephones are themselves social networks just in a different modality).

Now it has made that easier and maybe cheaper (although only if you ignore messaging apps). I'm not sure there's data one way or the other to suggest that it has enabled new familial connections that wouldn't otherwise have happened. Even in the digital erra, we've had

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#144

Post by jshen »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #110
jemmyw wrote: post #44

So Facebook didn't censor anything? He didn't admit censoring and the story wasn't censored. Nobody had their posts about it taken down and nobody was prevented from discussing it. Facebook just didn't disseminate the story, they prevented their feeds from selecting it and showing it. Isn't that what everyone wants? Except that they do that with all stories and have no algorithms at all? It's not censorship though so…

nobody was prevented from discussing it. Facebook just didn't disseminate the story Facebook didn't disseminate it so you never got the chance to start discussing it.

That’s not censorship

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#145

Post by [deleted] »

epgui wrote: post #113
mgraczyk wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't "censorship by algorithm" though. This was a human being intentionally banning a specific thing. There was no algorithm in the loop. They didn't "tweak their algorithm" anymore than an antivirus tweaks its algorithm to detect a new virus, they specifically censored a specific piece of content.

I suggest reading the articles before writing in the comments: > Facebook did not completely ban sharing of the article, but instead limited how much its algorithm automatically shared it to other people for a week, while third-party fact-checkers tried to verify the reporting. So while people could post the article and discuss it, it was less likely to spread organically to new users.

[deleted]

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#146

Post by rufus_foreman »

cf141q5325 wrote: post #35
readthenotes1 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Among other things, it shows that his father did know about his shady deals (ukraine, china). Also had videos of various illegal activities that you and I would probably be thrown in jail for if the FBI found them on a laptop of ours

While its easy to talk from outside the US, I am honestly a lot less worried about the content and a lot more about the fact that it is a non trivial question whether or not the son of the leader of the free world is a crack user. Reality and all this fake news stuff got weird fast. Which wasnt really surprising if you look at the upcoming clusterfuck of cheap realistic video simulations. After getting there already…

>> I am honestly a lot less worried about the content and a lot more about the fact that it is a non trivial question whether or not the son of the leader of the free world is a crack user.

Joe Biden is not the leader of the free world. And it is not an open question whether Joe Biden's son is a crack user.

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#147

Post by WillPostForFood »

jshen wrote: post #144
WillPostForFood wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nobody was prevented from discussing it. Facebook just didn't disseminate the story Facebook didn't disseminate it so you never got the chance to start discussing it.

That’s not censorship

Wikipedia definition of censorship:

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information. This may be done on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient".[2][3][4] Censorship can be conducted by governments,[5] private institutions and other controlling bodies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

What Facebook did fits the definition of censorship perfectly - they suppressed the story.

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#148

Post by mgraczyk »

epgui wrote: post #113
mgraczyk wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't "censorship by algorithm" though. This was a human being intentionally banning a specific thing. There was no algorithm in the loop. They didn't "tweak their algorithm" anymore than an antivirus tweaks its algorithm to detect a new virus, they specifically censored a specific piece of content.

I suggest reading the articles before writing in the comments: > Facebook did not completely ban sharing of the article, but instead limited how much its algorithm automatically shared it to other people for a week, while third-party fact-checkers tried to verify the reporting. So while people could post the article and discuss it, it was less likely to spread organically to new users.

"The algorithm" here refers to Facebook's backend. They are using that word carelessly. I know how it works, I worked on the actual "algorithms" at Facebook. This censorship wasn't done by an "algorithm" in any meaningful sense of the word. Somebody at Facebook coded a rule that showed this content to fewer people.

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#149

Post by ohiovr »

cromwellian wrote: post #134
refurb wrote: post #32

I’m kind of shocked this isn’t a bigger story. - Right before a presidential election a major story breaks about a Presidential candidate - FBI jumps in to say “it’s Russian disinformation” - Story suppressed across the media including online as “disinformation” - After the election story turns out to be 100% true

And a nothing burger. Amazing how a Coke addict who failed upwards to get a cushy c suite job like many, is supposed to sway the election but the Trump family running a fraudulent university and a fraudulent charity, paying millions in fines, isn’t literally a disqualification.

We knew what Trump did. If he did something, we knew. And we always knew. It was a favorite thing to discuss.

Re: Zuckerberg says FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

#150

Post by CapricornNoble »

hotpotamus wrote: post #65
remarkEon wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily but it’s worth scrutiny, right? Blood is deeper than votes, and if someone who is running for office has a family member with a drug problem - that’s funded by shady deals with a country that’s openly hostile to the country in which that person is running for office - is makes sense to ask questions. The illegal activities are mostly around guns, drugs, hookers, perhaps some bank and tax fraud but I h…

I'm pretty sure every human has a family member with a drug problem. I don't think that justifies rifling through their possessions and data.

If you or even a family member has a drug problem, financial problems, a sex addiction, etc...all of that stuff is VERY easily exploitable by State-level espionage professionals. Since the potential for damage to the nation is high if certain information were to fall into the wrong hands, the first step in Risk Mitigation is to limit the access of the at-risk persons so they don't have the information in the first place. This is basic Security Clearance 101 stuff. It's strict because real people have lost their lives due to exploited agents: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen
Post reply on HN