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

Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

rollingstone.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 407 posts

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#111

Post by Beltalowda »

piokoch wrote: post #34

The problem is that no automatic method we have now will catch context. There is a difference between "Jews were murdered by Germans during war" and "Jews destroyed German economy before the war" that will not be recognized by any machine we have nowadays. The first is true, the second is bullshit, how algorithm can now this? More, even if Facebook employees humans to do moderation still for some contractor from Asia…

Furthermore, you can publish "The effects of the Jewish population on the 1930s German economy" which can be either a genuine bona-fide analysis, or something which essentially boils down to "Jews destroyed German economy before the war".

I think the "reddit model" where you have smaller communities with community mods works much better than the Facebook or Twitter model where there's one "global community". Not that reddit's moderation is perfect or that you can 100% rely on community mods, but overall, it seems to work much better.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#112

Post by knightofmars »

bwb wrote: post #2

I was just talking to an author who published an ad on Facebook for their sci fi book. They had the word "beat" in the ad. The FB algo said that words intills people to violence, banned her account for 2 months, and kept all the ad money. Funny enough, her book is about the dangers of an algorithm-based AI supersystem... Facebook is the worst.

This reminds me of the short story "Computers Don't Argue" by Gordon D Dickson. The format is a series of correspondence between individuals regarding a book. The plot starts with a man attempting to deal with the situation of having been mailed the wrong book by an online retailer. It then proceeds to take a turn into the dark.

https://www.atariarchives.org/bcc2/showpage.php?page=133

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#113

Post by codingdave »

wodenokoto wrote: post #7
thriftwy wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How come they get to keep money for the service not provided? Should be strictly illegal.

It probably is, but not all jurisdictions have a small claims court and even those that do, it can be quite cumbersome compared to the lost money

Criminal cases do not go to small claims court. If you sue them in a civil case, yes, that could be small claims, but if you convince a prosecutor to charge them criminally, it is a completely different legal process.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#114

Post by ReptileMan »

job_suche wrote: post #86

I mean, that is also the first thought I had when I read the title, even before delving into the article. If instead of "beautiful blue eyes" it was "silky smooth pale white skin", would it then be different? For once I think Facebook is right. Poor choice of a film title, that, especially considering the theme of the film.

There were lots of people with beautiful blue eyes and silky smooth pale white skin that perished in the Holocaust...

Eyeballing the difference between Ashkenazi and a regular person from Central or Eastern Europe is mission impossible.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#115

Post by PurpleRamen »

Timshel wrote: post #60
PurpleRamen wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

? You do not end up killing millions of peoples without systemic targetting and industrialized organisation. The fact that it might be called genocide or democide or something else is semantic ... Anyway my point (albeit unclear) was more that you are arguing the premise of the parent post : "Germany and Japan committed roughly equivalent atrocities" which I believe is quite difficult and in a way reinforce the paren…

> ? You do not end up killing millions of peoples without systemic targetting and industrialized organisation.

No, they do. That's how any war runs. Countries don't start wars with plans on for wiping out the citizens in the most efficient way. If a massacre happens, then it's something more spontaneous, happening on the spot.

> The fact that it might be called genocide or democide or something else is semantic ...

No, it's a significant difference in intention and execution. Germany had an elaborated logistic for transporting their victims through the country and continent. They had death camps with full planning on how to kill people. They even started the war with the side-intention to "cleaning the world".

Japan, like every other invader did nothing like this. They started wars and accepted that people will die, but this was not their goal. And neither were the massacres and other crimes their goal, it just something that happened along the way.

> Anyway my point (albeit unclear) was more that you are arguing the premise of the parent post : "Germany and Japan committed roughly equivalent atrocities" which I believe is quite difficult and in a way reinforce the parent since he appears to believe there is a systemic diabolisation of the Nazi as way to target by proxy the white (anyway that's how I interpret: "great punching bags by proxy for what the what the author really wants to say")

Sure, but your reasoning is wrong. Japan did bad things, but they are just one of many evil empires in history. It's not exceptional unique in what they did. But the Nazis were unique and exceptional. That's where your argument fails. Japan is just one of many, and people denounce those many equally, more or less. But there was just one event on the scale of the Nazi-Crimes.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#116

Post by EveYoung »

herbst wrote: post #42
bwb wrote: post #2

I was just talking to an author who published an ad on Facebook for their sci fi book. They had the word "beat" in the ad. The FB algo said that words intills people to violence, banned her account for 2 months, and kept all the ad money. Funny enough, her book is about the dangers of an algorithm-based AI supersystem... Facebook is the worst.

I realize this was a weird time and masks have been a complicated topic. However: I advertised some masks my grandma has sewn on FB. It was ok, expansive clicks like always but ok. This was running for at least a week or two. But when I changed some text it triggered a new ad review and within no hour my account was banned. It didn't even took a hour to deny my appeal as well and my account was lost forever (without…

In my experience, Meta doesn't care about you unless you have a multi-million budget or your buying through an agency that has the right connections.

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#117

Post by bwb »

math-dev wrote: post #95
bwb wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious? It is entirely true, why would I share that otherwise? I've been on HN for a long time, see my background :) Your account is totally blank and joined in 2021. You also submitted an article about rethinking app development at FB. In a comment you also post you work for a large company. Do you work for Facebook?

I don’t work at facebook but based on your response I am more likely to believe you now. Sorry if it caused any angst, wasn’t intended. However doesn’t change the fact that a lot of things get accepted at face value if they align with what someone’s view of things is

No worries, I just was kinda stunned you would imply I had any motive to not share something accurate. It was a convo I had this morning with an author who is a friend.

(It it is just one piece of data, and people are good at finding data that supports their viewpoint of course. Given all the scandals FB is under and problems on this thread, I do think it supports a narrative of FB having massive problems around ethics and moral actions.)

Here is a fun story :)

I have an ad account at FB for a company I closed in early 2020 due to Covid.

I wanted to delete the account, but FB makes it impossible to do that. I message their support and they tell me they can remove it, but they need my ID and a handwritten letter. I am stunned. A handwritten letter??? How does that achieve anything :)

So I write out a short note with a bit of snark about a tech company needing a handwritten letter, take a picture and send it to their support chat/ticket along with my ID. They do not like that I was snarky and refuse to do anything, even after I remove some of my snark and resend it.

Thus, I still have the account and 14 support replies later they still refuse to help me.

(note, they didn't want a letter send to them via the post office, they literally wanted me to write it and send it to them. So weird...)

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#118

Post by protomolecule »

bwb wrote: post #2

I was just talking to an author who published an ad on Facebook for their sci fi book. They had the word "beat" in the ad. The FB algo said that words intills people to violence, banned her account for 2 months, and kept all the ad money. Funny enough, her book is about the dangers of an algorithm-based AI supersystem... Facebook is the worst.

Would you share the link to the book? Genuinely interested in reading

Re: Facebook bans Holocaust film for violating race policy

#119

Post by nradov »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #27
icare_1er wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Removing incitements to violence seems like a good thing, and I would guess their customers (the advertisers) fully support it. The fact that they do it so badly is entirely on them.

Is removing incitements to violence always a good thing? Apparently Facebook makes an exception when it comes to violence against the Russians invading Ukraine.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/exclusive-facebook-inst...

I do support the right of Ukrainians to defend their country. But I'm not comfortable with giving social media corporate employees the power to decide which violence is good and which is bad.

Post reply on HN