331–340 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> because the word for delay in French is offensive in English It's also the word for delay in English.
It's also not offensive in English, even though some virtue signalers insist on taking offense to it.
I'm certain it will make parts of the user experience worse, but at least for the Threads app, this seems at least a little necessary - if you're aiming to be the "new" twitter or whatever social need twitter was fulfilling, you need to break free of the shackles of IG/Meta moderation, which is very unforgiving and brutal in very subtle ways that aren't always easy to figure out. But basically, I find a platform like…
I think you misunderstand what Meta is doing here. They’re not stopping moderation of posts. Meta used to pay third party company fact checking companies to put disclaimers on “misinformation” posts on Facebook. They’re going to stop that now. They’re still going to continue their other more traditional moderation where you’ll be banned for making an obvious tongue in cheek joke or whatever.
Presumably because the political climate of California is so skewed from the rest of the country.
I'd like to hear an informed take from anybody who thinks that Facebook's fact-checkers were a better product feature than Community Notes. All of the articles I'm seeing about this online are ideological, but this feels like the kind of decision that should have been in the works for multiple quarters now, given how effective Notes have been, and how comically ineffective and off-putting fact-checkers have been. The…
The ideological bits are: * Dana White added to the board. * "Move our trust and safety and content moderation teams out of California, and our US content review to Texas. This will help remove the concern that biased employees are overly censoring content." - like people being in Texas makes them more objective?! The actual mechanisms of running a social media network at scale are tricky and I think most of us would…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I once posted a picture of an email stating my train was delayed in French. So the word 'retard' appeared in it. Instagram banned me from monetization or partnerships or something on my account, because the word for delay in French is offensive in English.
> because the word for delay in French is offensive in English It's also the word for delay in English.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I once posted a picture of an email stating my train was delayed in French. So the word 'retard' appeared in it. Instagram banned me from monetization or partnerships or something on my account, because the word for delay in French is offensive in English.
> because the word for delay in French is offensive in English It's also the word for delay in English.
I'm certain it will make parts of the user experience worse, but at least for the Threads app, this seems at least a little necessary - if you're aiming to be the "new" twitter or whatever social need twitter was fulfilling, you need to break free of the shackles of IG/Meta moderation, which is very unforgiving and brutal in very subtle ways that aren't always easy to figure out. But basically, I find a platform like…
> "acoustic" to refer to an autistic person Is autistic an illegal word or something? What the fuck?
Go on Twitter and you will see people self-censor the normal swear words too.
Shit becomes “sht”, fuck becomes “fck”
Very dystopian.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also not offensive in English, even though some virtue signalers insist on taking offense to it.
Nah it’s offensive. Just because you don’t take issue doesn’t mean it doesn’t hurt others.
For example:
- whether crime is up or down
- whether the earth is warming or not
- how many people live in poverty
- what the rate of inflation is
- how much social security or healthcare costs
- etc
These are all verifiable, measurable facts, and yet, we somehow manage to disagree.
We always used to disagree and that is healthy, we avoid missing something. But in the past we could agree on some basic facts and then have a discussion. Now we just end a discussion with an easy: "Your facts are wrong." And that leads to an total inability of having any discussion at all.
Fact checking is not censorship. Imagine math if we'd question the basic axioms.
Zuckerberg says Facebook is going to be more "like X" and "work with Trump". It has changed its content policy to allow discussions that should horrify anyone.
"In a notable shift, the company now says it allows “allegations of mental illness or abnormality when based on gender or sexual orientation, given political and religious discourse about transgenderism and homosexuality and common non-serious usage of words like ‘weird.’”
"In other words, Meta now appears to permit users to accuse transgender or gay people of being mentally ill because of their gender expression and sexual orientation. The company did not respond to requests for clarification on the policy."
But Zuck himself says that they are also dialing their algorithms back in favor of allowing more bad content. It's not right.
https://www.wired.com/story/meta-immigration-gender-policies...
Community notes seems to be quite well received. I like that the algorithm seems to be public and (IIUC) tamper-evident. The obvious context is that either Meta gets out of the content moderation game voluntarily, or the incoming admin goes to war with them. > focusing our enforcement on illegal and high-severity violations. I imagine this will in practice determine how far they can go in the EU. Community notes, sur…
I really like Community Notes, and hate the rest of what Twitter has become. But... Community Notes is subject to "tampering." Elon's either removes the CNs himself from his posts, or his brigade downvote them to infinity so they don't appear on all the misinfo he posts.