Earlier quoted context omitted.
> because the word for delay in French is offensive in English It's also the word for delay in English.
I've only ever seen it used to mean "delay" in occasional technical contexts, e.g. "fire retardant material", in practice it seems to be mostly a noun that means "stupid person".
Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model
341–350 of 1001 posts
Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model
#342Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model
#343I'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 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.
Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model
#344Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model
#345Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
> "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 FB office in Austin, Texas is a moderately left-leaning area. Their office in Silicon Valley is about the most extreme left-wing place in the country. At the v…
Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model
#346Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've only ever seen it used to mean "delay" in occasional technical contexts, e.g. "fire retardant material", in practice it seems to be mostly a noun that means "stupid person".
The words have the same meaning - "person with slowed down intellectual development"
"Retard" means "thick", in this context, not "will get there eventually".
The technical definition is not how the euphemism is used.
Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model
#347I'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 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.
Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model
#348Earlier 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.
This is different than the fact-checking, and has to do with automated moderation algorithms (which generally suck), which are continuing (because advertisers want them).
That aside, I find it offensive a little bit that Meta has taken it upon themselves to decide what the "right" discourse is that their users want to see, and would rather they create a mechanism to let users decide for themselves - which this does at least outwardly appear to be a move towards. They've also in the last few years toned down or removed some of the auto-modding in private groups, and shifted that responsibility towards its community members and moderators - which was also a similarly good step.
Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model
#349Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
You forgot the biggest one – replacing Nick Clegg as their global policy chief with Joel Kaplan, a Republican lobbyist.
Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model
#350What I think I just read is that content moderation is complicated, error-prone, and expensive. So Meta is going to do a lot less of it. They'll let you self-moderate via a new community notes system, similar to what X does. I think this is a big win for Meta, because it means people who care about the content being right will have to engage more with the Meta products to ensure their worldview is correctly represent…
> I think this is a big win for Meta, because it means people who care about the content being right will have to engage more with the Meta products to ensure their worldview is correctly represented. Strong disagree. This is a very naive understanding of the situation. "Fact-checking" by users is just more of the kind of shouting back and forth that these social networks are already full of. That's why a third-party…
"Fact-checking" completely removed the ability for debate and is therefore antithetical to a functional democracy. Pushing back against authority, because they are often dead wrong, is foundational to a free society. It's hard to imagine anything more authoritarian than "No I don't have to debate because I'm a fact-checker and by that measure alone you're wrong and I'm right". Very Orwellian indeed!
Additionally, the number of times that I've observed "fact-checkers" lying thru their teeth for obvious political reasons is absurd.