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

Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

about.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

741–750 of 1001 posts

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#741

Post by tacitusarc »

TrackerFF wrote: post #131

Hot take: This is to please the incoming president. Both the far-right and far-left live off misinformation, but right now the far-right is experiencing a renaissance, and tech moguls are bending the knee to be on good terms with the leaders. MAGA and European far-right politicians have been moaning for ages that fact checking is "politically biased". The Biden laptop controversy was the catalyst for this.

In what sense is this a hot take? This seems to be the dominant explanation by a wide margin.

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#742

Post by pavlov »

tgma wrote: post #739
davidw wrote: post #212

Earlier 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…

> like people being in Texas makes them more objective?! This is the least charitable interpretation. Obviously, it is not talking about a single person moving to Texas suddenly changing colors like a chameleon (although I suspect there is quite a bit of merit to that due to groupthink and community speech policing in BayArea/LA). And yes, I think it won't be a stretch to think Texas would be more objective represent…

Is the distribution of people in Austin so very different from the Bay Area?

Both states are internally diverse. And it’s just silly to suggest that “groupthink and community speech policing” is something that exists in California but not Texas.

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#743

Post by cakealert »

zahlman wrote: post #730
arielcostas wrote: post #19

Zuck's video claims Europe has been imposing a lot of censorship lately, which is a nicer way for him to say "we have done a crappy job at stopping misinformation and abusive material, got fined A LOT by countries who actually care about it, and that's somehow not our fault". Community notes is good news, and something I was expecting to disappear from Twitter since Elon bought it a couple years ago, especially since…

Why should social media operators be responsible for "stopping misinformation" in the first place? That sounds a lot like the logic that was used to justify smashing the printing presses in Gutenberg's day, not to mention by countless villains of dystopian sci-fi (e.g. Fahrenheit 451), in turn based on other real-world concerns. I think I should have a right to let others lie to me, and decide for myself if I believe…

In all cases what they mean is that they want opinions or statements that go against to whatever ideology or political faction they belong to to be censored.

Humans tend to strongly identify with such things and motivate their moral reasoning to fit.

I would wager Mark and other sharks like him would find this entire thread very amusing. For they have no ideology other than self interest, nothing they do is for any other purpose other than their own.

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#746

Post by Animats »

zahlman wrote: post #731
Animats wrote: post #300

News story about Zuckerberg sucking up to Trump.[1] News story about other CEOs sucking up to Trump.[2] News story about Bezos stucking up to Trump.[3] "The Führer is always right" [4] [1] https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/04/business/zuckerberg-trump-mus... [2] https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/kevin-oleary-explains-why-... [3] https://newrepublic.com/article/188170/jeff-bezoss-shocking-... [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…

I've only been here about 1/30th as long as you, so I fully accept that I could be wrong here; but this really doesn't seem to measure up the standard of discourse that I understood to be expected on HN.

It's not great, but it's unfortunately relevant to the article topic.

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#747

Post by toss1 »

emmelaich wrote: post #672
toss1 wrote: post #611

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it was in the works for a long time, then Zuckerberg has been planning to bend the knee to Trump for a long time. Today, Trump in press conference (video at [0]: Q: "Do you think Zuckerberg is responding to the threats you've made to him in the past?" TRUMP: "Probably. Yeah. Probably." This tells us all we need to know. It has nothing to do with facts and everything to do with yielding to political pressure to ben…

Bending left and right according to the government of the day doesn't tell you where the true center is.

Autocracy is not Left or Right. It is corrupting all the institutions to serve the will of the autocrat, not the will of the people.

Bending the knee to the autocrat, in this case explicitly changing your rules and operations to enable the autocrat and his followers to more easily spread their lies and intimidation is not political flexibility, it is obeying in advance to be complicit in implementing the autocracy.

It would be better if you didn't have to learn that the hard way, but our educational system and information distribution system has failed. This is just a more advanced and accelerated example of that failure.

[Edit: yes, my mistake to phrase it as political pressure — it was nothing of the sort — it was authoritarian extortion. Note Zuck has a case before the FTC.]

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#748

Post by TheKarateKid »

paxys wrote: post #333
davidw wrote: post #212

Earlier 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.

This is on par for Meta. Don't forget that Cheryl Sandberg was their Democratic Party liaison.

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#749

Post by grahamj »

tgma wrote: post #739
davidw wrote: post #212

Earlier 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…

> like people being in Texas makes them more objective?! This is the least charitable interpretation. Obviously, it is not talking about a single person moving to Texas suddenly changing colors like a chameleon (although I suspect there is quite a bit of merit to that due to groupthink and community speech policing in BayArea/LA). And yes, I think it won't be a stretch to think Texas would be more objective represent…

I don't see how it matters where the mods are located when their instructions still come from California.

Re: Ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to Community Notes model

#750

Post by brigandish »

abtinf wrote: post #536
threeseed wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how about I get to use my critical thinking Because no-one, including you, is an expert on everything. So there will be many topics for which you will not be able to make an informed judgement about the accuracy of the content. And on a social network centred around sharing it can be very easy for inaccuracies to spread.

> Because no-one, including you, is an expert on everything. As I said, god forbid I forget my place and use my mind in the domain of my betters.

Looks like we got ourselves a reader…

Yep, reading, researching, considering what things matter given your own life experience and situation, these are all meaningless in the face of THE EXPERTS!

/s

When J.S. Mill wrote about infallibility[1], I can't remember if he wrote about outsourcing that infallibility belief to others, but if he did, he predicted the last 5 years of pro-censorship arguments perfectly.

[1] https://www.bartleby.com/lit-hub/on-liberty/chapter-ii-of-th...

Post reply on HN