Live data from Hacker News

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

about.fb.com

771–780 of 1001 posts

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

#771
post #665

> As a result, we’re going to start treating civic content from people and Pages you follow on Facebook more like any other content in your feed, and we will start ranking and showing you that content based on explicit signals (for example, liking a piece of content) and implicit signals (like viewing posts) that help us predict what’s meaningful to people. We are also going to recommend more political content based…

I really do wish that one of the major platforms would a strict white- and black- list. "Doomscrolling" would be so much nicer if one could have, say, strict filters set to "Don't ever show me pranks, fake useless diy, kids being exploited, anything gym related" and "I really like snowboarding, WW2 history and pinball machines." Of course, the algorithm is still gonna "do its thing", but with a few hard guides. Sure,…

Meta has failed (abysmally) at identifying and categorizing content where you’ve said “show me less of this.”

Bluesky’s not my favorite website but Xblock is proof that the app can go “this is a twitter screenshot and she doesn’t want to see those” at scale.

AI could identify, label, and hide all of these things.

On bluesky it already does: “this is rude” or “this content promotes self harm” , I wish both websites could suppress , snooze, or completely nuke “viral” or political content be it left or right. In bluesky’s case it’s not that I disagree with them. It’s just that I’ve had this shit that I more or less agree with shoved down my throat from every angle for a decade and I’m exhausted and don’t want to see or engage with it anymore. People who have nothing else to say 24/7 every single day of their life and mine just need to go away and I wish the AI on bluesky would just let me filter people whose content is primarily political temper tantrums because I don’t have the time or will to mute or block them all so I just don’t use the product.

In fact for moderation purposes, Facebook already is doing that on their back end. (a few years ago you could see automatically generated alt text like “a woman holding a baby” though I don’t use meta at the present time and don’t know if it’s still doing this.)

AI is already analyzing the memes and purging ones with themes they don’t like on FB though . Unlike bluesky moderation, it’s not presented as something I can leverage or access to make my experience more enjoyable on Facebook.

But that’s not how they’re leveraging AI right now. They won’t let it prevent me from seeing memes posts and content with themes **i** don’t like.

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

#772

> As a result, we’re going to start treating civic content from people and Pages you follow on Facebook more like any other content in your feed, and we will start ranking and showing you that content based on explicit signals (for example, liking a piece of content) and implicit signals (like viewing posts) that help us predict what’s meaningful to people. We are also going to recommend more political content based…

The way I read that — we tried hiding political content, but in the end lost user engagement to our competitors, so we decided to roll it back.

People say they don’t want political content, but they’re also more likely to engage with it if they see it.

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

#773

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also not offensive in English, even though some virtue signalers insist on taking offense to it.

Have you ever seen someone use the slur without intending the same mean-spiritedness that the "virtue signalers" are taking offense to?

Sure. I have a 50 year old friend who takes care of her retarded brother. When describing him and what she does, she simply calls him retarded, because he is, and people know what that word means.

One of the kindest women I know, but she doesn't bead around the bush or have time for euphemisms.

Idiot, retard, mentally handicapped, ect. It is all doomed to be a euphemistic treadmill because they can and are used as an insult. The insulting part isn't the word used, but the comparison drawn. Give it 10 years or so and whatever the current word is will also be out of favor as a pejorative.

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

#774
post #665

> As a result, we’re going to start treating civic content from people and Pages you follow on Facebook more like any other content in your feed, and we will start ranking and showing you that content based on explicit signals (for example, liking a piece of content) and implicit signals (like viewing posts) that help us predict what’s meaningful to people. We are also going to recommend more political content based…

I really do wish that one of the major platforms would a strict white- and black- list. "Doomscrolling" would be so much nicer if one could have, say, strict filters set to "Don't ever show me pranks, fake useless diy, kids being exploited, anything gym related" and "I really like snowboarding, WW2 history and pinball machines." Of course, the algorithm is still gonna "do its thing", but with a few hard guides. Sure,…

You talk about this like it's a service for the users.

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

#775
post #38

As a leftist, while this is concerning, it's also important to remember that Meta censors left content as much as it does right content. So, while this announcement certainly seems to be in bad faith (what could Mark mean by "gender" other than transphobic discussion?), this should be a boon both for far-right and left discussion. Does that mean increased polarization and political violence? Surely, surely.

>it's also important to remember that Meta censors left content as much as it does right content. This is a bold claim. I see a lot of people in this discussion that seem to have a very different experience. Your point would be much stronger with evidence, if only to calibrate everyone's understanding of what you mean by "left content". >what could Mark mean by "gender" other than transphobic discussion? From what I'…

> Your point would be much stronger with evidence, if only to calibrate everyone's understanding of what you mean by "left content".

I think it's extremely likely that people will see the "de-ranking" of content they agree with as bias, regardless of their place on the spectrum.

Similar: "Biden must have committed election fraud, because all of my friends voted for Trump and I don't know anyone who voted for Biden." (previous election, obviously) Well, is that because no-one voted for Biden, or that the friends/content you see is tuned to how you lean.

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

#776

This is happening because Trump threatened to put Zuckerberg in prison for life (not an exaggeration): https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-warns-mark-zuckerberg-c... Trump himself confirmed this today: https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lf66oltlvs2l I cannot believe anyone would actually be okay with this situation.

[deleted]

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

#777

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also not offensive in English, even though some virtue signalers insist on taking offense to it.

Have you ever seen someone use the slur without intending the same mean-spiritedness that the "virtue signalers" are taking offense to?

These words have non-offensive uses outside of schools and offices.

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

#778

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only one side was fact checked.

Was it the side that did the vast majority of the lying?

This is the problem, you are clearly biased. She brought up the Charlottesville issue that has been widely debunked; it is blatantly false and well-known to be false. She was not fact-checked. That's the issue.

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

#779
post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've not seen any examples of the "official" fact-checkers being wrong; have you?

It's trivial to find examples. I put "fact checkers were wrong" into DDG and turned up: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/01/07/five-times-f... https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o95 https://reason.com/2021/12/29/facebook-masks-false-informati... Even when they aren't wrong, they can be biased. See for example: https://www.allsides.com/blog/media-bias-alert-politifact-fa... Also, compare and contrast how the…

> Trump says the unemployment rate for African-American youths is 59 percent.

> In May, the bureau said the employment-population ratio for blacks ages 16 to 24 was 41.5 percent. Flipped over, that would mean that the unemployment ratio - although such a statistic is not published by the bureau - would be 58.5 percent. That’s pretty close to the 59 percent figure Trump cited, Sinclair noted.

> Mostly False

Crazy

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

#780

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, and that's the gov't we have now. The previous one was also suppressive but in different ways

That's simply not true.

Exactly! They simply used lawfare in an attempt to bankrupt, sieze the assets of, and imprison their main political opponents rather than keep the scale balanced (for the sake of democracy) /s
Post reply on HN