861–870 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you use the term "open-source" in this context, what do you mean?
> When you use the term "open-source" in this context, what do you mean? The code for its implementation is literally available on GitHub [0] under the Apache License 2.0. [0]: https://github.com/twitter/communitynotes
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also not offensive in English, even though some virtue signalers insist on taking offense to it.
Language is what we make of it, it's not a fixed concept. If people take offense to it then it's offensive.
As Stephen Fry said: "So fucking what?".
A thumbs-up gesture is offensive in the Middle East, should it be banned world-wide?
Funnily enough the original example upthread was the use of the word "retard" which is harmless in French, which ended up getting the user in trouble.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's ending because the government that encouraged fact checking is ending. The new one has made it clear they despise fact checkers
Or they are more realistic, or less corrupt. Seems to me that if some authority is determining what are facts and what are not for me, that I am easily shapable and foolable. Community Notes at least don't claim they have the facts. So that leaves you more with a responsibility to make up your own mind. I know this isn't for everyone, there are still a lot of people that like to have leaders tell them how they should…
Do you really think the company which has openly admitted it wants to create AI profiles that post as if they're humans and not tell you they are AI care at all about facts or what you think or believe?
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…
Autocracts doesn't get democratically elected, as far as I understand. Trump is a democratically elected leader who will end his term at most in 2028. Autocracts tend to not be democratically elected (or to change the rules once they're elected to never be deposed). Zuckerberg will bend his knee to the Democrats if they win next term. This is not autocracy, this is just knowing where the wind blows.
Most, if not all, autocrats are democratically elected (with some wildly varying definition of democracy of course).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get how the partisan story is easy to tell here, but I'm saying something pretty specific: I think it would have been product development malpractice for this decision not to have been in the works for many, many months, long before the GOP takeover of the federal government was a safe bet. Community Notes has been that successful, and Facebook's fact-checkers have been that much of a product disaster. I've never s…
As a product decision taken independently, maybe. Running one of those things at scale with all kinds of people trying to subvert it for various reasons, including some downright evil ones, is not an easy task. Announced together with everything else and given the timing, I just can't help but think there's a political component to all of it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. To me it sounds better for large actors who pay shills to influence public opinion, like Qatar. I disagree that this is better for either Facebook users, or society as a whole. It does however certainly fit the Golden rule - he with the gold makes the rules.
I was under the impression that Community Notes were designed to be resistant to sybil attacks, but I could be wrong. Community Notes have been used at Twitter for a long time. Are there examples of state-influenced notes getting through the process?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed, how to fact check the fact checkers? If we could have legitimate fact checking that really works, then I guess we wouldn't need any politics at all.
> Indeed, how to fact check the fact checkers? Like any other work, it can be reviewed by supervisors within the company and/or the client (Meta). If a sample of an employee's work shows that they often hide content that isn't factually false, they are performing their job poorly. If Meta doesn't like the job the company is doing, the contract can be cancelled. > If we could have legitimate fact checking that really…
And the ones in power and with money can decide who the fact checkers will be. And the ones in power and with money can help and support each other. Because we want to keep the money inside the family, to protect the facts you know.
When you grow up you start to understand that you can't trust all authority all the time.
Meta also nominated a Trump-affiliated boxing entertainment businessman to its board yesterday. They’re doing everything they can to suck up to the incoming administration.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is that different from fact checkers? They can also be driven by large actors who pay shills to influence public opinion? Only the name "Community Notes" is less misleading then "Fact checkers".
Fact checkers are employed by Meta?
Sure, I'll trust the leadership of this huge commercial company, famous for lots of controversies reagarding privacy of people. I'll trust them to decide for me what is true and what is not.
Great idea!
I speculated what Zuckerberg wanted and what he'd do when he visited Mar-a-lago[0]: * Push to ban Tiktok * Drop antitrust lawsuits against Meta * Meta will relax "conservative" posts on its platforms * Zuckerberg will donate to Trump's cause So far, Zuckerberg has already donated to Trump's cause. Now he has relaxed "conservative" posts on its platforms directly or indirectly. When Trump comes into power, he'll likel…
> ban Tiktok I would be really interested in how someone could spin advocating for less moderation and at the same time asking to ban the competitors' social media platforms.