191–200 of 381 posts
The best solution for now seams to be what twitter is doing with community notes.
There is no solution based on censorship that doesn't undermine democracy. If you want Facebook to censor people/content/ideas that you don't like it is going also to censor vital information needed for a democracy to work. The best solution for now seams to be what twitter is doing with community notes.
Every other day, my feed seems to be filled with pro-Republican posts, followed by pro-Democratic posts the next. It’s fascinating how the model decided this was the kind of content worth generating.
> "it is not Meta's role to police offensiveness" Just to fund, transmit, amplify, protect, and profit from it.
[flagged]
“Shareholder value” is ambiguous for good reason. It defers to the Board’s judgement. Fiduciary responsibility doesn’t excuse this sort of incentivizing of crime.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Zuck was gagging for the Trump 2nd term so he could go all in on this shit. Slow clap for the Meta employees that enable it.
[flagged]
One, do better. Two, the vitriol is obviously aimed at Meta’s white-collar employees. (Anecdotally, it’s getting harder for them to date.)
There is no solution based on censorship that doesn't undermine democracy. If you want Facebook to censor people/content/ideas that you don't like it is going also to censor vital information needed for a democracy to work. The best solution for now seams to be what twitter is doing with community notes.
You don't have to censor, but you don't have to pay either
> "it is not Meta's role to police offensiveness" Just to fund, transmit, amplify, protect, and profit from it.
[flagged]
Every other day, my feed seems to be filled with pro-Republican posts, followed by pro-Democratic posts the next. It’s fascinating how the model decided this was the kind of content worth generating.
They didn't just run a linear regression or whatever on some data and magically get the most rage inducing system. They made conscious decisions at nearly every step to make changes to optimize for "Engagement", which at this point is a code word that means "Controversial" the same way that a video of someone eating a toddler would be "Controversial"
It's digital crack pointed at a subsection of our brain that evolved to do group signalling.
> "it is not Meta's role to police offensiveness" Just to fund, transmit, amplify, protect, and profit from it.
[flagged]
Ironically he seems to be very sensitive to this judgment. You would think he would also take action on the basis of it, but so far, seemingly not?