Facebook’s Systems Promoted Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar
1–10 of 14 posts
Re: Facebook’s Systems Promoted Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar
#2No, Facebook simply showed what other people posted.
Re: Facebook’s Systems Promoted Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar
#3No, Facebook simply showed what other people posted.
Repeating other people's message is typically what promoters do.
Re: Facebook’s Systems Promoted Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar
#4Apparently, they introduced stickers that allow you to boost violent content by flagging it... They probably started this with good intentions, but the algorithm clearly went wrong.
"In 2014, Meta attempted to support an anti-hate initiative known as ‘Panzagar’ or ‘flower speech’ by creating a sticker pack for Facebook users to post in response to content which advocated violence or discrimination. The stickers bore messages such as, ‘Think before you share’ and ‘Don’t be the cause of violence.’
However, activists soon noticed that the stickers were having unintended consequences. Facebook’s algorithms interpreted the use of these stickers as a sign that people were enjoying a post and began promoting them. Instead of diminishing the number of people who saw a post advocating hatred, the stickers actually made the posts more visible."
Re: Facebook’s Systems Promoted Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar
#5Re: Facebook’s Systems Promoted Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar
#6Re: Facebook’s Systems Promoted Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes? Google is promoting every mail that is sent to your Gmail inbox?
Has Gmail stopped filtering spam?
Spam is by definition messages that the recipient does not want to receive. Given what happened in Myanmar it looks like these people did want to receive those messages - but some organisations like "Amnesty International" didn't want those users to receive those messages. That is not a spam issue, that is a censorship issue.
Re: Facebook’s Systems Promoted Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Has Gmail stopped filtering spam?
Spam is by definition messages that the recipient does not want to receive. Given what happened in Myanmar it looks like these people did want to receive those messages - but some organisations like "Amnesty International" didn't want those users to receive those messages. That is not a spam issue, that is a censorship issue.
Spam is by definition messages that the recipient does not want to receive.
That is not a spam issue, that is a censorship issue.
Re: Facebook’s Systems Promoted Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spam is by definition messages that the recipient does not want to receive. Given what happened in Myanmar it looks like these people did want to receive those messages - but some organisations like "Amnesty International" didn't want those users to receive those messages. That is not a spam issue, that is a censorship issue.
Spam is by definition messages that the recipient does not want to receive. Whether or not the recipient wants an email is an orthogonal concern to whether Google promotes it. When Google places email in someone's Inbox, as opposed to Spam, Google is promoting that email. That is not a spam issue, that is a censorship issue. Alright, it's a censorship issue. Censorship on one side; genocide on the other. Ideology or…
Google does not send emails to spam just because it doesn't like the politics of what is being said in the email, so no, it's not the same thing.
Also when Google sends something to spam you can still read it. What "Amnesty International" is asking for here is making it impossible for people to read what some people say.
Re: Facebook’s Systems Promoted Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar
#10Would it be fair to say that HN "promotes" stories that HN users upvote, let alone actions that such stories might lead to?