161–170 of 512 posts
Is HN just reddit now? The comments on this are beyond stupid and add nothing of value or thought.
I agree there are a lot more low quality comments, though. It depends on the article.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We can come up with a definition and refine it. Maybe something like: algorithmic content suggestions trying to maximize engagement and time on app (leave out chronological + explicit follow). Banning is not the way to go about things. India is always ban happy -> a competitive exam in a state? Take down internet in the whole state to curb cheating. Outright banning hard to deal with stuff sets a bad precedent.
You don't ban the users or the internet, you make it illegal to do shitty psyops on the public. They were making plenty of money on chronological friend feeds.
Anonymity online seems the ultimate double edge sword. I prefer privacy over government prescribed safety.
Why does this company deserve tax-breaks on their AI data-centers again?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We can come up with a definition and refine it. Maybe something like: algorithmic content suggestions trying to maximize engagement and time on app (leave out chronological + explicit follow). Banning is not the way to go about things. India is always ban happy -> a competitive exam in a state? Take down internet in the whole state to curb cheating. Outright banning hard to deal with stuff sets a bad precedent.
You don't ban the users or the internet, you make it illegal to do shitty psyops on the public. They were making plenty of money on chronological friend feeds.
Why make it sound like it's a UAE problem?
Since y'all are pro at censorship, you may have the answer to my question?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, you're commenting in text format on a web forum to strangers using pseudonyms right now. Why is that valid but the use of social media isn't?
Not really. No infinite scroll. No personalized algorithm. No insane levels of tracking. To compare this to facebook or tiktok is incredibly dishonest.
"I've never had a social media account on any platform and I have plenty of friends and an active social life." Yeah, most people who use social media also have plenty of friends and an active social life.
You seem to not comprehend that there is actual utility to social media for many people, or that most people using social media aren't touch-starved incels or lonely basement dwellers or whatever.
But to answer OP's question since no one else will - maybe try Fediverse alternatives like Mastodon or Friendica.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the exact opposite of what you think. The problem is the governments in those places, and not the private company. The private company would gladly connect everyone.
> The problem is the governments in those places, and not the private company. Do you think Meta will comply if North Korea or Iran requests same censorship? If your answer is "No, they will not comply", then problem is the company
Those countries don’t allow Meta to operate at all.
> If your answer is "No, they will not comply", then problem is the company
I don’t understand what point you’re trying to make. Large companies comply with the laws of countries they operate in. It’s not optional. If you have a presence there you either comply with their laws or they shut you down.
In some of these countries they might even arrest any employees of the company they can get their hands on to send a message, even if they didn’t have decision making authority. That’s not something you subject your employees to.
Well, it's that or the accounts get removed completely. Sometimes you have to pick your fight, and this doesn't look like one that's worth it.
The third option is to ignore them and let them block you . In a democracy this causes lots of public outrage and might be reversed. Not sure how it goes in authoritarian monarchies.
