Watch live: Zuckerberg, Dorsey testify before Senate [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Watch live: Zuckerberg, Dorsey testify before Senate [video]

#181

Post by DangitBobby » Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 6:23 PM UTC

hallway_monitor wrote: post #144

DangitBobby wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? You have a hard time thinking of rich people doing more harm than good? Do you recall the decades where the truth about tobacco was actively suppressed? How fossil fuel companies are doing the same thing right now about Global Warming? Or the dismantling of regulatory agencies like the EPA by the Trump admin? Or the various billionaires that fund "think tanks" to conduct "research" favorable to their economic…

It seems less productive to focus on "rich people" and instead focus on "large corporations", because all of these actions are done in the name of the corporation. An adjustment to corporate law to put the responsibility for actions of corporations on to C-level execs could have positive effects for example.

It is done in the name of corporations by rich people to protect the wealth of rich people. Not really sure why we are trying to speak in euphemisms.

Re: Watch live: Zuckerberg, Dorsey testify before Senate [video]

#182

Post by procombo » Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 6:26 PM UTC

CodeGlitch wrote: post #110

tensor wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an interesting question! I'm not sure there is anything I need to hear from these two. That's not to say that polarization and disinformation being amplified due to social media bubbles isn't a serious problem. Rather, I don't think it's up to these two to fix it, nor even understand it. As a society we need to first understand the problem, then decide on what, if anything, we want to do to fix it. Fixes woul…

Some things are simply too destructive to be in society. I'll take smoking as an example: Of course you should have the option to put whatever you like into your body. But when it starts to seriously affect your health and the people around you, it calls into question whether your right to smoke is above the negative impact on society. This is how I see social media. (I realise a lot of HN folk work in this area) The…

I've recently conceded to the argument that it's impossible to solve the problem without first defining the role and function of the companies. I believe that should be at the center of Senate questioning, not because it's comfortable, but because it is necessary.

I cooked eggs this morning. There is a diversity of wonderful eggs and even some bad eggs. Is the Twitter service a) the eggs, b) the pan, c) the stove, or d) the hen-to-table service of providing a delicious breakfast?

Re: Watch live: Zuckerberg, Dorsey testify before Senate [video]

#183

Post by efitz » Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 6:28 PM UTC

Dirlewanger wrote: post #134

elicash wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Nothing happens" mostly because people disagree about things. As a result, seems like a good thing that these hearings broadcast different views on these issues so that the public can know how those views differ. Then, after knowing those views, people get to weigh in during election seasons. In this very recent election, of course, the public weighed in and likely delivered divided government, so we can expect some…

This is Zuck's 3rd time doing this. His first time was 2 years ago. What meaningful legislation, if any, has been introduced/passed since then? Congress is full of decrepit baby boomers that don't know/don't care to know shit about technology.

Right now with a split Congress, no legislation is getting passed if it is in any way controversial. Lack of progress has little to do with technology awareness and much to do with partisanship, e.g. "not wanting to give the other side a win".

Re: Watch live: Zuckerberg, Dorsey testify before Senate [video]

#184

Post by disambiguation » Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 6:32 PM UTC

kemonocode wrote: post #85

mxskelly wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this a joke? Please tell me you're joking.

Many rich people are incredibly miserable and basically stuck in a position they cannot escape from. That doesn't mean they aren't doing a lot of harm (they are) or they aren't aware of it (again, they are) but they might not see a viable way out of it. I remember when Zuckerberg was just seen like a nerdy, awkward kid suddenly put in big boy pants and people empathizing with him, and not like the eldritch abominatio…

> Many rich people are incredibly miserable and basically stuck in a position they cannot escape from.

citation?

Re: Watch live: Zuckerberg, Dorsey testify before Senate [video]

#185

Post by dang » Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

hvdfhbj wrote: post #148

Aunche wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the Senators spent their time asking meaningful questions that don't know the answer to rather than grandstanding, they might be able to find something they can mutually agree on.

And if footballers could just stop struggling against one another then maybe they could all agree on which direction the ball should go. There's no room for agreement here. The sides are Republicans: stop censoring us Democrats: please censor Republicans even more

Could you please not use HN for political and ideological battle? You've posted dozens of such comments already. We ban that kind of account because doing that destroys the curious conversation that the site is supposed to be for.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of HN to heart, we'd appreciate it.

Edit: actually you've broken the site guidelines so repeatedly and so badly already that I think we need to ban this account. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.

Re: Watch live: Zuckerberg, Dorsey testify before Senate [video]

#186

Post by disambiguation » Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

dustingetz wrote: post #53

blhack wrote: post #28

Let me give a preview for anybody who can’t tune in: Democrats all say that disinformation is a threat to democracy. Republicans say that freedom of speech is essential to our democracy. Jack and Mark preface every answer with “senator thank you for this question” and don’t answer anything. They both insist that the humans making editorial decisions are somehow impartial. Republicans yell a lot. Somethings they say d…

Maybe these two men actually aren't trying to become more wealthy. Perhaps they are trapped by promises and partnerships made in the past, where they consensually entered an unbreakable alliance.

i'll entertain this fan-fiction

you're describing a "deal with the devil". who do you propose is the "mafia" like entity they're dealing with that will "break their legs" if they back out of their job? Epstein blackmail maybe?

Re: Watch live: Zuckerberg, Dorsey testify before Senate [video]

#187

Post by BurningFrog » Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 6:39 PM UTC

justin66 wrote: post #176

BurningFrog wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an immigrant, I find the Pledge of Allegiance pretty creepy. I don't think it has anything substantial to do with freedom of speech issues. Obscenity laws and flag burning are better examples.

I don't understand your comment. Regardless of where you stand on the topic, I don't think it's controversial that compelled recitation of the pledge is debated in public and argued about in the courts as a first amendment freedom of speech issue. (after reading your comment below I think I get it. It's one of the infringements of freedom of speech that you're willing to tolerate because it's merely "creepy?" If so,…

Maybe you should reread the comment below?

It doesn't mention "creepy", and says something quite different from what you got from it.

Re: Watch live: Zuckerberg, Dorsey testify before Senate [video]

#188

Post by justin66 » Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 6:46 PM UTC

BurningFrog wrote: post #187

justin66 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand your comment. Regardless of where you stand on the topic, I don't think it's controversial that compelled recitation of the pledge is debated in public and argued about in the courts as a first amendment freedom of speech issue. (after reading your comment below I think I get it. It's one of the infringements of freedom of speech that you're willing to tolerate because it's merely "creepy?" If so,…

Maybe you should reread the comment below? It doesn't mention "creepy", and says something quite different from what you got from it.

Right, "creepy" is the word you used above.

You're welcome to entertain an eccentric definition of "freedom of speech" that doesn't include one of the major freedom of speech issues of our time. It's just very odd.

Re: Watch live: Zuckerberg, Dorsey testify before Senate [video]

#189

Post by AssassinDuck » Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 6:50 PM UTC

hvdfhbj wrote: post #148

Aunche wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the Senators spent their time asking meaningful questions that don't know the answer to rather than grandstanding, they might be able to find something they can mutually agree on.

And if footballers could just stop struggling against one another then maybe they could all agree on which direction the ball should go. There's no room for agreement here. The sides are Republicans: stop censoring us Democrats: please censor Republicans even more

I love your characterization of the Republican party as just honest people who get censored by the big bad censoring Democrats.

Let's take this election for example. Republican leaders and officials have jumped on the misinformation train and are now peddling unfounded claims of election and voter fraud. Twitter keeps suppressing those tweets and tagging them as fake, this in turn makes the Republicans mad because they can't spread what they see as reality.

Ignoring the fact that Republicans are the source of most of the misinformation you see online right now might make it seem like they are being censored, but in reality it's just cleaning up what can only be described as dishonest, anti-democratic and delusional lying.

Re: Watch live: Zuckerberg, Dorsey testify before Senate [video]

#190

Post by abvdasker » Tue, Nov 17, 2020, 6:50 PM UTC

What a disgrace. Republicans and Democrats are basically arguing over the specifics of content moderation by these social media companies. Republicans think the moderation goes too far or is politically biased while Democrats argue the moderation doesn't go far enough and want dissent they call "disinformation" removed from social media. Lindsey Graham at multiple points indulged in McCarthyite questioning about the political beliefs of Twitter and Facebook employees.

All the while, Section 230 is being held hostage even though it has absolutely nothing to do with the content moderation these companies currently perform. Few in elected office seem to have much regard for the 1st Amendment. At this point there's clear bipartisan support for curtailing the Section 230 protections that make these discussions possible.