Live data from Hacker News

My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook Goodbye post

alecmuffett.com

21–30 of 269 posts

Re: My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook Goodbye post

#21
Just saying, at this stage, if I were Facebook and I wanted to take the pressure off, I’d be putting out little stories that make the story about the whistleblower instead of about Facebook. I’d also focus on stories that will make us disagree with her over various particulars rather than with Facebook.

Facebook has a pretty simple problem: they pissed off too many people, either by taking too much of the winnings for themselves or by inserting themselves into divisive governing tasks or just by ruining what earlier users liked about the product. Lately I even think the anger towards them is because they represent the Internet, and the whole Internet seems to suck lately.

So does Facebook deserve every bit of this bad press? Maybe not. Maybe it’s not all fair. But it’s all coming from somewhere- they’ve just made too many people mad. I don’t think you can insert yourself this directly into monopolizing control of information and the enormous winnings of the Internet without this happening.

Re: My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook Goodbye post

#22

As cited in this article, Frances Haugen is arguing against allowing Facebook to use end-to-end encryption because she suggests Facebook should have more surveillance of private communications: https://twitter.com/AlecMuffett/status/1452309133928054799?s... A lot of people jumped to the defense of the Facebook leaker because the media so successfully framed it as a “whistleblower” situation, but that’s not really wha…

I also don't see anything too 'whistle-blower' worthy in the goodbye post.

It just seems to be a vague message that although social media sometimes have a positive impact, it also sometimes has a negative impact, and that Facebook has employed strategies to help it grow. Hardly shocking findings!

Re: My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook Goodbye post

#23

As cited in this article, Frances Haugen is arguing against allowing Facebook to use end-to-end encryption because she suggests Facebook should have more surveillance of private communications: https://twitter.com/AlecMuffett/status/1452309133928054799?s... A lot of people jumped to the defense of the Facebook leaker because the media so successfully framed it as a “whistleblower” situation, but that’s not really wha…

> some of her suggestions really do not align with what the tech community wants at all

I agree in general with your comment, but what I don't like is anyone (Haugen, you or anyone else) speaking for "the tech community". We all have different opinions, and you can't generalize with that.

For example, plenty of people I know including myself would be strongly against less encryption, but strongly for more government control of tech companies (not via less encryption but via other means).

It's really hard to generalize, and in this case we gain nothing by generalizing so let's do it less, not more.

Re: My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook Goodbye post

#24
post #6

On the popularity of Haugen: I find it amusing how your government treats a whistleblower who is promoting government control over social media, vs the way your government treats a whistleblower who leaks evidence of government spying and abuse. The fact that Edward Snowden and Julian Assange are treated the way they are (and the earlier treatment of Manning) gives the US government zero credibility on press freedom,…

> On the popularity of Haugen: I find it amusing how your government treats a whistleblower who is promoting government control over social media, vs the way your government treats a whistleblower who leaks evidence of government spying and abuse.

Well one of them leaked documents of said government, the other company secrets.

Re: My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook Goodbye post

#25

As cited in this article, Frances Haugen is arguing against allowing Facebook to use end-to-end encryption because she suggests Facebook should have more surveillance of private communications: https://twitter.com/AlecMuffett/status/1452309133928054799?s... A lot of people jumped to the defense of the Facebook leaker because the media so successfully framed it as a “whistleblower” situation, but that’s not really wha…

There's no rational discussion around these e-mob hate trains. It boils down to "You're either with us or against us".

I guess we're focusing on hating facebook this year.

Re: My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook Goodbye post

#26
post #6

On the popularity of Haugen: I find it amusing how your government treats a whistleblower who is promoting government control over social media, vs the way your government treats a whistleblower who leaks evidence of government spying and abuse. The fact that Edward Snowden and Julian Assange are treated the way they are (and the earlier treatment of Manning) gives the US government zero credibility on press freedom,…

On one hand are whistleblowers to the American public against the U.S. government. On the other hand, a whistleblower to the American public and U.S. government. Not sure why one would expect them to be received similarly.

Re: My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook Goodbye post

#27
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is a bit schizophrenic on this topic. On one hand, it seems everybody wants more freedom and less surveillance, but they give FB a hard time for not monitoring content better. Hopefully these aren't the same people expressing these contradictory points of view. I'd be curious to know what both side think the ideal social network should look like.

> On one hand, it seems everybody wants more freedom and less surveillance, but they give FB a hard time for not monitoring content better. I don't think these are conflicting views: (1) Less monitoring on private messages (2) More monitoring on public posts

The obvious solution to #2 is encrypted private social networks that aggressively lock out the monitors. To continue the monitoring it'll require abolishing encryption, that's where the views in question (more freedom + less surveillence and more content monitoring) inevitably are going to end up conflicting and must always end up conflicting.

Re: My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook Goodbye post

#28

> Facebook whistleblower warns ‘dangerous’ encryption will aid espionage by hostile nations So another reason the politicians in DC are so abnormally happy about Haugen. She's providing a security/safety theater argument against encryption, one that is so convoluted it's bound to confuse the general public in a we have to deny your rights to protect your rights sort of way.

She seems more like a lobbyist than a whistleblower.

Re: My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook Goodbye post

#29
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On one hand, it seems everybody wants more freedom and less surveillance, but they give FB a hard time for not monitoring content better. I don't think these are conflicting views: (1) Less monitoring on private messages (2) More monitoring on public posts

The obvious solution to #2 is encrypted private social networks that aggressively lock out the monitors. To continue the monitoring it'll require abolishing encryption, that's where the views in question (more freedom + less surveillence and more content monitoring) inevitably are going to end up conflicting and must always end up conflicting.

How do you ban monitoring of public posts?

Re: My interview with Steven Levy re. leaking of my Facebook Goodbye post

#30

As cited in this article, Frances Haugen is arguing against allowing Facebook to use end-to-end encryption because she suggests Facebook should have more surveillance of private communications: https://twitter.com/AlecMuffett/status/1452309133928054799?s... A lot of people jumped to the defense of the Facebook leaker because the media so successfully framed it as a “whistleblower” situation, but that’s not really wha…

This is a very common deflection tactic by corporations.

Try and discredit the leaker over the information that was leaked.

We saw it with Wikileaks and now we will see as more and more tech employees start sharing what goes on behind the curtains.

Post reply on HN