Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia • Hacker News Board

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#211

Post by sjy » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 9:36 PM UTC

djoldman wrote: post #181

srcreigh wrote: post #129

I haven't read the bill, but this looks like a huge win. FB has abused our brain chemistry with addictive content. Their platform makes discussions more impulsive, passionate and careless not unlike any other addictive substance. People crave "the goods" ie browsing their bite sized feeds, and neglect the responsibility of actually learning about the news. Not unlike how if you're addicted to sugar/unhealthy foods yo…

>FB has abused our brain chemistry with addictive content. Their platform makes discussions more impulsive, passionate and careless not unlike any other addictive substance. People crave "the goods" ie browsing their bite sized feeds, and neglect the responsibility of actually learning about the news. Not unlike how if you're addicted to sugar/unhealthy foods you don't want your veggies. Is Facebook the bad guy here?…

> Are we really saying that people cannot stop using social media? Are we saying that people don't think it's bad for them?

Yes, that’s part of the definition of ‘addictive.’ Internet and social media addiction is well documented, even though not all users are addicted. Like gambling.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#212

Post by uniqueid » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 9:38 PM UTC

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #106

extropy wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Publicly disclosing the algorithms would drastically increase the pace of gaming them and resulting in pay to play system where the fanciest SEO wins. Google and Facebook partially relies on the obscurity to keep the fighting the spam battle. IMO we don't have the technology yet to have fully open ranking algorithms that are not quickly broken. To think of it - similar to crypto around WW2.

This excuse has been used to protect Google and Facebook for decades, but considering disinformation campaigns, civil unrest, and outright genocide has been the cost... I think the price of using obscurity to prevent SEO tactics is way too high .

The root cause isn't algorithms, it's a lack of accountability (both of companies and of users). The problem with 8chan wasn't some inadvertently harmful AI, it's that the site and its users damaged the world for several years without facing consequences.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#213

Post by beachy » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 9:38 PM UTC

tw04 wrote: post #78

Oh no, not that, anything but that. In all seriousness I hope this drives the less informed in Australia to seek out actual news sources and break out of the echo chamber that is Facebook. And I hope it forces Facebook to actually support journalism instead of leeching off of it. You can't have a robust democracy without a robust fourth estate.

Australia doesn't really have a robust fourth estate. It has a Murdoch-ruled empire which is pretty much the propaganda arm of the rightwing Liberal government, though it's hard to say who wags who's tail.

FB is an insane echo chamber for sure but at least you can pick your chamber. Any exposure to the news in Australia is tainted by the Murdoch's foul agenda.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#214

Post by djoldman » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 9:39 PM UTC

aliceryhl wrote: post #204

djoldman wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>FB has abused our brain chemistry with addictive content. Their platform makes discussions more impulsive, passionate and careless not unlike any other addictive substance. People crave "the goods" ie browsing their bite sized feeds, and neglect the responsibility of actually learning about the news. Not unlike how if you're addicted to sugar/unhealthy foods you don't want your veggies. Is Facebook the bad guy here?…

Do you also think that it should be optional to wear a seatbelt?

That's a good question.

In most states, as far as I know, it's illegal not to wear a seatbelt. So from the point of view of the law, it's not optional. Pragmatically, it's somewhat optional because it's unlikely that violations of the law are detected and prosecuted.

From a "should this actually be the law" point of view: I don't know.

I think that in US society, our championing the rights of the individual has led to a failure to protect the individual from themselves.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#215

Post by DavidSJ » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 9:40 PM UTC

gkmcd wrote: post #60

A key part of this legislation is the requirements for tech companies to provide selected news organisations with advance notice about changes to ranking algorithms. This has been generally overlooked in the reporting and discussion but I believe it is the actually the most important part of the legislation. It will give the selected news organisations an enormous advantage over other companies not included and prote…

> a particular media company that currently dominates the media landscape here

What is this company, out of curiosity? My guess is ABC, but I don't know.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#216

Post by Nowado » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 9:41 PM UTC

cabalamat wrote: post #203

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I absolutely want to ban self-driving cars that behave in ways no human can explain or understand! The mere idea that anyone would think that should be legal is borderline insane . All you are doing here is convincing me that tech companies are just runaway trains with nobody at the controls!

> I absolutely want to ban self-driving cars that behave in ways no human can explain or understand! Can you explain or understand the algorithms humans use to drive cars?

Screw that.

Explain to me step by step how you walk.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#217

Post by danielheath » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 9:41 PM UTC

tantalor wrote: post #198

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also believe any algorithm that isn't human-readable should be banned. If it can't be understood, nobody can validate that it isn't racist, sexist, or slanted towards encouraging violence and harm. The fact that technology companies have been grossly negligent and irresponsible isn't a reason to not regulate them: It's proof regulation needs to be much, much stronger.

> any algorithm that isn't human-readable should be banned There's existing a term for people with this view: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite

You refer to the activists who successfully protected their quality of life by refusing to let someone else use technology to ruin it.

An apt comparison.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#218

Post by zmmmmm » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 9:42 PM UTC

Jonanin wrote: post #89

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only problem I have with this requirement is that it requires giving only news organizations access to this information. Your concerns can adequately be addressed by ensuring everyone has even access to that information. Google and Facebook's algorithms should be required to be publicly disclosed. As a society, we should demand that we are able to see the algorithms that every web property lives and dies based on…

These algorithms are not human readable code. They are massively complex interconnected systems of many black box ML models. I don't understand what clarity people think releasing the "algorithms" will bring. In fact, describing ranking as a single algorithm is pretty misleading.

As you say, explaining the intracicies of the algorithm is a fools errand. I guess it is more reasonable if you turn it around: these changes have drastic impact on businesses, so there is a duty to behave responsibly in administering them.

If Google really has no idea what the impact of a change will be then it is fairly irresponsible to make that change given the real world harm it can cause. But I suspect in general it does have at least a reasonable idea what the effect of changes will be - that is why it is making them.

So the more reasonable version of this is that they need to submit human interpretable descriptions of the effect of changes based on reasonable evidence and validation of their models.

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#219

Post by sjy » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 9:45 PM UTC

anticristi wrote: post #67

scribu wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this article on simple linking vs. previewing sums up the issue: https://theconversation.com/webs-inventor-says-news-media-ba...

Awesome summary. It seems to me that this is a bit of a failure of the fair use doctrine. Making one preview of an image or article does not impact the author's monetisation ability. Making a business out of systematically producing previews (and adding your own ads around them) should no longer quality as fair use. We have a joke: A: How much is a drop of gas? B: A drop of gas? Well, zero! A: One million drops of ga…

The stated rationale for the law is not copyright infringement, so fair use is not relevant. It’s an attempt by Australia’s competition (antitrust) regulator to address an alleged market failure: “The proposed bargaining code is intended to address bargaining power imbalances between Australian news media businesses and digital platforms in order to ensure that commercial arrangements between these parties do not undermine the ability and incentives for news media businesses to produce news for Australians.” https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/ACCC%20-%20Mandatory%20...

Re: Changes to sharing and viewing news on Facebook in Australia

#220

Post by nizmow » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 9:46 PM UTC

DavidSJ wrote: post #215

gkmcd wrote: post #60

A key part of this legislation is the requirements for tech companies to provide selected news organisations with advance notice about changes to ranking algorithms. This has been generally overlooked in the reporting and discussion but I believe it is the actually the most important part of the legislation. It will give the selected news organisations an enormous advantage over other companies not included and prote…

> a particular media company that currently dominates the media landscape here What is this company, out of curiosity? My guess is ABC, but I don't know.

Murdoch’s News Corp.