Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#211

Post by JadeNB » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 4:31 PM UTC

colpabar wrote: post #161

taylodl wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In other words, when the elite are impacted the full force of law will be brought to bear on the perpetrator of the injustice. This used to be called aristocracy. We've spent the past 250 years pretending it doesn't exist here in the States.

I find it funny how we use phrases like "Russian oligarchs" all the time without batting an eye, but we never use them when referring to the Bushes or the Clintons in the US.

There's a minor genre of imagining US journalism standards for world reporting applied to reporting on the US: https://slate.com/tag/if-it-happened-there

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#212

Post by gwright » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 4:33 PM UTC

otterley wrote: post #177

nindalf wrote: post #110

Huh, never thought I’d see XCheck in a news article. I used to work at Facebook and spotted abuse of this system by bad actors and partly fixed it. It’s still not perfect but it’s better than it used to be. I think I might have agreed with the author of this article before working in Integrity for a few years. But with time I learned that any system that’s meant to work for millions of users will have some edge cases…

You haven’t really touched on the main problem discussed in the article, which is that to Facebook, there are special users - mainly celebrities and politicians - who get to play by different rules than the rest of us. Social media was supposed to help level the playing field of society, not exacerbate its inequalities.

> Social media was supposed to help level the playing field of society,

Why do you think this? I mean it isn't like there was a plebiscite on what "social media was supposed to help".

As with most things of consequence in our world, social media is more of an emergent phenomena that any sort of planned effort. We have a legislative system that is there to provide a mechanism to adapt our legal system as needed.

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#213

Post by tsimionescu » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 4:33 PM UTC

JadeNB wrote: post #207

isk517 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on the rules and laws. The system tends to be very good at punishing rich people that swindle money from other rich people.

> The system tends to be very good at punishing rich people that swindle money from other rich people. … Eventually? I'm surely not the only one who thinks of Madoff first, and he got away with it for almost a decade after suspicions were first reported.

Ah, but Madoff was also making money for other rich people, so the system took some time to decide what to do.

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#214

Post by nindalf » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 4:33 PM UTC

otterley wrote: post #208

nindalf wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did touch on that problem. Like I pointed out Zuckerberg can’t log in on new devices anymore. That’s because of the thousands of attempts per second to log into his account. Those attempts happen because he’s a celebrity. His experience is objectively different because of who he is. It’s the same with Neymar. How many times do you think his profile is reported for any number of violations by people who don’t like h…

I concede that some accounts probably deserve that specific type of protection. However, it doesn’t explain the other kinds of protections these people have, including exemption from content-based rules. Those are the issues of real concern.

The fact that the content couldn’t be taken down was a bug. I feel like you, the author and most critics of Big Tech discount the possibility of bugs existing.

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#215

Post by IncRnd » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 4:34 PM UTC

edoceo wrote: post #167

linuxftw wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly we need to setup the Social Media Agency and regulate them. We'll staff the agency with high level political appointments comprised entirely of Twitter and Facebook executives. Works for the FDA, anyway.

We can call the the Ministry of Truth.

It was inconceivable before 9/11 that we would ever have something called "Department of Homeland Security" or be "asked for our papers". Yet, right afterwards, we were given the "Department of Homeland Security" and the "Patriot Act", which has been extended every single time, despite how it has been regularly abused. My children have grown up into adults not knowing anything else. Just wait a short while. If you don't do something, you will live under the "Ministry of Truth".

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#216

Post by wldcordeiro » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 4:36 PM UTC

The same is true of its advertisements. 'High-profile' organizations get freedom to literally spam you and the report action is meaningless.

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#217

Post by uselesscynicism » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

gkop wrote: post #147

Aunche wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brock Turner wasn't elite in any sense besides his acceptance into Stanford, which had been revoked. His father was an electrical engineer and his mom was a nurse. Also, the judge who made the ruling was fired.

> All-American swimmer https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/03/3... Athletics are another sense in which he was elite.

I thought the whole point of them complaining about "rules for thee, not for me" and "the elite" were class complaints, but now the goalposts are moved and so anyone who excels at anything is part of "the elite"?

Yes, I suppose the kulaks were members of the bourgeoisie after all, for they had skills, and skills are capital, and thus they are part of the oppressor class -- the elite.

Indeed, his mother, a nurse, and his father, as an engineer, both possessed intellectual capital and are thus counterrevolutionaries.

Just to be clear: the above is somewhat tongue in cheek and obviously nothing about the boy's background should be relevant in a violent crime case, and his was particularly disgusting.

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#218

Post by pjc50 » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

jdavis703 wrote: post #174

metalliqaz wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there anyone walking around that actually believes that rules and laws apply to the elite? Some seem to think that the reason this is excused is because (in the US at least) every poor schmuck seem to think they they will be rich and powerful someday and get to partake. I've never found that very credible, but smarter people than me seem to think so.

Yes. Donald Trump was impeached twice and has an unknown number of civil and criminal investigations ongoing. If a billionaire and the leader of a major political party is in this much trouble, it kind of shows that elites do get in trouble.

Ongoing, not completed. However a lot of his less privileged associates were actually convicted.

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#219

Post by bvhg3 » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

sophacles wrote: post #181

elzbardico wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most journalists nowadays seem pretty gullible and hard set on their preconceived world views. I fail to see any advantage in critical thinking skills on the media class.

Well here's one thing: they tend to cite sources. Do you have any actual data on your assertion? What you "fail to see" is merely a statement of your observation skills. I would like to compare that with other sources that aren't so clearly biased.

Primary source: "persons familiar with the matter".

Re: Facebook has exempted high-profile users from some or all of its rules

#220

Post by tsimionescu » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

jdavis703 wrote: post #174

metalliqaz wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there anyone walking around that actually believes that rules and laws apply to the elite? Some seem to think that the reason this is excused is because (in the US at least) every poor schmuck seem to think they they will be rich and powerful someday and get to partake. I've never found that very credible, but smarter people than me seem to think so.

Yes. Donald Trump was impeached twice and has an unknown number of civil and criminal investigations ongoing. If a billionaire and the leader of a major political party is in this much trouble, it kind of shows that elites do get in trouble.

Impeachment + acquittal and open trials aren't punishment. They are the very opposite - they show how we make a show of justice for the elites, while doing nothing practical. I can promise you that nothing substantial will come of all these trials - he will at the very worse have to pay some small percentage of his huge fortune.