Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 463 posts

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#261

Post by theplatman »

KaiserPro wrote: post #196

Ex Meta employee here (yes you are right to boo): The thing that really gets me is that internally there are 4 levels of data 1 being public domain shit (the sky is blue) up to 4 which is private user data, or something that is sensitive if leaked or shared. I was told that by default all user data is level 4, as in if you do anything without decent approval, you're insta fired. There are many stories about at least…

have always wondered about this especially post Cambridge Analytica where Meta imposed really stringent requirements for API use even for personal things while it was blatantly obvious that internally it was a different story

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#263

Post by Bridged7756 »

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #32
getnormality wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, yeah. If I went straight to the press to trash the reputation of my client's product, rather than communicating internally first to help them proactively address the issues, I would expect to get fired. Not that I am remotely interested in defending Meta, or optimistic that they would proactively address privacy issues. But I don't feel that sympathetic to the outsourcing company here either. I don't know what…

You would help conceal a crime against the people just because it's good business?? Congratulations, you have a bright future in politics and/or tech CEOing.

More like a bright future being someone's fall guy. The ignorance to think that a large tech giant like Facebook would give a crap about any of those concerns makes this person too politically inept to make it anywhere

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#264

Post by dntrkv »

KaiserPro wrote: post #196

Ex Meta employee here (yes you are right to boo): The thing that really gets me is that internally there are 4 levels of data 1 being public domain shit (the sky is blue) up to 4 which is private user data, or something that is sensitive if leaked or shared. I was told that by default all user data is level 4, as in if you do anything without decent approval, you're insta fired. There are many stories about at least…

> I was told that by default all user data is level 4, as in if you do anything without decent approval, you're insta fired. There are many stories about at least one person a month during boot camp accessing user data and getting escorted out of the building within hours.

Given the size and nature of Meta's business, I would assume they would have better systems in place. SWEs should only have access to PII with explicit consent from users/customers e.g. support tickets.

Especially someone going through boot camp. Do they have access to de-anonymized user data during training?

Shit, at my last company I had to jump through so many hoops to access user data even with consent from the customer.

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#266

Post by mplewis »

Aaronstotle wrote: post #99
everdrive wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds about right. If you know someone who uses these smart glasses, it's important not to tolerate them whatsoever. Don't speak with them, interact with them. I wouldn't even recommend being in their presence.

I want to get the Oakley Meta ones so I can record bike rides easier, should I not be tolerated?

No. Fuck off

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#268

Post by genewitch »

Aurornis wrote: post #236
abdullahkhalids wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CSAM exists on social media because they are so large that it's not possible to moderate them effectively. To me this is a a no-go. If a business is so large that it cannot respect laws, it needs to be shut down. The correct way to organize social media is in federated way. Each server only holds on average a few hundred or few thousand people. Server moderators should be legally responsible for content on their serv…

> Server moderators should be legally responsible for content on their server. So if you want to send someone to jail, just talk your way into joining their server, upload some illegal content, and report them for it? > Not many moderators will have to look at CSAM because the structure of the system makes is unappealing to even try sharing CSAM, knowing you will be immediately blocked. Why would someone join a serve…

right, and you have other users on fediverse that notice that server leaking, and if the content is bad enough, report the service to an authority. Having all of the pedophiles and other creeps on a tiny subset of servers, isloated islands of them; well, that ought make enforcement easier.

It also makes it relatively easy to avoid, as server admins share blocklists. I know a dozen servers offhand that i'd block if i ran another fediverse server.

Fosstodon fediverse server doesn't have this issue, for example.

I replied this way because the way you wrote it, it sounds like an indictment of a system that's designed to avoid advertisers getting user profiles, over all else.

The problem is the people who participate in this (the illegal and immoral), and not "the network."

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#269

Post by Barrin92 »

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #164
prepend wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How else do you want companies to remove and prevent CSAM? It seems like you must have some human involvement to train and monitor. It’s a terrible job, I wouldn’t want to do it, but someone needs to. Perhaps one day, AI will be accurate enough to not need it, but even then you need someone to process complaints and waivers (like someone’s home photos being inaccurately flagged).

CSAM exists on social media because they are so large that it's not possible to moderate them effectively. To me this is a a no-go. If a business is so large that it cannot respect laws, it needs to be shut down. The correct way to organize social media is in federated way. Each server only holds on average a few hundred or few thousand people. Server moderators should be legally responsible for content on their serv…

>CSAM on social media will be 100x suppressed because banning people is way easier on small servers.

No it isn't. Small servers often don't have paid security or moderation, are run in anonymous fashion, and have no profit motive that can even be used to incentivize them against hosting illegal content.

That's visible when it comes to porn. There's a million bootleg porn sites on the internet hosted that show off illegal content. The only site that was ever forced to curate its content was Pornhub, because they're sufficiently large, work in a jurisdiction that has laws and can be held accountable. From a content moderation standpoint going after a million web forums is an absolute pain in the ass compared to going after Facebook.

Which is the first argument any decentralization advocate always brings up (and they're correct to do so), censorship is harder and evasion of law enforcement easier when dealing with a network of independent actors.

Post reply on HN