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

Facebook and the Normalization of Deviance

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 62 posts

Re: Facebook and the Normalization of Deviance

#41

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

Animats wrote: post #27
im_down_w_otp wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't their algorithms all designed to optimize for engagement? Isn't engagement just the measure of how much time you spend on and interacting with their system? Doesn't that mean that they're not deciding what to keep feeding us, but rather that we are? It seems like what they've done is basically automate, "Give the people what they want.", as it were. We produce the clickbait, we click on the clickbait, then we…

It seems like what they've done is basically automate, "Give the people what they want.", as it were. Yes. Facebook profits from giving people what they want, but did not create the demand. What's scary is the quantity of demand for nuttiness. The other big feature of social media is that it brings diffuse minorities together. Before social media, outliers were unlikely to meet those with similar inclinations. Social…

> The other big feature of social media is that it brings diffuse minorities together. Before social media, outliers were unlikely to meet those with similar inclinations. Social media powered cohesion of groups from gays to Proud Boys to flat-earthers.

And this is mostly a great thing. Like the internet started this, but Facebook (and Twitter I suppose) made it mainstream.

We're essentially in another time period like the one after the invention of the printing press, where the mechanisms for controlling the spread of information break down, and something new is born.

Unfortunately, it's much easier for journalists/policymakers et al to blame "Big Tech" rather than realise that to some extent, we are all to blame.

Re: Facebook and the Normalization of Deviance

#42

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

goatinaboat wrote: post #40
im_down_w_otp wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't their algorithms all designed to optimize for engagement? Isn't engagement just the measure of how much time you spend on and interacting with their system? Doesn't that mean that they're not deciding what to keep feeding us, but rather that we are? It seems like what they've done is basically automate, "Give the people what they want.", as it were. We produce the clickbait, we click on the clickbait, then we…

Doesn't that mean that they're not deciding what to keep feeding us, but rather that we are? Not exactly. Think about fast food. You are genetically programmed to enjoy fatty, sugary, salty foods because these were hard to come by back in the day. Now they are easy and companies push them on us, by exploiting this evolutionary development in a harmful way. Similarly all your social instincts like FOMO are baked in, a…

> Similarly all your social instincts like FOMO are baked in, and [TV/radio/books] targets them ruthlessly.

Are my rephrasings of your statement any less true, or is FB somehow different?

Re: Facebook and the Normalization of Deviance

#43

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

sneak wrote: post #33
wyattpeak wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that really the problem? When in history did people get their news and information from a large and diverse set of sources? For as long as there's been national news, it's been dominated by a few headline sources. Before that there were lots of local sources, but nobody was reading the local news from both Connecticut and Colorado. I don't know what the difference is today. Maybe there isn't a difference, we just…

> When in history did people get their news and information from a large and diverse set of sources? Lots of people get information from friends and family and their community directly. Facebook is now mediating these private communications in DM, and censoring them. There are whole sites you simply cannot link to in DMs to your friends and family.

Can you give an example of such a site?

Re: Facebook and the Normalization of Deviance

#44

Post by goatinaboat »

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #42
goatinaboat wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't that mean that they're not deciding what to keep feeding us, but rather that we are? Not exactly. Think about fast food. You are genetically programmed to enjoy fatty, sugary, salty foods because these were hard to come by back in the day. Now they are easy and companies push them on us, by exploiting this evolutionary development in a harmful way. Similarly all your social instincts like FOMO are baked in, a…

> Similarly all your social instincts like FOMO are baked in, and [TV/radio/books] targets them ruthlessly. Are my rephrasings of your statement any less true, or is FB somehow different?

Are my rephrasings of your statement any less true, or is FB somehow different?

Yes. A TV show has to appeal to a million or 10 million people and the feedback cycle is a season long. It has to stay pretty close to the “average”. There's a limit on how strongly it can pull any lever, and pulling that lever might decrease influence with half the audience as much as it increases it with the other.

Whereas Facebook can tweak the experience for a single individual with a hundred feedback loops in a day and when it finds the right level pull it as hard as it can. That’s new.

Re: Facebook and the Normalization of Deviance

#47

Post by sneak »

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #43
sneak wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When in history did people get their news and information from a large and diverse set of sources? Lots of people get information from friends and family and their community directly. Facebook is now mediating these private communications in DM, and censoring them. There are whole sites you simply cannot link to in DMs to your friends and family.

Can you give an example of such a site?

Twitter. Facebook censors certain links to tweets, even. That's not an example of a domain that is wholly banned, but it's a good example of the practice.

Re: Facebook and the Normalization of Deviance

#48

Post by yeetman21 »

Barrin92 wrote: post #25

There's some real crazy quotes in that piece > "According to the newspaper, Zhang was fired for “spending too much time focused on uprooting civic fake engagement and not enough time on the priorities outlined by management.”"[...] > "Facebook’s products enabled corrupt governments to create fake followers and fake “likes,” which then triggered Facebook’s algorithms to boost their propaganda and legitimacy. According…

If he was tasked with a job regarding domestic (US) activities, why should he be looking into Honduras?

>ask yourself if it can truly be said that Facebook is still in any way shape or form aligned with human flourishing.

FB contributes a lot to many open source projects such as Godot and OCP. Please stop being so dramatic

Re: Facebook and the Normalization of Deviance

#49

Post by commandlinefan »

bourgwaletariat wrote: post #22
ryandrake wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brave post! Seems whenever you imply on HN that developers should follow some code of ethics, and be held responsible for the ethical impact of the systems they make, people look at you like you have a horn growing out of your head. “But what if my manager TOLD me to write that evil code??” “Hey, I’m not making the requirements, I just implement them!” According to a lot of replies you will get, we are just helpless…

I pretty much only log in to make comments like this and the message is well received. We are the ones doing this. Doing something wrong isn't right because someone paid you to. No, it's even worse . It's immoral. I was instructed by management to implement signature fraud into a contract management system for a multibillion dollar real estate brokerage. It was illegal. I refused. They fired me on illegal grounds. I…

Equating actual, illegal signature fraud with facebooks facilitation of free speech - even speech that you, personally, disagree with - is a far bigger problem than vaccine misinformation.
Post reply on HN