Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may be "more effective" to implore the government to crack down on media policies you don't like, but it's also as much a threat to free expression as Facebook's ridiculous and overt censorship of this image.
Free expression already has limits (No "Fire!" in a crowded theater when no danger exists), I'm absolutely fine with government saying what Facebook isn't allowed to do (remove journalistic posts without due process).
Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
411–420 of 454 posts
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#412Maybe the censorship team was too young know the significance of the picture. I am guessing average Facebook employee is under 30. Probably younger than that. Vietnam war is over 40 years old, most American students learned about it and knew that picture, but I don't know how much Vietnam war is taught in other countries. It might have been a combination of age and where the person grew up that contributed to deletin…
"Most American students learned about it and knew that picture..." I'm 38: We didn't learn much about the Vietnam war, honestly. The sections on everything from the 50's onward were very short, and sometimes glossed over due to time constraints. I think we had one teacher tell us that it was simply because not enough time had passed since it happened, which always seemed ridiculous to me. It is kinda like we knew it…
Same age here, pretty much same experience.
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#413Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But that also means it is very hard to use an alternative, especially as Facebook buys relevant competitors of information exchange like Instagram and WhatsApp. It's not very hard. There are literally thousands of popular forums that are not facebook. > Given Facebook's overwhelming presence in modern daily life, it is necessary to regulate No it's not. The fact that you are frequenting a particular site does not g…
There are not literally thousands of forums that have Facebook's reach. Network effects, corporate acquisitions, walled-garden approaches, and similar mechanisms make an equivalent reach outside of Facebook difficult. http://www.businessinsider.com/social-media-engagement-stati... http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/576d559e52bcd05c658... Global monthly active users, millions: * Facebook: 1,650 * Tumblr: 550 * I…
I highly doubt you need in your daily life to reach 1.6 billion of people. If you need to talk to your relatives and friends, there are thousands of options. Including, you know, talking to them. If you need to find people with similar interests, there are thousands of places where you can do it, unless your interests require talking to a billion people at once - at which point you are probably an advanced AI which is destined to rule us all and need not to bother talking to a puny human like me.
Of course, if your goal is to see cat pictures on the biggest social network there is in existence, then you have no alternative but Facebook. But I question this goal has any value at all. Facebook may have millions of posts every second, but you will never know about it, will never see them and will never interact with their creators in any way.
If your purpose is to spread your ads to as many people as possible, billion-sized site is also providing reach second to none. But I personally have very little interest about the optimal spread of advertisement, and so does about 99.999% of people that do not work in ad business.
In short, I see nothing that makes Facebook more than a) Schelling point that can be easily replaced with another one, and b) so-so platform to waste one's time because why not.
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#414Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, it's not a public utility, it's not governed by a neutral third party, it's not open, transparent or free. What did you expect? It's a surveillance and marketing platform that you subjected yourselves to out of convenience, operated for its own benefit and indirectly to the benefit of its customers, certainly not its users. I've never really understood social media in this form, nor understood its takeover as pr…
> Yep, it's not a public utility, it's not governed by a neutral third party, it's not open, transparent or free. What did you expect? It's a surveillance and marketing platform that you subjected yourselves to out of convenience, operated for its own benefit and indirectly to the benefit of its customers, certainly not its users. With the possible exception of "surveillance" everything you just said is also true of…
Not really relevant, I didn't have to subscribe to NYT in order to stay in touch with my friends and family.
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#415This is what you get out from centralizing your communications medium. Sure, we all can easily talk to each other but now you have to assume the host will find something you do or say a liability thus remove it as quickly as you post it. To say that Facebook shouldn't do this comes into conflict in protecting share holder value (which means also avoiding illegal content per local laws). So, you can't have it both way…
> I think the better solution to the problem as it stands is to force people to start hosting their own content I'm encouraged that Tim Berners-Lee is working on this exact problem with Solid (Socially linked data) "a way for you to own your own data while making it available to the applications that you want to be able to use it." http://www.digitaltrends.com/web/ways-to-decentralize-the-we...
you kinda already have an instance of IPFS from the creator of bittorrent, its called btsync. totally p2p. Tho somebody needs to make a 'Solid' layer on top of it.
as far as social net is concerned I'd settle for a middle ground social network like ello with irrevocable privacy and non-censorship protections built in from the founding doc itself.
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#416If you're a Facebook user and you are unhappy with the way the company strongarms, censors and manipulates its audience, the most effective way for you to express this dissatisfaction is to close your account, block social media bugs and encourage your friends and family to do the same. Facebook doesn't care how you feel when you use their service; their bottom line simply depends on your contribution to the statisti…
DNS hosts blocklist for all Facebook related trackers (you'd be surprised at how many there are)
https://github.com/jmdugan/blocklists/blob/master/corporatio...
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#417Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Any organization, when it becomes sufficiently large, essentially becomes a government. Remind me when Facebook used violence to enforce laws or take taxes?
Any given API change, content promotion or censorship, freebooting support (or restrictions), represents a taking of usefruct or allocation amongst various parties. With little or no recourse to them.
> With little or no recourse to them.
Did those parties enter into a contract with Facebook that said that Facebook owed recourse if they changed or censored something? Evidently not.
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#418Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yep, it's not a public utility, it's not governed by a neutral third party, it's not open, transparent or free. What did you expect? It's a surveillance and marketing platform that you subjected yourselves to out of convenience, operated for its own benefit and indirectly to the benefit of its customers, certainly not its users. With the possible exception of "surveillance" everything you just said is also true of…
Not really relevant, I didn't have to subscribe to NYT in order to stay in touch with my friends and family.
If you're going to start splitting hairs then you don't "have to" use any one particular method of staying in touch with people. Supreme convenience is not force.
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#419Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really relevant, I didn't have to subscribe to NYT in order to stay in touch with my friends and family.
If you're going to start splitting hairs then you don't "have to" use any one particular method of staying in touch with people. Supreme convenience is not force.
> Supreme convenience is not force.
In theory, it is not. In practice, it is. Not only that, in case when there is a fight between almost anything (such as privacy, security,...) and convenience, the latter will always win (on large scale).
Re: Facebook deletes Norway PM's post as 'napalm girl' row escalates
#420We really need a real public safe space on the Internet.