I'm resigning from my job at Facebook • Hacker News Board

Re: I'm resigning from my job at Facebook

#431

Post by at_a_remove » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:08 PM UTC

banads wrote: post #361

at_a_remove wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, that word "just." Whenever I see "just" in some kind of kind of technical demand in the first line, I immediately know that there's a lot of stuff to unpack. Here, you have requested something fairly close to a general AI which understands both written language, images, and even more fun, images of language. Cartoon violence right on down to "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" And will quoting Henry II…

Okay, but companies like Google, FB, and Twitter are already putting great efforts towards implementing that type of thing in production. Whats so difficult about letting a user toggle those existing filters on and off? Or allowing users more control over their news feed, such as allowing it to be chronological? Or hiding items based on keywords? Its our job as technologists to not only tell people if/when their requ…

Eh, I haven't seen it in production.

I hate seeing politics of any stripe in my news feed, for example. I get enough of it elsewhere. But how can Facebook take an image, recognize that it is a cartoon, and that the cartoon is based on something political? We're not there yet. We're not anywhere near there yet.

You and I, as humans in this time period, will likely recognize a drawing of a man with kind of mocha-y skin, ears that stick straight out, large-ish front teeth, and kind of a squint as a standard issue caricature of a particular former President of the USA. We can immediately go "aha, politics!"

So I suppose we could try to train some AIs on a historical set of caricatures of politically-relevant figures. Of course, caricaturists and cartoonists of all stripes are called upon to produce new stylized exaggerations of people as they step into the limelight (or are dragged into it), so our training set must be updated on a daily basis. Hrm, some more work there ...

But then it gets into "politics you would like to hear" versus "politics you would NOT like to hear," and that is just going to be something that will require a mental model of what you do and do not like.

Right now, Amazon and Netflix cannot get my recommendations even CLOSE and their data is much better curated than what someone might type into a Facebook text box.

Chronological? Reasonable! Probably doable. Keywords? Who is putting those in? Who is curating that set of keywords?

Re: I'm resigning from my job at Facebook

#432

Post by simsla » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:09 PM UTC

gfodor wrote: post #279

It’s strange to me how the two things Facebook gets the most shit for, this and the Cambridge Analytica scandal, are far down the list of reasons that I see as reasons to abhor Facebook. In both cases there are sane arguments to be made in Facebook’s defense, unlike other aspects like their decision on their business model. However, if politics is what it takes for the exodus to begin, so be it.

Can you elaborate what you think the main reasons should be? (Genuinely interested.)

Re: I'm resigning from my job at Facebook

#433

Post by newacct583 » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:23 PM UTC

AdrianB1 wrote: post #388

newacct583 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't understand why doesn't Facebook just: -Allow all posts [...] To me effectively everyone wins. "Everyone", including racists, terrorists, drug cartels, human smugglers, child pornographers, scammers, phishers, hackers, gun nuts, anarchists... I know you say you'd be fine with all that stuff, but if I write long enough I'll find something you're not OK with. And everyone else has a different something. Findin…

People in the "everyone" categories you mention can be heard if they want to, the world and Internet are big enough for everyone. And I have the impression that you think you are the owner of the truth by putting categories that should NOT have free speech because you KNOW they are bad. You are wrong multiple times, first because your categories are extremely subjective (I know gun nuts that are very nice people with…

> People in the "everyone" categories you mention can be heard if they want to, the world and Internet are big enough for everyone.

Which was exactly my point. "Facebook" is not "the world and Internet", is it? The question is about whether moderated forums have value to people (they do, you're reading one right now). Demanding that your moderated forum not be moderated affects whether or not people see it as valuable. Facebook wouldn't be Facebook without moderation to make it so. HN wouldn't be HN, Reddit wouldn't be Reddit, etc...

> you think you are the owner of the truth [...] For you free speech is a bad idea

Go. Away. This junk doesn't belong on HN. And I'm gonna bet you get flagged for that by the very moderation we're discussing.

Re: I'm resigning from my job at Facebook

#434

Post by ogre_codes » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:27 PM UTC

thrownaway954 wrote: post #404

ogre_codes wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A big chunk of any protest is getting your voice heard. So yeah, he's trying to grab attention. That is entirely the point here.

more of a kid crying that he doesn't like the way things are than a protest in my book, but your entitled to your opinion.

Likewise your very comment can be dismissed as a kid crying (You are just jealous he's getting more attention than you).

If you don't respect the right of others to speak out, don't expect your opinions to be respected in turn.

Re: I'm resigning from my job at Facebook

#435

Post by ISL » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:34 PM UTC

kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #310

ISL wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Viewed another way: If he waited to vest, that means he took away a substantial sum of Facebook's money. It is a good thing when thoughtful people have resources.

By that logic, he could have taken even more money by continuing to work.

Continuing to work would abet processes with which he disagrees.

Re: I'm resigning from my job at Facebook

#436

Post by mchusma » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:34 PM UTC

valleyjo wrote: post #84

mchusma wrote: post #49

I don't understand why doesn't Facebook just: -Allow all posts -Allow users to customize what they want to see (e.g. "dont show me posts that glorify violence" or "only allow covid posts that match WHO guidelines" or "allow exceptions from political figures or of historical significance") and allow users to ban hide posts that are found untruthful by third parties (snopes, etc). To me effectively everyone wins. Faceb…

I agree. But this would reduce engagement and therefore profits. Do you see FB opting in to reducing profits?

I'm not so convinced it would reduce engagement. I would think that me giving Facebook feedback on what I want would potentially increase engagement. But it feels more sustainable to me, and less prone to unwanted regulation.

In fact, if I were Facebook and wanting to reduce competition, I would try to pass legislation that requires these kinds of controls, making it harder for upstarts.

Re: I'm resigning from my job at Facebook

#437

Post by asdff » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:36 PM UTC

adpirz wrote: post #248

12xo wrote: post #39

Social media is fast food. If you eat it all the time it makes you feel awful and will destroy your mental and physical health. But its cheap, easy to get and tastes really good... So stupid people love it.

Remove "stupid", and this is otherwise accurate.

When I slip down the rabbit hole every now and then and end up deep in a multi hour social media/internet binge when I could be doing something else entertaining as well as constructive, I am definitely being a stupid person.

Re: I'm resigning from my job at Facebook

#438

Post by asdff » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:37 PM UTC

seesawtron wrote: post #158

kiplkipl wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're on social media

HN is a forum, but very different from places like Facebook and Reddit.

The only difference between HN and reddit is tighter moderation.

Re: I'm resigning from my job at Facebook

#439

Post by mchusma » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:39 PM UTC

johannes1234321 wrote: post #418

zarkov99 wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it doesn't. The customization could be done based on the source (Always/never show government officials posts, for example) or the votes of a trusted entity (the WHO, The White House, CNN, your cool friend who knows what is going on, etc). Plenty of empty gas bags have been identified by their reaction to Pandemic but also plenty of people who were right, early (and widely mocked at the time). There is signal ther…

I shortened my quote, for context the GP post had these examples: > e.g. "dont show me posts that glorify violence" or "only allow covid posts that match WHO guidelines" or "allow exceptions from political figures or of historical significance") Glorifying violence isn't objective measurable. How do you identify matches to WHO guidance (incl. satire, valuable critique, ...) How exactly do you identify "political figu…

Hi, thanks for following up. So you say all these things are hard and not objectively measurable, and I agree. But Facebook is already making these decisions, so in some ways it can be described as lettings users opt out of Facebook's curation in different ways.

I think perfect is the enemy of good in this case. Giving users more control is good.

I guess to be clear on my stance, I think Facebook should be trying to be as neutral as possible, and keep making progress on that front, knowing it is impossible to be perfectly neutral in every way.

Re: I'm resigning from my job at Facebook

#440

Post by mchusma » Thu, Jun 04, 2020, 5:43 PM UTC

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #109

mchusma wrote: post #49

I don't understand why doesn't Facebook just: -Allow all posts -Allow users to customize what they want to see (e.g. "dont show me posts that glorify violence" or "only allow covid posts that match WHO guidelines" or "allow exceptions from political figures or of historical significance") and allow users to ban hide posts that are found untruthful by third parties (snopes, etc). To me effectively everyone wins. Faceb…

Hmm. I think you may be onto something. Tagging may not be that hard ( though false positives may be an issue ) and only showing stated preferences. But do we want to move into slippery slope of 'show me car accidents with at least one fatality'.

That is where it gets hard, but I think its doable. And just to play with the thought experiment you would probably weigh things. Like would you want to see any car accidents on your street within 50 feet of your house? Maybe yes. 2 miles away? Probably not, but may be if they have a fatality sure. Car accident of a friend in another country? Maybe. A train wreck with 100 deaths in your state?

Basically you can adjust the likelihood of something showing on your feed by severity weighted by location and friend graph (showing less severe things closer to you and more severe things further away). This matches how I think humans actually process information.