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

An Anti-Facebook Manifesto, by an Early Facebook Investor

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 133 posts

Re: An Anti-Facebook Manifesto, by an Early Facebook Investor

#51

Post by opmac »

paulsutter wrote: post #13
opmac wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately I believe your myopic viewpoint is exactly what Facebook has driven to create.

What are the sinister threats in your Facebook feed? Or are you just speculating about what the unwashed masses must be seeing?

Not sure about threats, but I've seen plenty of fake news, conspiracies, etc; many of which have been tied to Russian disinformation groups (or other malignant foreign interests). See the Nation in Distress group; https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/10/11/faceboo....

Re: An Anti-Facebook Manifesto, by an Early Facebook Investor

#52

Post by x3tm »

pesenti wrote: post #42
x3tm wrote: post #2

What I struggle to understand is how could esteemed AI researchers like LeCun and many others work for such a company to give it even more powers and edge? How can they justify this as scientists? The huge influx of money into research (here AI, but could be anything in the future) combined with the disfunctions of academia is very troubling.

I joined a year ago to lead the AI team (Yann is part of it but I am not answering for him here). It's a choice as I don't have to work any longer. Why am I there? - I believe Facebook's products are good for the world. They have had an extremely positive impact on my family in particular. - It is the one place where AI can have a really positive impact on the world. - It's is the most talented set of people I have e…

Thanks for your clear reply. There's only one thing though from what you mentioned that is not vague or subjective:

> It is the one place where AI can have a really positive impact on the world.

Can you develop on this please?

Why do you think a social network (however efficient it may be with e.g. targeted ads) will have a bigger impact on its members versus e.g. AI in healthcare? or finance? or education? which will have a truly global impact.

Re: An Anti-Facebook Manifesto, by an Early Facebook Investor

#53

Post by dantheman »

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #33

These large dominating companies are monopolies in every sense of the word and need to be broken up. The Bell System was broken up and didn't have a tenth of the tracking and control of people's lives that Google and Facebook do. Ma Bell didn't actively harm its users and cause depression. Ma Bell didn't collude with Russia to influence a presidential election and install a puppet president. https://en.wikipedia.org/…

The bell system was a government granted monopoly, as in it was illegal to compete with them.

Re: An Anti-Facebook Manifesto, by an Early Facebook Investor

#54

Post by pul »

jerf wrote: post #30
androidgirl wrote: post #10

I understand this is a manifesto, but really the dialogue around Facebook and social media has truly become unhinged. Facebook is just a symptom, it seems What is there to be _done_? Pandora's box is open, so to speak. If Facebook disappeared overnight, are we really going to assume the problems they're in are going to go away? Everyone is potentially connected to everyone, everywhere, on the entire planet. There has…

"What is there to be done ?" A $0.01 tax per ad impression. Such a thing would not destroy the advertising industry, but it would do wonders for making it much less worthwhile to deploy massive surveillance technology to make .03 cents more per user per day, and leave only very high-value advertising behind. It would probably anti-decimate it or more, though (leave only 10% behind instead of destroying 10%). $0.10 pe…

I fail to see how this would reduce the incentive to collect data. If anything, wouldn't it require _more_ information on users to figure out whether or not showing an ad would be worthwhile?

Re: An Anti-Facebook Manifesto, by an Early Facebook Investor

#55

Post by mrweasel »

sgt101 wrote: post #24
androidgirl wrote: post #10

I understand this is a manifesto, but really the dialogue around Facebook and social media has truly become unhinged. Facebook is just a symptom, it seems What is there to be _done_? Pandora's box is open, so to speak. If Facebook disappeared overnight, are we really going to assume the problems they're in are going to go away? Everyone is potentially connected to everyone, everywhere, on the entire planet. There has…

There is a solution: all sites (above a scale of say 1m users) must offer a zero advertising, zero tracking account option at a yearly fee of exactly advertising revenue per user per year. Most people would not take this; but rich people would. The top 1%? Top 5%? This would cripple the monopoly model and open the market.

The article made an interesting point, namely manipulation.

As you say, most people wouldn't pay to avoid the tracking, the people who would pay could just as easily do without Facebook or Twitter. The question becomes: Would you pay to not be manipulated?

Re: An Anti-Facebook Manifesto, by an Early Facebook Investor

#56

Post by throwaway991133 »

x3tm wrote: post #15
zozbot123 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the alternative? Google? Baidu?

How about universities?

Ha! Let me explain to you how the sausage is made at [American] universities. You're a fresh-faced researcher with a brand new PhD and you got super, super lucky and landed one of the very few tenure-track positions at a research university available each year. On your first day of orientation, your department head hands you a piece of paper with a number written on it. The number varies every year based on the university and the economy. Maybe this year it's $500,000, maybe a few years from now it's $1M. That number is how much money in research grants you need to bring in to the university over the next 6 years.

If you bring that money in, congratulations, you get tenure; now you get a chance to work on whatever interests you for the rest of your life. But if you fall short of that goal, you're denied tenue; GTFO. You might think being a really good teacher will save you; it won't. You might think that volunteering for some annoying university committee will save you; it won't. You may think writing some really impactful papers (that nevertheless fail to bring in research grant money) will save you; it won't, unless you're really, really, really close to your monetary goal.

So how do you get across the hump? In your first year or two, you think that ethical projects can totally work for you. You bring in a $10K grant here, a $25K grant there. Then you realize you're far short of your goal. So you do what most successful professors do. You start taking DARPA money, DOD money, DOJ money, Amazon or Google or Facebook money. You start building (or facilitating the building of) technology that kills people, that selects people to kill, that monitors populations for trouble-makers or for people susceptible to advertising campaigns. Of course, those aren't the words used in your grant proposals, instead you keep it really abstract. But deep down, you know what your research is going toward.

Re: An Anti-Facebook Manifesto, by an Early Facebook Investor

#57

Post by newscracker »

pesenti wrote: post #42
x3tm wrote: post #2

What I struggle to understand is how could esteemed AI researchers like LeCun and many others work for such a company to give it even more powers and edge? How can they justify this as scientists? The huge influx of money into research (here AI, but could be anything in the future) combined with the disfunctions of academia is very troubling.

I joined a year ago to lead the AI team (Yann is part of it but I am not answering for him here). It's a choice as I don't have to work any longer. Why am I there? - I believe Facebook's products are good for the world. They have had an extremely positive impact on my family in particular. - It is the one place where AI can have a really positive impact on the world. - It's is the most talented set of people I have e…

> - I believe Facebook's products are good for the world. They have had an extremely positive impact on my family in particular.

I see that as trading off some positive impact at a personal level for a much larger negative social impact. Many people do this quite often in various situations for different reasons. Not holding this against you at this point.

> - It is the one place where AI can have a really positive impact on the world.

You'd need to substantiate how Facebook is "the one place" for making this claim, and also explain how all the evil things the company has done all these years, including news of tracking teens recently, gets somehow compensated for or adjusted against the positive impact you claim it can have. Without looking at all the negative things the company has done, this is just daydreaming, IMNSHO.

> - I believe in Zuck. Despite all the bashing, he is one of the most thoughtful and visionary leader I have worked for.

Thoughtful and visionary don't necessarily imply that it's good for everyone else. He doesn't seem visionary in what he says or writes. He may have a vision for himself, that's for sure. He's shrewd, cunning, obstinate and all that, but "thoughtful and visionary" on a broader level is really a huge stretch of imagination. Also consider the reason why the WhatsApp founders left the company.

> But Facebook is a place were you are free to disagree openly

It doesn't look like many employees disagree openly in the company, or don't follow up with disagreements when the CEO and COO shoot things down. The employees at Google, another company which thrives on profiling and tracking people, have shown a lot more disagreement in public in the recent times (though only for a few things). I haven't seen something as vehement or as many from Facebook employees (I have to research if something like that has even happened). So there's something else going on in the company (maybe Facebook employees who realize the negative impact of the company and how disagreements aren't encouraged just quit silently?). From the outside it doesn't look like a company that accepts or even allows disagreements. It looks like one person at the top vetoes everything that doesn't match his strategy. Again, consider the reason why the WhatsApp founders left the company.

Re: An Anti-Facebook Manifesto, by an Early Facebook Investor

#58

Post by paulsutter »

opmac wrote: post #51
paulsutter wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the sinister threats in your Facebook feed? Or are you just speculating about what the unwashed masses must be seeing?

Not sure about threats, but I've seen plenty of fake news, conspiracies, etc; many of which have been tied to Russian disinformation groups (or other malignant foreign interests). See the Nation in Distress group; https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/10/11/faceboo... .

You saw these in your own feed? Do share

Re: An Anti-Facebook Manifesto, by an Early Facebook Investor

#59

Post by [deleted] »

ecshafer wrote: post #45
paulsutter wrote: post #11

Its curious that the media is going to such great lengths to paint Facebook as villians. My own Facebook stream is travel photos, people saying gushy things about their spouse, plus a few people still obsessed with Trump. Harmless stuff. Our lives must be pretty cushy when this is one of the biggest dangers that we face.

This is one of the things that individual experience can vary a lot. My Facebook is maybe 30% racist rants, bashing liberals, and a call to arms against the government for taking away guns. Another 30% is people ranting about Trump and talk to about a communist revolution. 30% is memes. 10% is travel photos and news about lives.

[deleted]

Re: An Anti-Facebook Manifesto, by an Early Facebook Investor

#60

Post by calgoo »

paulsutter wrote: post #13
opmac wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately I believe your myopic viewpoint is exactly what Facebook has driven to create.

What are the sinister threats in your Facebook feed? Or are you just speculating about what the unwashed masses must be seeing?

Well, if I remember correctly, they track your web navigation using that little like button on every page (even if you don't click it). Then there is the issue that its working on identifying exactly who you live with, where you work, who you socialize with etc. These are things that i can think of right now, and im sure there are a lot more.

Edit: While you where talking mostly about content of fb, i see these issues as being the biggest problem for me personally. I was on the internet in the late 90s and we learned early on never trust anything written on the web, and i apply the same to FB/Twitter/HN/Reddit etc.

Post reply on HN