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

The Ex-CIA Agents Deciding Facebook’s Content Policy

mintpressnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 80 posts

Re: The Ex-CIA Agents Deciding Facebook’s Content Policy

#51

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

Ansil849 wrote: post #50
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which Russian news outlets are blocked? Can you list them?

Sure: RT- Russia Today English RT- Russia Today UK RT - Russia Today Germany RT - Russia Today France RT- Russia Today Spanish Sputnik’ Source: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L... Or here's a mass media summary if you don't want to read the official documentation: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-bans-rt-sputnik-bann...

I just browsed Russia Today without a VPN. I'm in the US

Re: The Ex-CIA Agents Deciding Facebook’s Content Policy

#52

Post by s_dev »

alaric410 wrote: post #45
s_dev wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To have access to American tech. Simply turning off Google/Apple/Amazon/Facebook will have massive repercussions throughout that countries economy and politics and put that country at a competitive disadvantage on a world stage.

Tell that to China, they seem to be doing fine without Google/Amazon/Facebook. Of those companies, Google is probably the only one you can't remove without effort. But this article was about Facebook. Why should we allow Facebook to operate on our country given that they hire from the CIA?

>Tell that to China

China and the entirety of the EU are the only entities on the planet that could possible compete with "US Tech" and thus the only ones in a position to "go it alone" in order to accelerate a domestic tech industry.

>Of those companies

You're just asserting it is possible to cut all but Google. OK then.

>Why should we allow Facebook to operate on our country given that they hire from the CIA?

I don't know why you're asking HN why your country should make decisions.

I have given you a reason as to why they would make this decision -- access to US Tech. That's the benefit you get -- sounds like a Q for your own gov officials.

Re: The Ex-CIA Agents Deciding Facebook’s Content Policy

#53

Post by noslenwerdna »

Ansil849 wrote: post #43
AyyWS wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just went to RT from the US. This whataboutism doesn't work.

I'm so tired of "whataboutism" being used to as some attempt to shut down an argument. It is perfectly valid to point out hypocritical arguments. And it might stun you to know that the West isn't solely composed of the US. Try going to RT from the EU - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L... Take special note not just of the block, but of the anticircumvention provisions.

The grandparent made the broad generalization not the person you are replying to. They said the "west" is blocking RT. It might stun you to learn that the US is part of the west and isn't blocking RT. I don't want to stun you too much, but the west is not some uniform block of countries.

Re: The Ex-CIA Agents Deciding Facebook’s Content Policy

#54

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

ARandomerDude wrote: post #19
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #9

Insulting and emotionally charged language.

Therefore it must be false? I don't follow your logic.

It is bad journalism and insulting to the reader. Meta is a large org. CIA, NSA, FBI, etc are large orgs. There will be overlap. You need to tell me why I should care. What are they doing to undermine Meta?

Re: The Ex-CIA Agents Deciding Facebook’s Content Policy

#56

Post by AinderS »

alphabetting wrote: post #42

Given the discourse on their website, FB should have known the optics here would spur negative pieces like this. That said, not buying the insinuation that CIA itself is influencing their former employees. Former employees shouldn't carry a scarlet letter with them to companies they go to after leaving government. The author's history of sensationalist posts in defense of authoritarian govts is pretty suspect as well…

I can only imagine that this comment was written in total ignorance of the CIA's storied history. Suffice it to say that it is not a government agency like any other [1]. If "former" FSB agents held key positions controlling social media content in your country, that would likewise not be concerning, right?

And regardless of just how scarlet the letter should be that "ex" CIA employees carry, it goes without saying any (social) media organization that wants to maintain even the thinnest pretense of neutrality and independence cannot give "ex" intelligence agents, of any country, editorial control.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2khAmMTAjI - "The CIA is a terrorist organization", also discussed on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25245026

Re: The Ex-CIA Agents Deciding Facebook’s Content Policy

#57

Post by alphabetting »

alaric410 wrote: post #46
alphabetting wrote: post #42

Given the discourse on their website, FB should have known the optics here would spur negative pieces like this. That said, not buying the insinuation that CIA itself is influencing their former employees. Former employees shouldn't carry a scarlet letter with them to companies they go to after leaving government. The author's history of sensationalist posts in defense of authoritarian govts is pretty suspect as well…

If you were previously part of an organization that violates human rights, I have every right to hold it against you.

This is a company of 60k people. Take issue with their hiring sure, but using the hiring of a couple staffers who are former govt data analysts (these aren't Jason Bourne/blackwater types) to define the company is silly.

Now if we are looking at Tiktok's parent company, which has CCP members on their board, I think it is more fair question the motives of the company there.

Re: The Ex-CIA Agents Deciding Facebook’s Content Policy

#58

Post by Ansil849 »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #51
Ansil849 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure: RT- Russia Today English RT- Russia Today UK RT - Russia Today Germany RT - Russia Today France RT- Russia Today Spanish Sputnik’ Source: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L... Or here's a mass media summary if you don't want to read the official documentation: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-bans-rt-sputnik-bann...

I just browsed Russia Today without a VPN. I'm in the US

> I'm in the US

That's great. The block is in the EU. Which is in...the West.

Re: The Ex-CIA Agents Deciding Facebook’s Content Policy

#59

Post by Ansil849 »

noslenwerdna wrote: post #53
Ansil849 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm so tired of "whataboutism" being used to as some attempt to shut down an argument. It is perfectly valid to point out hypocritical arguments. And it might stun you to know that the West isn't solely composed of the US. Try going to RT from the EU - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L... Take special note not just of the block, but of the anticircumvention provisions.

The grandparent made the broad generalization not the person you are replying to. They said the "west" is blocking RT. It might stun you to learn that the US is part of the west and isn't blocking RT. I don't want to stun you too much, but the west is not some uniform block of countries.

> It might stun you to learn that the US is part of the west and isn't blocking RT.

Golly gee, you sure got me there on that! Let's rephrase to "parts of the West", what impact does that have on the argument that Western powers engage in media censorship as well?

> I don't want to stun you too much, but the west is not some uniform block of countries.

LOL. You understand it is _literally_ called the "Western Bloc", right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Bloc

Re: The Ex-CIA Agents Deciding Facebook’s Content Policy

#60

Post by kornhole »

alphabetting wrote: post #42

Given the discourse on their website, FB should have known the optics here would spur negative pieces like this. That said, not buying the insinuation that CIA itself is influencing their former employees. Former employees shouldn't carry a scarlet letter with them to companies they go to after leaving government. The author's history of sensationalist posts in defense of authoritarian govts is pretty suspect as well…

If someone spent 15 years rising up to the top ranks of the CIA and then left to lead Meta's policy and content moderation, what story is logical to you?
Post reply on HN