Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#61

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 3:39 AM UTC

austenallred wrote: post #25

whatevthrow31 wrote: post #20

Ok, I had to make a throwaway for this because apparently its a heated debate. Why does everything Facebook do have to be so heavily criticized? Safety Check is a wonderful feature. If I remember correctly, it started off as an internal hackathon project that got turned into a full feature. They get shit if they turn it on (here), and if they don't turn it on (past tragedies where they failed to turn it on). Why does…

The combination of a wildly successful company, not caring about privacy, and a (formerly) bombastic founder. It's the perfect storm for HN shitposting. They have an enormous target on their back and could never do anything right. They got ripped for not enabling safety check recently too. https://techcrunch.com/2015/11/15/facebook-says-it-will-enab...

[deleted]

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#62

Post by idibidiartists » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 3:40 AM UTC

aaron-lebo wrote: post #54

Sacho wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have a strong opinion about your general question, but this is easily explainable: > Safety Check is a wonderful feature. If I remember correctly, it started off as an internal hackathon project that got turned into a full feature. They get shit if they turn it on (here), and if they don't turn it on (past tragedies where they failed to turn it on). It's just not the same people doing the complaining. That so…

They don't just have lots of users, they have more users than any country in the history of the world (that's 1.9 billion monthly users). Therefore there are potentially massive, world-changing consequences to everything they do, and even those who don't use it can't opt out of the effects. Do you really feel like a non-democratic oligarchy (or more inflammatory language, a dictator) should have that much power? edit…

China has more people than Facebook has users.

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#63

Post by raleighm » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 3:41 AM UTC

bogomipz wrote: post #49

whatevthrow31 wrote: post #20

Ok, I had to make a throwaway for this because apparently its a heated debate. Why does everything Facebook do have to be so heavily criticized? Safety Check is a wonderful feature. If I remember correctly, it started off as an internal hackathon project that got turned into a full feature. They get shit if they turn it on (here), and if they don't turn it on (past tragedies where they failed to turn it on). Why does…

>"Ok, I had to make a throwaway for this because apparently its a heated debate." I am curious why do you feel the need to make a throwaway account because something is a "heated debate."?

Agreed. If it's because OP's a facebook employee, that should be disclosed w/ the throwaway account.

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#64

Post by colordrops » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 3:41 AM UTC

whatevthrow31 wrote: post #20

Ok, I had to make a throwaway for this because apparently its a heated debate. Why does everything Facebook do have to be so heavily criticized? Safety Check is a wonderful feature. If I remember correctly, it started off as an internal hackathon project that got turned into a full feature. They get shit if they turn it on (here), and if they don't turn it on (past tragedies where they failed to turn it on). Why does…

Seems to be a pretty tame topic to be using a throwaway. Perhaps you have a vested interest in the debate.

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#65

Post by ghughes » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 3:41 AM UTC

fratlas wrote: post #29

whatevthrow31 wrote: post #20

Ok, I had to make a throwaway for this because apparently its a heated debate. Why does everything Facebook do have to be so heavily criticized? Safety Check is a wonderful feature. If I remember correctly, it started off as an internal hackathon project that got turned into a full feature. They get shit if they turn it on (here), and if they don't turn it on (past tragedies where they failed to turn it on). Why does…

I agree with you up until the mic comment. I ran a few tests with friends. We talked about very obscure topics repeatedly (and nothing else) that we would otherwise would have never messaged, and after scrolling 2 mins, targeted ads appeared for those topics. Happened for multiple topics.

I just don't buy this theory until I see some evidence. It wouldn't be hard for a talented individual to reverse engineer the Facebook client app to find out if it's either a) continuously recording and uploading raw audio to their servers, or b) continuously recording and locally processing audio before sending information about the content to their servers. Until I see an analysis of their code that indicates either of those things is happening, I have to believe that this is a conspiracy theory perpetuated by people posting these suspicious anecdotes all over the internet.

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#66

Post by naaaaak » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 3:43 AM UTC

whatevthrow31 wrote: post #20

Ok, I had to make a throwaway for this because apparently its a heated debate. Why does everything Facebook do have to be so heavily criticized? Safety Check is a wonderful feature. If I remember correctly, it started off as an internal hackathon project that got turned into a full feature. They get shit if they turn it on (here), and if they don't turn it on (past tragedies where they failed to turn it on). Why does…

> Why does everything Facebook do turn into a riot?

Their core audience are a bunch of SJW cucks. Everything is offensive.

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#67

Post by whatevthrow31 » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 3:45 AM UTC

raleighm wrote: post #63

bogomipz wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Ok, I had to make a throwaway for this because apparently its a heated debate." I am curious why do you feel the need to make a throwaway account because something is a "heated debate."?

Agreed. If it's because OP's a facebook employee, that should be disclosed w/ the throwaway account.

I'll be honest and say that I'm a former Facebook employee. Probably should have disclosed that originally, but I think it gives even more credit to my Hanlon's razor statement.

It's just safer/easier to use a throwaway. I have these opinions in real life, but I try not to be too controversial in writing.

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#68

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 3:45 AM UTC

naaaaak wrote: post #66

whatevthrow31 wrote: post #20

Ok, I had to make a throwaway for this because apparently its a heated debate. Why does everything Facebook do have to be so heavily criticized? Safety Check is a wonderful feature. If I remember correctly, it started off as an internal hackathon project that got turned into a full feature. They get shit if they turn it on (here), and if they don't turn it on (past tragedies where they failed to turn it on). Why does…

> Why does everything Facebook do turn into a riot? Their core audience are a bunch of SJW cucks. Everything is offensive.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#69

Post by clusmore » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 3:45 AM UTC

SeeDave wrote: post #58

clusmore wrote: post #19

>But by making Safety Check a default expectation Facebook flips the norms of societal behavior and suddenly no one can feel safe unless everyone has manually checked the Facebook box marked “safe”. I'm not buying this statement. Where is the evidence of this? The article features two tweets from nondescript people stating they think the feature spreads unnecessary fear, but features no tweets from people who actuall…

It's not speculation, in my opinion, because the "Safety Check" feature gives the impression that every human being potentially affected by a terrorist attack/natural disaster/unfortunate circumstance is completely and totally unsafe (killed, raped, beaten, burned, and so on) lest they broadcast their safeness to Facebook. It's one thing to scream "FIRE!" in a crowded theater, but is it not equally damaging to imply…

>but is it not equally damaging to imply that loved ones are in danger lest they broadcast their safety on your platform?

Facebook aren't implying this, you're suggesting that people are inferring this. Again, without any evidence. I have yet to hear anybody actually complain that they were afraid because one of their loved ones didn't check in. I haven't been on either end of this feature yet, but from the article it looks like the wording to potential victims is "We want you to know that you can use Safety Check to post that you're safe" and for the loved ones of potential victims, that they are "not marked as safe yet". This doesn't sound like an implication of anything to me, but then again I'm not the sort of person to infer that my friends are unsafe because they haven't told me explicitly that they are safe, Facebook or otherwise.

Re: Facebook’s Safety Check is a stress-inducing flip of social norms

#70

Post by pdkl95 » Thu, Jun 15, 2017, 3:46 AM UTC

austenallred wrote: post #22

aaron-lebo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's obvious abstract reasons why they should stop using it: 1. Facebook knows about all of your interactions on Facebook, and they probably know what you are buying and what sites you visit through tracking mechanisms. In real life we call those people stalkers. 2. What utility are they really getting? Is keeping up with every part of your friend's life (or the good parts they show you) really worth the stress an…

> Facebook knows about all of your interactions on Facebook, and they probably know what you are buying and what sites you visit through tracking mechanisms. So what? I mean that earnestly - why is it inherently bad if a company knows a lot about me? > What utility are they really getting? It's fake utility. Do you really believe that easily keeping up with friends is "fake" utility? You really think that billions of…

> why is it inherently bad if a company knows a lot about me?

With enough data about you (Facebook collects more than enough) it becomes easy to manipulate you (blackmail, "targeted advertising" aka propaganda, etc), and your pattern-of-life can be sold for profit. Data doesn't go away and we keep inventing more powerful analysis methods, so the risk, that collected data will be used against you only increases with time.

Claiming that this risk doesn't exist or isn't likely to happen requires showing how Facebook won't lose control of the data to any future hacker, government, or buyer with a sufficiently large cash offer. Pretending otherwise is a just-world fallacy.