61–70 of 239 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is worse than that. Imagine your Trump-supporting extended family voting down CNN news stories as "not credible." Expect mass brigading by The_Donald.
You think CNN is 100% honest and credible? The same could be said of liberals or any arbitrary group of people.
They would be better off auto-blending articles at the other end of users' opinion spectrum into their news feeds (or comment threads) to try and burst the echo chambers. "Here are some articles at the polar opposite to your norms."
No algorithm is (yet) smart enough to judge the quality of journalism. Facebook shouldn't try.
This is a frankly awful idea. I do not want Facebook acting as some sort of arbiter of what information is truthful. The cure is worse than the disease.
Aren't they being forced into this role? Facebook is routinely cited as a vector for supposedly democracy wrecking Russian propaganda. There has been a stream of threats and deadlines imposed by European governments demanding that Facebook et al "stop" "hate speech." Forgive me but if the Powers That Be were breathing down my neck 24/7 I think I might start to believe I'm expected to "do something."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't see why that would help.
Those counts are the rating by which people determine legitimacy of content. Popular content must be correct by virtue of that fact that so many people can’t be wrong. And when you only show people content that they all ready agree with it further reinforces its legitimacy. Remove the counts and people have no external validation for the legitimacy of a piece of content. They actually have to read it. What we have no…
This is a frankly awful idea. I do not want Facebook acting as some sort of arbiter of what information is truthful. The cure is worse than the disease.
> I do not want Facebook acting as some sort of arbiter of what information is truthful Facebook isn't the arbiter. Their users are. And if a substantial percentage deem a website to be untrustworthy then Facebook simply won't display it as often.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah only one side routinely falls for russian propaganda, downright lies and breitbart.
Really? Here’s a paper (PDF) showing some of the most active & influential #BlackLivesMatter tweeters were linked to Russia. On BOTH SIDES. http://faculty.washington.edu/kstarbi/examining-trolls-polar... This matches similar research I saw in the last few days on some other political topic (can’t remember which) were some of the most important and active tweeters were Russian on both sides. Russia wasn’t trying to ge…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with you, but I'm sure they will never remove those metrics. You might like the extension Facebook Demetricator: http://bengrosser.com/projects/facebook-demetricator/ Personally I block the entire news feed with uBlock Origin which has made my experience of Facebook tolerable.
How do you disable or block the "suggested" crap I am seriously considering a year without adblock and going out of my way to click as many ads as possible. Blocking is ineffective, it's time to fuck over the metrics
What you are thinking of exists: AdNauseam. It clicks on every single ad you see to disrupt the metrics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those counts are the rating by which people determine legitimacy of content. Popular content must be correct by virtue of that fact that so many people can’t be wrong. And when you only show people content that they all ready agree with it further reinforces its legitimacy. Remove the counts and people have no external validation for the legitimacy of a piece of content. They actually have to read it. What we have no…
What seems likely to me is that people share obviously fake news not because they see it has a lot of likes but because it confirms things they already believe.
If the only incentive to read/share/comment was a genuine understanding or willingness to share and participate the entire space would be different.
This is the opposite of what they should have done. Shows just how much of an echo-chamber Facebook has become. This is just adding another metric by which garbage can be made legitimate and vice versa. Facebook would be a much better platform if they removed the like and comment count from every post. It’s those numbers that lead people to believe that garbage is legitimate in the first place. By hiding these number…
This makes absolutely no sense to me. For almost all stories you can work out its popularity just by the number of comments. And you can determine the comment count (-/+ an order of magnitude) just by scrolling through the comments. The accurate number isn't important for most people. None of this will prevent the dissemination of fake news. What will do is (a) not prioritising it and (b) detecting whether it's fake.…
you can work out its popularity just by the number of comments
BuzzFeed. The most trusted name in news.