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

Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 1001 posts

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#661

Post by Covzire »

notfed wrote: post #657

Zuckerberg should learn to plead the 5th when asked about political intervention questions. He keeps apologizing, thinking it will gain him respect, but the general public only sees this as a grand admission of guilt (ostensibly for some crime they didn't know of until now, and still don't know any details about). Many other CEOs get asked similar questions, and they refuse to engage in the discussion; the result is…

Facebook usage is tanking I think, they're losing market share because nobody trusts facebook for anything but the marketplace anymore, with exceptions of course but I don't know many people who use it anymore for anything but birthdays and the like.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#662

Post by UncleOxidant »

EricDeb wrote: post #473
h3rsko wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Probably zuck is just trying to seem neutral however it shakes out in November

Some of this stuff happened in 2020 (who was president in 2020?) and some of it happened later. So seems to be saying the both teams were playing the game if you read between the lines (ie. you're likely right).

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#663

Post by FireBeyond »

andy_ppp wrote: post #234
jpadkins wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a coalition that contains RFK Jr, Tulsi Gabbard and Elon Musk are now far right?

I don’t believe any of them think Trump will be a good president.

RFK Jr dropped out of the race, endorsed Trump and appeared with him at a Trump rally.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#664

Post by 3np »

PaulKeeble wrote: post #98

The same elements that make Reddit and Twitter unpleasant places to comment are also the elements that meant they sustained the discussion around the research (and conspiracies) of the ongoing Covid pandemic. There is no Covid aware community really anywhere else of remotely the same size as on Twitter and secondarily Reddit (which cracked down a bit). The weird part is 4.5 years into this pandemic there are still si…

We already know that both Twitter and Reddit heavily censored and weighted posts around this topic.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#665

Post by Fatnino »

SoftTalker wrote: post #609
silverquiet wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few years back it started showing me obvious political ragebait. I ignored it and then it started showing me pictures of women whose nipples were obviously showing through their clothing, which was an improvement, but still not the reason I signed up for Facebook. I've always understood it as the algorithm is looking for engagement and will try some lowest common denominator tactics to engage in it. As someone who…

What if they had shown you pictures of men whose penises were obviously showing through their pants? Why was Facebook not being gender-neutral with this tactic?

Because fb knows the user is male and odds are this would attract a click.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#666

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 »

dimitrios1 wrote: post #169
ryandrake wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They were already doing censorship, just for different things - there was never a free for all because that eventually ends up like 4chan which is not advertiser-friendly. If you look at every attempt to create "The Uncensored Free Speech Version Of [ANY_SERVICE]," they all, inevitably turned into a 4chan-like trashfire. You've got to have some kind of moderation.

This is where I really feel my age. Every message board and chatroom (bbs, forums, irc, icq, aol, et all) on the young internet was virtually uncensored and a 100% free for all, yet we all mostly got by. You went to the places you knew to go to. The communities mostly self moderated by kicks/bans. It worked really well. So whats changed? Well, I have my thoughts, but one thing is for sure, as soon as the platform its…

> So whats changed?

I think back when the internet was new, people just weren't used to anonymity and still behaved like they were in a room with other people. Also the types of people who engaged in those early internet forums may have just been less likely to be showy edgelord trolls - these types took longer to get into the internet.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#667

Post by [deleted] »

torlok wrote: post #615
Malidir wrote: post #152

In Pavel's interview with Tucker Carlson, he mentions how he (VK) met with Zuckerberg, and he told them new features they were planning. And Zuck nicked them all. Zuck is on a major PR campaign drive, I would not trust a word he says.

Tuckster is an "anti-elite" heir to a fortune who grew up in a castle. The only job he ever had was outrage baiting naive people. People like him are against regulation, but will clap any time big tech is dragged in front of congress. It's all a scam. You're being had. Why are you treating any part of his interviews as valid information.

[deleted]

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#668

Post by nirav72 »

pndy wrote: post #594
amelius wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, soon someone here will build an "HDMI-hole" that uses AI to directly filter unwanted content from a HDMI signal.

I'd rather expect a HDMI cables that will display ads if you don't pay a subscription will come first. Pretty sure we had a thread on this not so long ago.

Yes, I vaguely remember Roku developing some tech to inject ads via hdmi.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#669

Post by SoftTalker »

Fatnino wrote: post #665
SoftTalker wrote: post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if they had shown you pictures of men whose penises were obviously showing through their pants? Why was Facebook not being gender-neutral with this tactic?

Because fb knows the user is male and odds are this would attract a click.

True. They probably know if you're gay also, so in that case they might do it.

Re: Zuckerberg claims regret on caving to White House pressure on content

#670

Post by tim333 »

giantrobot wrote: post #417
techostritch wrote: post #116

The thing I'm getting out of this Zuckerberg letter is that we've basically learned nothing. It's a nakedly partisan letter designed to signal to Republicans that he's not taking sides. Which I guess is fine, but I'm thinking about Paul Graham's recent tweet about the next round of social networks being designed to be built in to combat trolling, and it makes me think. This time there was valid concern about issues l…

> This time there was valid concern about issues like the lab leak theory being censored on social media You need to be very clear about what you mean by "lab leak theory" because that term has a number of definitions that are very different. There's the definition where COVID was the result of gain of function research that leaked from a lab through negligence. There's also a definition that it was an entirely natur…

You could just allow discussion without worrying too much which version.
Post reply on HN