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

What “The Social Dilemma” Gets Wrong [pdf]

about.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 129 posts

Re: What “The Social Dilemma” Gets Wrong [pdf]

#81

Post by op03 »

adim86 wrote: post #31

I found this press release pretty disappointing. It is very weak. This press release is like saying when the documentary about how bad McDonald is for you (Super Size me) came out, McDonald's issues a statement saying, oh but they (filmmakers) were not fair, they did not show you guys the steps we take to keep harmful bacteria from your food and ensure we don't poison you. This whole Press release is about the "Steps…

True. They can't afford to say they have no clue about what they are doing.

Lets say I want to setup a small town of 10K ppl anywhere in the world. As soon I try to do so, about a hundred different govt depts will descend on me to enforce all kinds of rules built up over hundreds of years to gaurantee health, water/sewage, fire, police, traffic, housing, edu, labor rights etc etc etc

Take public safety and administration of justice - there is always a formula to calculate how many police/judges/public defenders a town needs. There are even Sustainable Development Goals from the UN setting up targets for different countries.

Now Fuckerberg/Youtube et al set up these virtual towns with 2 billion people. And there are no formulas and they think the 2 billion people within will patiently allow them to work a formula out while the world burns.

More likely Social Media execs are going to be swinging from trees in various parts of the world soon.

Whats the solution?

De-scale.

Re: What “The Social Dilemma” Gets Wrong [pdf]

#82

Post by goatinaboat »

jtwaleson wrote: post #50

Yesterday I watched The Social Dilemma, and I just wanted to share some of my experiences: I quit FB as a user in 2011. In 2013, when I was 25, I received a high paying job offer to work at FB. Going to SV was a long-time dream, but in the end I took the hard decision not to take the offer. Ultimately I really don't like what FB does. The perks and salary don't compensate for that. I'm still on HN, LinkedIn and Whats…

I received a high paying job offer to work at FB

How did you get an offer without going through their extensive interview process?

Re: What “The Social Dilemma” Gets Wrong [pdf]

#83

Post by jtwaleson »

goatinaboat wrote: post #82
jtwaleson wrote: post #50

Yesterday I watched The Social Dilemma, and I just wanted to share some of my experiences: I quit FB as a user in 2011. In 2013, when I was 25, I received a high paying job offer to work at FB. Going to SV was a long-time dream, but in the end I took the hard decision not to take the offer. Ultimately I really don't like what FB does. The perks and salary don't compensate for that. I'm still on HN, LinkedIn and Whats…

I received a high paying job offer to work at FB How did you get an offer without going through their extensive interview process?

I went through the process. They reached out to me, and at first I was very excited and I just wanted to see how good I was. Honestly I didn't think I'd make it far. When I reached the offer stage after 2 months I took a long time to think if this is what I really wanted, and the fact that it was FB was one of the deciding factors.

Oh, and high paying: it was like 3x my previous salary, but not high for SV standards.

Re: What “The Social Dilemma” Gets Wrong [pdf]

#85

Post by fn1 »

reynard_le_faux wrote: post #68
fn1 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If feels to me that FB is mega coorp where the people in it want to do better but the machine is so much bigger than the people in it they are currently lost on how to do it Maybe it's just that the whole concept - Algorithmic curation of content, instead of human editors - is flawed and impossible to fix. Maybe YouTube has the exact same problem only fewer clearnames and a higher barrier-to-entry (no text posts).…

It's not like traditional newspapers/outlets are good for people. Not necessarily the algorithms fault.

It's really not comparable since nobody knows the extreme outliers the algorithms produce, that are out there. For newspapers we know them.

Re: What “The Social Dilemma” Gets Wrong [pdf]

#86

Post by dgellow »

ALittleLight wrote: post #77
dgellow wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They literally did it, it’s not over dramatized. From 2014: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/29/facebook-... > now Facebook, the world's biggest social networking site, is facing a storm of protest after it revealed it had discovered how to make users feel happier or sadder with a few computer key strokes. > It has published details of a vast experiment in which it manipulated information posted on 689…

Pretty significant difference between "Facebook has done some research on changing moods" and "Facebook's product is changing your behavior." It's overly dramatic in the way that I could say "Axe weilding man splits homeowners door uninvited" and "Fireman had to break down a door" and both are technically true, but only one is apt. Facebook's product is influencing my behavior, technically, maybe, but it's a clumsy d…

I don't see what else you want. In 2014 it was revealed that Facebook did run experiments to see how much of an impact they can have on people's sentiments. Just check the study, it's public: https://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788.full.

The researchers found out that Facebook's news does influence sentiments in a contagious manner. Which implies it does result in behaviors change on the platform, otherwise they don't have a way to measure the effect in the first place...

And don't forget to check the Acknowledgement section:

> We thank the Facebook News Feed team, especially Daniel Schafer, for encouragement and support; the Facebook Core Data Science team, especially Cameron Marlow, Moira Burke, and Eytan Bakshy; plus Michael Macy and Mathew Aldridge for their feedback.

It's not like they hide it, that's exactly why advertisers and political parties partner with Facebook in the first place.

Re: What “The Social Dilemma” Gets Wrong [pdf]

#87

Post by hrktb »

thinkloop wrote: post #41
Ma8ee wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it over dramatic? They are trying to make you buy something, sign up for something, or vote for someone.

Take "make you buy" - are they "making" you do it, or are you in the market for a camera and they're providing you with a really nice choice of one that will likely suit your needs? The answer of course is somewhere in between depending on context. People don't have zero agency, but they also don't have 100% agency.

Continuously feeding someone false information can change their perception of what’s right in the first place. That’s the whole point of impression ads. That’s why companies will pay so much to imprint an image on viewers.

If you are looking for a camera, going to a review site will give you a fair chance to find the product that fits your needs (most likely a lens module for your phone). Looking at Canon ads is not that.

Re: What “The Social Dilemma” Gets Wrong [pdf]

#88

Post by dr_dshiv »

dgellow wrote: post #86
ALittleLight wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty significant difference between "Facebook has done some research on changing moods" and "Facebook's product is changing your behavior." It's overly dramatic in the way that I could say "Axe weilding man splits homeowners door uninvited" and "Fireman had to break down a door" and both are technically true, but only one is apt. Facebook's product is influencing my behavior, technically, maybe, but it's a clumsy d…

I don't see what else you want. In 2014 it was revealed that Facebook did run experiments to see how much of an impact they can have on people's sentiments. Just check the study, it's public: https://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788.full . The researchers found out that Facebook's news does influence sentiments in a contagious manner. Which implies it does result in behaviors change on the platform, otherwise they do…

The PNAS paper showed very small effect sizes, to be clear. But, yes.

Re: What “The Social Dilemma” Gets Wrong [pdf]

#90

Post by esperent »

grandmczeb wrote: post #64
adim86 wrote: post #31

I found this press release pretty disappointing. It is very weak. This press release is like saying when the documentary about how bad McDonald is for you (Super Size me) came out, McDonald's issues a statement saying, oh but they (filmmakers) were not fair, they did not show you guys the steps we take to keep harmful bacteria from your food and ensure we don't poison you. This whole Press release is about the "Steps…

Your example is interesting because in retrospect Super Size Me was alarmist and unfair. Morgan Spurlock mislead viewers to believe that his health conditions were caused by McDonalds when they were in fact caused by alcoholism. https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-big-mac-attack-or-a-false-ala...

Are you claiming that the Social Dilemma was likewise alarmist and unfair?
Post reply on HN