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

Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

871–880 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#871

Post by throwaway2048 »

themacguffinman wrote: post #856
throwaway2048 wrote: post #716

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook's purpose of existence isn't for somebody to "pay for it". Facebook's purpose of existence is to make money.

And the way they make money is by someone paying for it. Some sites collect payments from users directly. Facebook collects payments from advertisers because most users wouldn't use Facebook if they had to pay for it. Do you have a point? This reads like an unfinished thought.

there is absolutely no reason that they cant do both at the same time, there is a mental short circuit going on when people think paying for a website means no ads. Its never meant that in pretty much any other media.

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#872

Post by [deleted] »

CaptainZapp wrote: post #841
guy_ro wrote: post #826

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Might be a long list. We've got >35,000 people working on safety and security. I expected some challenges recruiting people with all the bad press we got over the last few years, but instead I've seen that talented people eager for a really hard challenge are even more excited to join and wok on this area.

"Might be a long list. We've got >35,000 people working on safety and security. I expected some challenges recruiting people with all the bad press we got over the last few years, but instead I've seen that talented people eager for a really hard challenge are even more excited to join and wok on this area." I didn't read the article, because paywalled. So you're implying seriously that 35'000 people are actively inv…

[deleted]

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#873

Post by guy_ro »

guy_ro wrote: post #831
beachy wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to cherry-pick from your reply here, if $2M is the biggest ticket item you have to show for independent research on this topic - then you're woefully short given Facebook's revenues and size. 10 short years ago, nobody could have imagined that huge swathes of the population could have been swayed to accept non-scientific statements as fact because of social media. Now we're struggling to deal with existential th…

A counter-point to this is that studies show polarization has also fallen in some countries over the past years - including ones where social media (Facebook or otherwise) is popular. Studies also show some of the most polarized segments in the US to be the older population, which uses social media less. We definitely have work to do, but this suggests there are many factors at play.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w26669

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#874

Post by mola »

guy_ro wrote: post #831
beachy wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to cherry-pick from your reply here, if $2M is the biggest ticket item you have to show for independent research on this topic - then you're woefully short given Facebook's revenues and size. 10 short years ago, nobody could have imagined that huge swathes of the population could have been swayed to accept non-scientific statements as fact because of social media. Now we're struggling to deal with existential th…

A counter-point to this is that studies show polarization has also fallen in some countries over the past years - including ones where social media (Facebook or otherwise) is popular. Studies also show some of the most polarized segments in the US to be the older population, which uses social media less. We definitely have work to do, but this suggests there are many factors at play.

You have an interest in the outcome of the research, why should we trust you to conduct or fund it properly? Your track record is terrible. The fact you are throwing around dubious research as facts is crazy.

I'm sorry, but really, there's no reason to believe a word a you say.

You get paid from Facebook, Facebook lied again and again, how on earth do you expect people to take you seriously?

Your job and title is to give FB the optics of caring about integrity, and was invented as part of FB PR in the aftermath of the Christchurch massacre.

The amount of cynicism is just mind boggling.

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#875

Post by takeda »

guy_ro wrote: post #831
beachy wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to cherry-pick from your reply here, if $2M is the biggest ticket item you have to show for independent research on this topic - then you're woefully short given Facebook's revenues and size. 10 short years ago, nobody could have imagined that huge swathes of the population could have been swayed to accept non-scientific statements as fact because of social media. Now we're struggling to deal with existential th…

A counter-point to this is that studies show polarization has also fallen in some countries over the past years - including ones where social media (Facebook or otherwise) is popular. Studies also show some of the most polarized segments in the US to be the older population, which uses social media less. We definitely have work to do, but this suggests there are many factors at play.

Except now the people that use Facebook the most are grandparents (i.e. the demographic you mentioned that is most polarized). Facebook is no longer cool as it was 15 years ago.

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#876

Post by beachy »

hanspeter wrote: post #846
beachy wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to cherry-pick from your reply here, if $2M is the biggest ticket item you have to show for independent research on this topic - then you're woefully short given Facebook's revenues and size. 10 short years ago, nobody could have imagined that huge swathes of the population could have been swayed to accept non-scientific statements as fact because of social media. Now we're struggling to deal with existential th…

> Now we're struggling to deal with existential threats like climate change because a lot of people get their worldview from Facebook You state this as a matter of fact. How do you know this? Even if it were to be true, that people were more polarized in the climate worldview by Facebook and more so to the wrong side than the right side, we all know that climate change is the result of our behaviour the last centurie…

No arguments there, and my point was certainly overreach.

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#877

Post by mola »

guy_ro wrote: post #807
alpacaillama wrote: post #806

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article also claims that some of these people whose suggestions facebook ignored quit. Is this also cherrypicked?

Should I list the people who joined the team?

No, that's a diversion. It has nothing to do with the fact people felt unheard and had to quit.

So slimy....

Re: Facebook executives shut down efforts to make the site less divisive

#878

Post by personjerry »

fpgaminer wrote: post #299

You know what the internet needs? User agents. We've got this idea stuck in our heads that only the website itself is allowed to curate content. Only Facebook gets to decide which Facebook posts to show us. What if, instead, you had a personal AI that read every Facebook post and then decided what to show you. Trained on your own preferences, under your control, with whatever settings you like. Instead of being tuned…

I'm building something like that. My app learns based on the content you've read, to show you more relevant passages for you:

https://thinkerapp.com/

Post reply on HN