4 ms·
That's really not a fair comparison. What they are saying is actually: 1) "We can't automate the stopping of fake news without hiring an army of trained human
by dmoy 10y ago
That's really not a fair comparison. What they are saying is actually:
1) "We can't automate the stopping of fake news without hiring an army of trained human censors"
2) "Although since China already has an army of trained censors, it'd be easy to fix stuff for them with an API"
Edit, forgot to save, sorry:
The implication on #1 there is that for Facebook the cost is not worth it. Whether or not you agree with that is fine, but it's incredibly unfair to call it the same problem as China's censorship. It would cost Facebook something like $2-4 billion per year in labor to deploy a similar solution for just the united States
- rhizome 10y agoTaking a stab at a naive calculation, $3B worth of $60K/yr positions is 50,000 employees.
- dmoy 10y agoYup except China uses like 100k workers for ~200m online users, so scale up a bit.
- rhizome 10y agoAt a rate of 0.5%, the job is going to have to be extremely unskilled in order to get enough hires.
- dmoy 10y agoIt's a rate of 0.007% for China by virtue of their 1.5b population.
- rhizome 10y ago0.5% of online users.
- dmoy 10y agoRight but they don't have to hire from only that pool.
- rhizome 10y agoI think I'm not being clear. Using the China example, the number of censors required is 0.5% of the number of online users regardless of whether the censors are members of the "online users" group or not.
- dmoy 10y agoMaybe, it could be that it doesn't scale linearly though. All I know is where the numbers are at now (or actually, a year or two ago).
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- MacsHeadroom 10y agoA $60k/yr employee costs more like $100k-$140k/yr, depending on the area. Taxes, Benefits, insurance, office space, equipment, support employment (HR, Legal, etc).