3 ms·

This is too witch hunty, facebook didn't outwardly do anything to encourage this. By the same logic we can also blame the internet as a whole. There were simila

This is too witch hunty, facebook didn't outwardly do anything to encourage this. By the same logic we can also blame the internet as a whole. There were similar messages on twitter and chat apps. Facebook is big, so it gets the attention, but it doesn't mean it had outsized influence per capita. We need to be careful putting full blame on the platforms that enable communication.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
rhizome 9y ago
You might be interested in the concept of an attractive nuisance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attractive_nuisance_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attractive_nuisance_doctrine
- thinkloop 9y ago
  From the wiki: "landowner may be held liable for injuries to children trespassing on the land if the injury is caused by an object on the land that is likely to attract children" This is precisely the point, facebook did not do anything special to attract these events. Quite they opposite they try to eliminate it, however successfully.
  - cstoner 9y ago
    They built a messaging platform that could be used by litterally anyone to spread any message, and have done a pretty poor job of preventing its use by outside aggitators. That's definitely a tetanus filled rusty playground if I ever heard of it.
    - woah 9y ago
      Quoting the OP: > By the same logic we can also blame the internet as a whole. It may be trendy to hate on Facebook right now, but this kind of hand-wringing is ultimately an argument for internet censorship.
      - aylmao 9y ago
        Exactly. Which is what scares me. News lately have scared a lot of people into this censorship-supporting mentality and the idea of some sort of thought police. To have a healthy public discourse we need to strive for is educating people so immoral acts don't happen, not implement mechanisms that could lend themselves to censorship.
    - nitwit005 9y ago
      They can also send those messages with phone calls, SMS, ordinary mail, some guy yelling in the street, or whatever else. Facebook doesn't seem particularly worse than the other alternatives.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
  - CJKinni 9y ago
    > facebook did not do anything special to attract these events An attractive nuisance is not something specially put there to attract a person or incident. It's something that attracts just by it's being there in its current state.
  - JumpCrisscross 9y ago
    > facebook did not do anything special to attract these events They built a platform monetarily incentivised to promote attention-grabbing content. They then it loose in a country just opening up to the outside world. That is reckless. Combined with their history of profiting from such violence, it looks downright evil. Zuckerberg et al are our generation's analog to Goldman Sachs' bankers helping the oligarchs pillage post-Soviet Russia [1]. [1] https://www.thenation.com/article/harvard-boys-do-russia/ https://www.thenation.com/article/harvard-boys-do-russia/

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

rhizome 9y ago

You might be interested in the concept of an attractive nuisance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attractive_nuisance_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attractive_nuisance_doctrine

thinkloop 9y ago
From the wiki: "landowner may be held liable for injuries to children trespassing on the land if the injury is caused by an object on the land that is likely to attract children" This is precisely the point, facebook did not do anything special to attract these events. Quite they opposite they try to eliminate it, however successfully.
- cstoner 9y ago
  They built a messaging platform that could be used by litterally anyone to spread any message, and have done a pretty poor job of preventing its use by outside aggitators. That's definitely a tetanus filled rusty playground if I ever heard of it.
  - woah 9y ago
    Quoting the OP: > By the same logic we can also blame the internet as a whole. It may be trendy to hate on Facebook right now, but this kind of hand-wringing is ultimately an argument for internet censorship.
    - aylmao 9y ago
      Exactly. Which is what scares me. News lately have scared a lot of people into this censorship-supporting mentality and the idea of some sort of thought police. To have a healthy public discourse we need to strive for is educating people so immoral acts don't happen, not implement mechanisms that could lend themselves to censorship.
  - nitwit005 9y ago
    They can also send those messages with phone calls, SMS, ordinary mail, some guy yelling in the street, or whatever else. Facebook doesn't seem particularly worse than the other alternatives.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- CJKinni 9y ago
  > facebook did not do anything special to attract these events An attractive nuisance is not something specially put there to attract a person or incident. It's something that attracts just by it's being there in its current state.
- JumpCrisscross 9y ago
  > facebook did not do anything special to attract these events They built a platform monetarily incentivised to promote attention-grabbing content. They then it loose in a country just opening up to the outside world. That is reckless. Combined with their history of profiting from such violence, it looks downright evil. Zuckerberg et al are our generation's analog to Goldman Sachs' bankers helping the oligarchs pillage post-Soviet Russia [1]. [1] https://www.thenation.com/article/harvard-boys-do-russia/ https://www.thenation.com/article/harvard-boys-do-russia/