7 ms·

"In response to critics Facebook vows to do more to monitor its users' messages" - future TechCrunch headline. People might want to think about the unintended c

"In response to critics Facebook vows to do more to monitor its users' messages" - future TechCrunch headline. People might want to think about the unintended consequences of their criticism a bit more.

cryptoz 9y ago
Facebook offering no button to report abusive messages in Myanmar does not mean anything about reeading people's personal messages or invading their privacy. It is a simple feature that would help these people and improve their lives by protecting them from abusers on Facebook. But for some reason, Facebook won't implement that feature or even talk to these people about why not, or what else can be done.
- amirmc 9y ago
  There’s something particularly creepy in what Zuckerberg said and what the folks in Myanmar claim. Zuck says “we detected”, whereas the folks in Myanmar say they explicitly tried to raise the issue. Having a ‘report and moderate’ capability seems like one thing but from the above, it seems FB believes in constant monitoring and (presumably) censoring — which is something else entirely. Combine that with a country where “Facebook is the internet”, and it’s quite scary.
  - written 9y ago
    If you find above creepy, you should probably be creeped out by spam filters too (for at least 20 years now). Those are some third parties deciding what will get into your mailbox and what will not, based on questionable criteria. There were several business opprotunities just this year that vanished just because email providers of people who inquired to me over e-mail blocked my responses with 5xx error. Those people just think I ignored them, but in reality it was their provider censoring e-mail. They're not in control of their e-mail so they will never know. What's actually creepy here is that some unknown person is sending unsolicited messages about a group of people organizing to harm the receipient, and seemingly doing this en-masse for many users.
    - webbles 9y ago
      Or your email isnt configured properly. Probably that one.
  - vkou 9y ago
    To put it charitably, "We detected" could also mean "A bunch of people sent in reports."
Yetanfou 9y ago
No, let them dig their own grave. The more they monitor, the more users will abandon them. Once they've lost enough users to limit the network effect their decline will be like that of Myspace. Facebook the company will probably survive due to their other assets - Instagram, Whatsapp and whatever they manage to buy in the mean time - but Facebook the product is destined for the graveyard where it should be buried in unconsecrated ground with a stake through its heart.
- baud147258 9y ago
  A graveyard is too good for them. A ditch along a country road will be better. Or burned in the middle of nowhere and the ashes dumped in the ocea.
  - mudil 9y ago
    In other FB related news, Sheryl Sandberg said that if you want privacy, you'll have to pay to use FB. https://www.today.com/video/more-facebook-data-breaches-possible-sheryl-sandberg-says-on-today-1204254787587 https://www.today.com/video/more-facebook-data-breaches-poss...
    - gvurrdon 9y ago
      In theory I'd be happy to pay for a service such as Facebook's groups and events if it could be proven that it was preserving my privacy. Unfortunately, I doubt that Facebook can be trusted.
      - delecti 9y ago
        Doesn't meetup.com fit that description?
        gvurrdon 9y ago
        I think so. But, the people who organise events I'd like to attend and discuss topics of interest to me use Facebook to do so, and cannot be persuaded to do otherwise.
rl3 9y ago
Sorry, but it's not like Facebook in Myanmar should share the same free speech and user privacy ideals as if they were operating in a typical Western democracy. Facebook wants to compromise those principles in some Third World shithole as a means of short-circuiting government-sponsored genocide? Great, please do.
tonypace 9y ago
According to reports, invitations to lynchings of Rohingya are shared on Messenger. If you say freedom of speech, I say Facebook and all of it's evil is banned. I think I have the better case.
- khc 9y ago
  So if it's shared over SMS, we should ban the mobile network?
  - pjc50 9y ago
    In most Western countries this would be a crime and the mobile network would be obliged to provide an intercept.
- whatshisface 9y ago
  The invitations could also be shared via word of mouth (there were no problems organizing them in the 1800s US), POTS, postcards, email or GNU social.
  - vkou 9y ago
    Technology can be used for good or evil. Some technology is used predominantly for the former, some for the latter. Some empowers the latter more, or has to be used incredibly carefully to avoid bad outcomes. You can kill people with sharp sticks, or with nuclear weapons. You would be incredibly shortsighted to throw your arms up in despair, and say that shucks, technology is amoral, ethics is hard, nothing to see here, it's all the same, let's all move on. If Facebook wants to take credit for the good (Connecting people), they also need to take blame for the bad (Connecting lynch mobs with their victims.) If the bad outweighs the good, then we need to eliminate it.
    - whatshisface 9y ago
      I'm not really willing to give them credit for the good ("connecting people"): I was perfectly well connected before they started pulling in all of my friends into their network effect. If I were to break down and get on Facebook, I wouldn't give them a single drop of goodwill out of the buckets of goodwill between friends that they had weaseled themselves into being the courriers of. So, no, I don't give them any credit for what people write in Messenger.
drb91 9y ago
Yea, the issue there would not be the criticism. This is a dialogue that needs to happen for society as a whole to figure out what it wants and doesn't want.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

cryptoz 9y ago

Facebook offering no button to report abusive messages in Myanmar does not mean anything about reeading people's personal messages or invading their privacy. It is a simple feature that would help these people and improve their lives by protecting them from abusers on Facebook. But for some reason, Facebook won't implement that feature or even talk to these people about why not, or what else can be done.

amirmc 9y ago
There’s something particularly creepy in what Zuckerberg said and what the folks in Myanmar claim. Zuck says “we detected”, whereas the folks in Myanmar say they explicitly tried to raise the issue. Having a ‘report and moderate’ capability seems like one thing but from the above, it seems FB believes in constant monitoring and (presumably) censoring — which is something else entirely. Combine that with a country where “Facebook is the internet”, and it’s quite scary.
- written 9y ago
  If you find above creepy, you should probably be creeped out by spam filters too (for at least 20 years now). Those are some third parties deciding what will get into your mailbox and what will not, based on questionable criteria. There were several business opprotunities just this year that vanished just because email providers of people who inquired to me over e-mail blocked my responses with 5xx error. Those people just think I ignored them, but in reality it was their provider censoring e-mail. They're not in control of their e-mail so they will never know. What's actually creepy here is that some unknown person is sending unsolicited messages about a group of people organizing to harm the receipient, and seemingly doing this en-masse for many users.
  - webbles 9y ago
    Or your email isnt configured properly. Probably that one.
- vkou 9y ago
  To put it charitably, "We detected" could also mean "A bunch of people sent in reports."

Yetanfou 9y ago

No, let them dig their own grave. The more they monitor, the more users will abandon them. Once they've lost enough users to limit the network effect their decline will be like that of Myspace. Facebook the company will probably survive due to their other assets - Instagram, Whatsapp and whatever they manage to buy in the mean time - but Facebook the product is destined for the graveyard where it should be buried in unconsecrated ground with a stake through its heart.

baud147258 9y ago
A graveyard is too good for them. A ditch along a country road will be better. Or burned in the middle of nowhere and the ashes dumped in the ocea.
- mudil 9y ago
  In other FB related news, Sheryl Sandberg said that if you want privacy, you'll have to pay to use FB. https://www.today.com/video/more-facebook-data-breaches-possible-sheryl-sandberg-says-on-today-1204254787587 https://www.today.com/video/more-facebook-data-breaches-poss...
  - gvurrdon 9y ago
    In theory I'd be happy to pay for a service such as Facebook's groups and events if it could be proven that it was preserving my privacy. Unfortunately, I doubt that Facebook can be trusted.
    - delecti 9y ago
      Doesn't meetup.com fit that description?
      - gvurrdon 9y ago
        I think so. But, the people who organise events I'd like to attend and discuss topics of interest to me use Facebook to do so, and cannot be persuaded to do otherwise.

rl3 9y ago

Sorry, but it's not like Facebook in Myanmar should share the same free speech and user privacy ideals as if they were operating in a typical Western democracy. Facebook wants to compromise those principles in some Third World shithole as a means of short-circuiting government-sponsored genocide? Great, please do.

tonypace 9y ago

According to reports, invitations to lynchings of Rohingya are shared on Messenger. If you say freedom of speech, I say Facebook and all of it's evil is banned. I think I have the better case.

khc 9y ago
So if it's shared over SMS, we should ban the mobile network?
- pjc50 9y ago
  In most Western countries this would be a crime and the mobile network would be obliged to provide an intercept.
whatshisface 9y ago
The invitations could also be shared via word of mouth (there were no problems organizing them in the 1800s US), POTS, postcards, email or GNU social.
- vkou 9y ago
  Technology can be used for good or evil. Some technology is used predominantly for the former, some for the latter. Some empowers the latter more, or has to be used incredibly carefully to avoid bad outcomes. You can kill people with sharp sticks, or with nuclear weapons. You would be incredibly shortsighted to throw your arms up in despair, and say that shucks, technology is amoral, ethics is hard, nothing to see here, it's all the same, let's all move on. If Facebook wants to take credit for the good (Connecting people), they also need to take blame for the bad (Connecting lynch mobs with their victims.) If the bad outweighs the good, then we need to eliminate it.
  - whatshisface 9y ago
    I'm not really willing to give them credit for the good ("connecting people"): I was perfectly well connected before they started pulling in all of my friends into their network effect. If I were to break down and get on Facebook, I wouldn't give them a single drop of goodwill out of the buckets of goodwill between friends that they had weaseled themselves into being the courriers of. So, no, I don't give them any credit for what people write in Messenger.

drb91 9y ago

Yea, the issue there would not be the criticism. This is a dialogue that needs to happen for society as a whole to figure out what it wants and doesn't want.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]