3 ms·

They should. Allowing large commercial entities to facilitilate discrimination and only going after individual landlords would be an extremely inefficient use o

They should. Allowing large commercial entities to facilitilate discrimination and only going after individual landlords would be an extremely inefficient use of limited resources.

AdamM12 8y ago
The inefficiency of the process shouldn't be a deciding factor. Should be the justness of it. Facebook isn't discriminating. We don't punish shipping companies when their resources are used for drug smuggling. We punish the individuals involved in the illicit act. edit: Not entirely sure how arguing that our system should be a just one more so than one that goes after what is easiest is getting down voted so much but ok.
- AdamM12 8y ago
  Facebook isn't a party to a potential rental contract or contract to sale. They aren't in a position to deny someone housing.
  - dgzl 8y ago
    No, they're just in a position to allow rampant discrimination.
    - AdamM12 8y ago
      Craigslist and Backpage "allowed" rampant sex trafficking but I'd imagine the HN community wasn't happy with government shutting down those sections of the internet. FB isn't the one engaging in the discrimination imo.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- GordonS 8y ago
  > Facebook isn't discriminating This feels like a technicality - Facebook is overtly enabling, perhaps even encouraging discrimination.
  - astura 8y ago
    And profiting from it. The HUD press release contains the following text, which is pretty damning: >Additionally, Facebook promotes its advertising targeting platform for housing purposes with "success stories" for finding "the perfect homeowners," "reaching home buyers," "attracting renters" and "personalizing property ads." Yowzers!!
    - AdamM12 8y ago
      Is this sarcasm? Legitimate question because I don't see what the issue with these statements are.
- Hermitian909 8y ago
  If your edit is in earnest it's because your comment comes off as naive. Inefficiency _must_ be one of several deciding factors because our resources are limited. Tying resources up in a maximally just be deeply inefficient process prevents us from dealing with other problems of injustice for whom the solution requires more resources. The world _requires_ us to consider factors other than maximal justice in individual cases if we are to maximize justice in a broader societal context.
  - AdamM12 8y ago
    To me that sounds like a trade off of due process and justness. Which I hold in high opinion of. At the EOD all laws are backed by violence. If the state is to resort to that they better be right. edit: "...and justness"
    - Maybestring 8y ago
      Facebook shareholders aren't facing summary execution. There is no reduction of due process here.

They should. Allowing large commercial entities to facilitilate discrimination and only going after individual landlords would be an extremely inefficient use of limited resources.

AdamM12 8y ago

The inefficiency of the process shouldn't be a deciding factor. Should be the justness of it. Facebook isn't discriminating. We don't punish shipping companies when their resources are used for drug smuggling. We punish the individuals involved in the illicit act. edit: Not entirely sure how arguing that our system should be a just one more so than one that goes after what is easiest is getting down voted so much but ok.

AdamM12 8y ago
Facebook isn't a party to a potential rental contract or contract to sale. They aren't in a position to deny someone housing.
- dgzl 8y ago
  No, they're just in a position to allow rampant discrimination.
  - AdamM12 8y ago
    Craigslist and Backpage "allowed" rampant sex trafficking but I'd imagine the HN community wasn't happy with government shutting down those sections of the internet. FB isn't the one engaging in the discrimination imo.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
GordonS 8y ago
> Facebook isn't discriminating This feels like a technicality - Facebook is overtly enabling, perhaps even encouraging discrimination.
- astura 8y ago
  And profiting from it. The HUD press release contains the following text, which is pretty damning: >Additionally, Facebook promotes its advertising targeting platform for housing purposes with "success stories" for finding "the perfect homeowners," "reaching home buyers," "attracting renters" and "personalizing property ads." Yowzers!!
  - AdamM12 8y ago
    Is this sarcasm? Legitimate question because I don't see what the issue with these statements are.
Hermitian909 8y ago
If your edit is in earnest it's because your comment comes off as naive. Inefficiency _must_ be one of several deciding factors because our resources are limited. Tying resources up in a maximally just be deeply inefficient process prevents us from dealing with other problems of injustice for whom the solution requires more resources. The world _requires_ us to consider factors other than maximal justice in individual cases if we are to maximize justice in a broader societal context.
- AdamM12 8y ago
  To me that sounds like a trade off of due process and justness. Which I hold in high opinion of. At the EOD all laws are backed by violence. If the state is to resort to that they better be right. edit: "...and justness"
  - Maybestring 8y ago
    Facebook shareholders aren't facing summary execution. There is no reduction of due process here.