4 ms·
You find it concerning because it's easy to abuse. The fact-checkers get to decide what is "true", and other Facebook users are unlikely to listen to you if you
by x220 8y ago
You find it concerning because it's easy to abuse. The fact-checkers get to decide what is "true", and other Facebook users are unlikely to listen to you if you try and convince them that the fact-checkers are wrong.
- dymk 8y agoHonestly, the much harder problem is convincing people that fact checkers are right, if they already disagree with the fact checker. And they are much more numerous than those who already happened to agree with the fact checker.
- AnthonyMouse 8y agoIn my experience the biggest problem with fact checkers is that facts are complicated. Somebody says "the speed of light is 300,000 km/s" and you go to a fact checker and you get: > "TRUE: The speed of light is approximately 300,000 km/s." Then you go to another one and you get: > "FALSE: the speed of light is actually 299,792,458 m/s in a vacuum and has a medium-dependent value through air, water or another medium ... " Then you get into an argument with someone where the distinction matters and they cite the first one, or get into one where it doesn't and they cite the second one.
- kryogen1c 8y agoEasy to abuse has nothing to do with it. Positioning anyone to be an information filter is wrong. Full stop. This is totalitarianism 101. It doesn't matter if they're right or wrong. Freedom isn't predicated on moral superiority - it is the polar opposite. Freedom is exactly for those who are "wrong". I cannot imagine a more dangerous position for Facebook to take.
- xg15 8y agoOk, then how do you prevent things like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18225364 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18225364 ?
- mtgx 8y agoHow did you prevent government genocides in the past when they used newspapers or TV?
- gdhbcc 8y agoThere are costs to everything you do or don't do. If your argument is that censorship prevents genocide, i would point tou to nazi germany, or soviet russia.
- kryogen1c 8y agoIf you want to try and assign Facebook responsibility, which is debatable, then I would blame them for the false accounts and real accounts that were taken over. It's simply wrong and should not be tolerated in any circumstance. Separately from morality, I would argue it negatively impact Facebook's survivability. If your _social_ platform cannot be trusted to honestly deliver it's only product, they will surely die.
- tombert 8y agoI don't quite understand your argument; Facebook is a private corporation, and can regulate speech in any way they choose. It's not "totalitarianism 101"; if anything, it's a libertarian wet-dream of a corporation exercising their rights as they see fit.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]