3 ms·

Even if he did, Facebook doesn't go away. It's here to stay now. If you're dining with Satan, you can't decline dessert. You have to eat everything Satan prepa

Even if he did, Facebook doesn't go away. It's here to stay now. If you're dining with Satan, you can't decline dessert. You have to eat everything Satan prepares for the evening. You can try to run away, but I'm not sure you would get very far.

joonaa 8y ago
Maybe that's the case for him, but I'm of the oppinion that open protocols will win in the end. You often hear about the network effect of social netorks, however it is important to remember that FB is a subset of the greater network that is the Internet, which is built on open protocols.
- bilbo0s 8y ago
  I don't think you're understanding. Let's suppose that you had open protocols. How would that stop the spread of false and incendiary information about the Rohingya in this case? I mean, these people just happen to use Facebook to spread that information because Facebook is available. Who's to say they wouldn't just use the open protocol servers to spread the information if Facebook had not been available? This sort of thing is simply a consequence of being able to spread information. So Zuckerberg can run, we hackers can come up with open protocols, and whatever else, but this problem would still exist. This is just my opinion, but I don't think open protocols solve this problem, because this is a human problem at its root. The problem is the people, not really the tools.
  - joonaa 8y ago
    I agree that is't a human (moral) problem at it's root, but the problem may be aggravated by the current technical solution.
    - neolefty 8y ago
      1. I agree. 2. What technical solutions would be better at fending off these kinds of propaganda attacks? I am trying to figure out, for example, whether Reddit is more or less susceptible. As far as I can tell, individual subreddits do better and worse based on their members, moderation, voting policies, and scale.
      - joonaa 8y ago
        Knowing that I don't have an answer to your second question, just some ideas of the top of my head. Not optimizing for engagement at all may help. Driving people who whish to air their oppinions in public to blogs with RSS as a "follow" button may help. Not concentrating everyone and their mother on the same platform may help. Decentralizing the central features of FB to different providers and technolgies will make it harder to concert these propaganda efforts in my oppinion. Not that they will not try, as has been mentionend before this has happened before the internet existed.
dmos62 8y ago
Are you conciously victimizing Facebook's leadership? It makes money, but it has a net negative social effect. Do we, as a society, stigmatize, or at least not encourage greed? We don't. So you might as well say that these people are not the victims of the mythical, absolute evil, aka the devil; they're victims of our conflicted sense of value.
- Spooky23 8y ago
  It's easy to pin evil on Facebook because of the company's arrogance. It's arrogance that ultimately negative impacts the value of the firm. They look at growth as the only metric that matters and as a result have a vacuum in governance and practice. They appear to not fundamentally now respect the userbase, and have not appeared to seriously consider the conduct of partners on the platform in the past. Anyone of the age of the Facebook leadership should have always understood how online forums work. Anyone who used Slashdot in the old days understood moderation, trolls, etc.
craftyguy 8y ago
> If you're dining with Satan, you can't decline dessert. You have to eat everything Satan prepares for the evening. What?

joonaa 8y ago

Maybe that's the case for him, but I'm of the oppinion that open protocols will win in the end. You often hear about the network effect of social netorks, however it is important to remember that FB is a subset of the greater network that is the Internet, which is built on open protocols.

bilbo0s 8y ago
I don't think you're understanding. Let's suppose that you had open protocols. How would that stop the spread of false and incendiary information about the Rohingya in this case? I mean, these people just happen to use Facebook to spread that information because Facebook is available. Who's to say they wouldn't just use the open protocol servers to spread the information if Facebook had not been available? This sort of thing is simply a consequence of being able to spread information. So Zuckerberg can run, we hackers can come up with open protocols, and whatever else, but this problem would still exist. This is just my opinion, but I don't think open protocols solve this problem, because this is a human problem at its root. The problem is the people, not really the tools.
- joonaa 8y ago
  I agree that is't a human (moral) problem at it's root, but the problem may be aggravated by the current technical solution.
  - neolefty 8y ago
    1. I agree. 2. What technical solutions would be better at fending off these kinds of propaganda attacks? I am trying to figure out, for example, whether Reddit is more or less susceptible. As far as I can tell, individual subreddits do better and worse based on their members, moderation, voting policies, and scale.
    - joonaa 8y ago
      Knowing that I don't have an answer to your second question, just some ideas of the top of my head. Not optimizing for engagement at all may help. Driving people who whish to air their oppinions in public to blogs with RSS as a "follow" button may help. Not concentrating everyone and their mother on the same platform may help. Decentralizing the central features of FB to different providers and technolgies will make it harder to concert these propaganda efforts in my oppinion. Not that they will not try, as has been mentionend before this has happened before the internet existed.

dmos62 8y ago

Are you conciously victimizing Facebook's leadership? It makes money, but it has a net negative social effect. Do we, as a society, stigmatize, or at least not encourage greed? We don't. So you might as well say that these people are not the victims of the mythical, absolute evil, aka the devil; they're victims of our conflicted sense of value.

Spooky23 8y ago
It's easy to pin evil on Facebook because of the company's arrogance. It's arrogance that ultimately negative impacts the value of the firm. They look at growth as the only metric that matters and as a result have a vacuum in governance and practice. They appear to not fundamentally now respect the userbase, and have not appeared to seriously consider the conduct of partners on the platform in the past. Anyone of the age of the Facebook leadership should have always understood how online forums work. Anyone who used Slashdot in the old days understood moderation, trolls, etc.

craftyguy 8y ago

> If you're dining with Satan, you can't decline dessert. You have to eat everything Satan prepares for the evening. What?