3 ms·
This article just redefines “crisis” to its liking. If only falling profits make for a “real” crisis, then, no, Facebook is not in such a crisis. Indeed, the a
by shaki-dora 8y ago
This article just redefines “crisis” to its liking. If only falling profits make for a “real” crisis, then, no, Facebook is not in such a crisis.
Indeed, the author actually agrees that there are legitimate concerns about FB, some of which are new. I don’t quite get why a crises of ethics should be less “real”, or not reported on by journalists. Is it the primacy of the almighty powers of the market?
Even in the latter case, investors and consumers would seem to rely on such information by the media to make market decisions. To require them to act before reporting on their reasons to act seems counterintuitive.
....but at that point the article has long diverged into rehashing 2016 conspiracy theories.
tldr: this is a shallow not-defense of Facebook, with a headline specifically engineered to appeal to HN’s current groupthink hating “the media”.
- chillacy 8y agoHow do you even define a crisis of ethics without defining the underlying ethics, and how can you ensure that everyone is on the same page when morality is... well I don’t want to argue relative vs absolute morality but people disagree all the time.
- shaki-dora 8y agoWell, sure, “morality” is just a human construct. So is money. That doesn’t stop us from prosecuting bank robbers. In the specific case of Facebook, the recently released e-mails quite clearly showed they knew they were crossing boundaries of commonly accepted behaviors. They weren’t arguing about the ethics of using loose permissions on Android to read your SMS. They acknowledged the commonly accepted norms of behavior, and knowingly broke them.
- chillacy 8y agoTrue, all are human constructs. Prosecuting bank robbers is done under written laws though, we don't prosecute bank robbers with an appeal to morality. From the emails it seems like fb broke some laws and they can be punished for that, but imo they should be punished for breaking written laws, not based on a nebulous morality which varies from person to person. To what extent written laws reflect morality is another topic of course.
- StudentStuff 8y agoBroke some laws in this case references major violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, stealing user's SMS & Call data. Facebook's executives need to be prosecuted for this egregious crime committed against tens of millions of Americans, yet its unlikely any prosecutor will take action.
- chillacy 8y agoSounds great, prosecute for these major violations, not for breaking moral ideas the OP is referring to which I may or may not agree with. At least written laws are codified.
- stult 8y agoNot all laws are written, nor do they need to be to be enforced. Robbery was made illegal under common law (in the US, UK, and other common law countries) before it was ever codified or written down, for example. So yes, we actually did jail bank robbers for breaking unwritten laws (although they've since been written down).
- chillacy 8y agoInteresting. While I know people could be jailed for most of history for basically no reason, I assumed civilization was collectively moving away from that. It seems to things more predictable if the law is on the books. Do you find my assessment is incorrect when I say that this is the state of US law today in my original reply?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]