4 ms·
But they just made that number up.
by jacobush 7y ago
But they just made that number up.
- wheelerwj 7y agomore or less agreed, would def like to see how they ended up at 99%
- zelon88 7y agoRight. Assuming that they know that they're missing 1% of cases insinuates that they know enough about the 1% they're missing to quantify it.
- wastedhours 7y agoIsn't that right based on the statement though? The implication is 99% of the identified cases on Facebook are caught by Facebook's systems, the 1% not caught by Facebook's systems are tracked by other means. 100% of identified cases, not 100% of all cases.
- jacobush 7y agoStill very misleading if that is the case, what other means are there realistically to catch something if not by FBs systems, on FB? Self-reporting in the groups? Is that counted towards the FBs 99% or the 1%?
- wastedhours 7y agoReported directly to the police or other authorities? It's probably quite realistic in those scenarios for something that Facebook's systems have missed for it to be found by someone eventually and escalated. There's a little ambiguity in there, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's "misleading".
- twinkletwinkle_ 7y agoIs it made up? I thought they meant "Of content identified on Facebook, 99% was identified by Facebook's own systems". Not that Facebook captures 99% of terrorists. Just that it does the bulk of capturing terrorists _on Facebook_.
- philwelch 7y ago99% of all uses of the number “99%” are made up.