3 ms·

It seems silly to talk about Facebook "knowing something". Even an individual who knows something does not necessarily incorporate the implications of that know

It seems silly to talk about Facebook "knowing something". Even an individual who knows something does not necessarily incorporate the implications of that knowledge into every decision they make. A whole company certainly can't.

rhizome 7y ago
That is a cop-out. They should not be deploying technology that is fundamentally out of their control.
catalogia 7y ago
Companies shouldn't be held to lower standards the larger they are, which would be the natural consequence of your line of reasoning (the larger the organization, the less likely it is to understand its own actions.)
- jeffdavis 7y ago
  My philosphy is decentralization, in large part because of the nature of information flow. But in the context of the system we have now, it really is silly to say that an entity as large as FB "knows" something. And further, in the context of the lawsuit, trying to say that one company should be responsible for the internal financial situation of another enforces centralization -- and will ultimately favor large companies.
  - Keverw 7y ago
    Decentralization is interesting, but still some flaws and challenges in designing systems. Then making them mainstream is also another challenge as some of these systems are used for bad. But be interesting to make the internet ran by the people for the people instead of mega-corporations, even some people aren't happy with what's happening with handing over control of the .org TLD. I've always thought it's interesting though how an online company is supposed to follow the laws of the multiple states, and even worldwide since a website is accessible worldwide without borders. There are cases where US and European law conflicts. So a company has to decide which law is better to break. I feel the US would be way more aggressive, so maybe European law would have to take the backseat when the company lawyers do a risk analysis. Some stuff is as clear as mud and seems made up as they go. Then also at least 2 countries, maybe more require data for citizens to be held there so that countries own governments can backdoor it. So a backup must be replicated and stored in that country too. The top big tech companies have the money to deal with this, but some stuff like this is very hard for startups. Also wouldn't surprise me if some of these companies try to push regulations to make it harder for startups, so they can get comfortable and stay an established player in the market without needing to compete or innovate. Then also localization of languages seems like duplicated efforts.
Keverw 7y ago
Yeah, I guess the argument that there are posts about the school on Facebook, but I doubt the ad reviewers go that deep other than the content of the ads standalone. Probably doing a very narrowly defined task. Kinda reminds me of those posts people copy and paste as a status update claiming to amend the terms of service. Well, that's not how things work, but secondly, I'm pretty sure Facebook never actually reads that post unless it's reported as spam or abuse. So I think just because someone posts something on FB, doesn't mean the company had knowledge. Then even if someone does flag a post, probably a set of guidelines to follow based on the content and community standards instead of doing an analysis of the finances.

rhizome 7y ago

That is a cop-out. They should not be deploying technology that is fundamentally out of their control.

catalogia 7y ago

Companies shouldn't be held to lower standards the larger they are, which would be the natural consequence of your line of reasoning (the larger the organization, the less likely it is to understand its own actions.)

jeffdavis 7y ago
My philosphy is decentralization, in large part because of the nature of information flow. But in the context of the system we have now, it really is silly to say that an entity as large as FB "knows" something. And further, in the context of the lawsuit, trying to say that one company should be responsible for the internal financial situation of another enforces centralization -- and will ultimately favor large companies.
- Keverw 7y ago
  Decentralization is interesting, but still some flaws and challenges in designing systems. Then making them mainstream is also another challenge as some of these systems are used for bad. But be interesting to make the internet ran by the people for the people instead of mega-corporations, even some people aren't happy with what's happening with handing over control of the .org TLD. I've always thought it's interesting though how an online company is supposed to follow the laws of the multiple states, and even worldwide since a website is accessible worldwide without borders. There are cases where US and European law conflicts. So a company has to decide which law is better to break. I feel the US would be way more aggressive, so maybe European law would have to take the backseat when the company lawyers do a risk analysis. Some stuff is as clear as mud and seems made up as they go. Then also at least 2 countries, maybe more require data for citizens to be held there so that countries own governments can backdoor it. So a backup must be replicated and stored in that country too. The top big tech companies have the money to deal with this, but some stuff like this is very hard for startups. Also wouldn't surprise me if some of these companies try to push regulations to make it harder for startups, so they can get comfortable and stay an established player in the market without needing to compete or innovate. Then also localization of languages seems like duplicated efforts.

Keverw 7y ago

Yeah, I guess the argument that there are posts about the school on Facebook, but I doubt the ad reviewers go that deep other than the content of the ads standalone. Probably doing a very narrowly defined task. Kinda reminds me of those posts people copy and paste as a status update claiming to amend the terms of service. Well, that's not how things work, but secondly, I'm pretty sure Facebook never actually reads that post unless it's reported as spam or abuse. So I think just because someone posts something on FB, doesn't mean the company had knowledge. Then even if someone does flag a post, probably a set of guidelines to follow based on the content and community standards instead of doing an analysis of the finances.