4 ms·

It bothers me how much good computer science Facebook does with the proceeds from something that has basically helped destroy the fabric of society.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
meddlepal 7y ago
Just because something has changed in a way you disagree with does not mean it is destroying the "fabric of society."
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- adamnemecek 7y ago
  It's hard to defend fb right now.
TheMagicHorsey 7y ago
Don't believe the hype. Facebook isn't influential enough to destroy the fabric of society. Think critically on this as you walk around the streets and talk to people. Don't just believe what someone at the NY Times tells you. If you hang out with NY Times journalists, you'll see they aren't some special species from outer space embued with magic insights that we don't have.
AkshatM 7y ago
This is currently a matter of legal debate, but I don't think platforms can be held accountable for (most of) the actions of their users. A large part of what would be considered "destroying the fabric of society" - fake news, vitriol, intellectual sophistry, racism, sexism, hatred, etc. - predates Facebook. People have been nasty to each other since time immemorial - a better interpretation is that online dialogue, once the rarefied purview of a select group of well-educated academics and students, has caught up to offline dialogue, rather than deteriorated it. Algorithmic feed curation has added an element of insularity, but people have always formed communities around what they think and care about. Failures to educate, to inculcate critical thinking, to distinguish between truth and falsehood - these are not the shortcomings of social media not its responsibility to fix, but rather the fault of broader educational and corporate systems that prioritized vocational knowledge over inquiry and examination. We brought our own cudgels - social media is simply another area to bludgeon each other to death. Facebook can and should be held responsible only insofar as it has directly and with intent manipulated information - I don't think this has happened so far. Attempts to try and make Facebook fix what other systems were supposed to do are examples of first-order thinking - it's more effective to improve schools and colleges, offer opportunities for socioeconomic mobility, and reduce costs of living so that people can be healthier, smarter and more capable, so that they are less likely to begrudge offline or online.
- nikofeyn 7y ago
  > This is currently a matter of legal debate, but I don't think platforms can be held accountable for (most of) the actions of their users. it's not a legal argument being discussed. facebook certainly enables the actions of its users, even encouraging users via the site's features and suggestive behavior that emotionally attaches them to using the site. facebook, and basically every other social media platform, seek to "hack" the emotional state of their users to keep them coming back.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

meddlepal 7y ago

Just because something has changed in a way you disagree with does not mean it is destroying the "fabric of society."

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
adamnemecek 7y ago
It's hard to defend fb right now.

TheMagicHorsey 7y ago

Don't believe the hype. Facebook isn't influential enough to destroy the fabric of society. Think critically on this as you walk around the streets and talk to people. Don't just believe what someone at the NY Times tells you. If you hang out with NY Times journalists, you'll see they aren't some special species from outer space embued with magic insights that we don't have.

AkshatM 7y ago

This is currently a matter of legal debate, but I don't think platforms can be held accountable for (most of) the actions of their users. A large part of what would be considered "destroying the fabric of society" - fake news, vitriol, intellectual sophistry, racism, sexism, hatred, etc. - predates Facebook. People have been nasty to each other since time immemorial - a better interpretation is that online dialogue, once the rarefied purview of a select group of well-educated academics and students, has caught up to offline dialogue, rather than deteriorated it. Algorithmic feed curation has added an element of insularity, but people have always formed communities around what they think and care about. Failures to educate, to inculcate critical thinking, to distinguish between truth and falsehood - these are not the shortcomings of social media not its responsibility to fix, but rather the fault of broader educational and corporate systems that prioritized vocational knowledge over inquiry and examination. We brought our own cudgels - social media is simply another area to bludgeon each other to death. Facebook can and should be held responsible only insofar as it has directly and with intent manipulated information - I don't think this has happened so far. Attempts to try and make Facebook fix what other systems were supposed to do are examples of first-order thinking - it's more effective to improve schools and colleges, offer opportunities for socioeconomic mobility, and reduce costs of living so that people can be healthier, smarter and more capable, so that they are less likely to begrudge offline or online.

nikofeyn 7y ago
> This is currently a matter of legal debate, but I don't think platforms can be held accountable for (most of) the actions of their users. it's not a legal argument being discussed. facebook certainly enables the actions of its users, even encouraging users via the site's features and suggestive behavior that emotionally attaches them to using the site. facebook, and basically every other social media platform, seek to "hack" the emotional state of their users to keep them coming back.