5 ms·

What I really find worrying is that all this knowledge gets locked up behind the facebook walled garden. Essentially giving them a monopoly on processing this i

What I really find worrying is that all this knowledge gets locked up behind the facebook walled garden. Essentially giving them a monopoly on processing this information. I understand why the doctors do it (use something that's available). But as another poster mentioned, we really need something better.

mokash 7y ago
Indeed. It seems that Facebook's network effect is at play here. As a platform, it is playing a massive role in communication and information sharing in an epidemic. Perhaps when this is all over some sort of open-collaboration framework should be devised for medical professionals (assuming one doesn't exist?). Also, someone could quite easily take the information from Facebook and put it somewhere else that's more accessible. Facebook groups are closed, right?
sjg007 7y ago
This just makes FB more of a public utility.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
buboard 7y ago
It s probably for the best. You dont want twitter crowds shutting down conversations and leading to analysis paralysis because every intervention is risky. I would go even further and say the records of these groups should be deleted after months, so as not to become lawsuit material months down the road
pengstrom 7y ago
Absolutely. Having the power that comes from network effects should come with matching responsibility.
sjg007 7y ago
Least of my concerns. It’s more important that the information be shared now.
dna_polymerase 7y ago
That's really one of those theoretical views. Nobody at Facebook is sitting there right now checking for the cure in the comments in order to start production of a vaccine at Facebook. In reality it is as open as it can be. What's really worrying is that decades after the WWW started as a project for researchers to share their findings, Facebook is the best way to do this.
im3w1l 7y ago
I wonder if Iran is allowed to take part in this discussion, being under US sanctions and all.
steveeq1 7y ago
nls/augment was developed in the '60s for precisely this type of thing.
mlrtime 7y ago
Do you really find it all that worrying, more so than the virus itself? I'm not a FB apologist but the fact that they have this network affect and that doctors can use it for free is outstanding. This would not have happened 20 years ago.
- read_if_gay_ 7y ago
  That’s not so much due to Facebook as it is to the internet.
  - edouard-harris 7y ago
    Facebook has, in fairness, made this sort of collaboration far easier than it would have been in the days of the pre-Facebook Internet.
- CaptArmchair 7y ago
  The kicker is that this isn't really news for anyone who works in the realm of open science, information dissemination, digital archiving and so on. If you think salvaging information from social media is a challenge, consider how much gets lost in e-mail or byzantine folder structures on shared drives, or legacy document management systems, usb drives or personal laptops. The value of information isn't just determined by it's relevancy or "usefulness" in a particular context, but also by it's level of accessibility and discoverability. Moreover, let's not forget that a huge amount of that information is noise and only a fraction of that will converge in peer reviewed science down the line. And that's how human communication and sharing of information usually works. Not everything needs to be kept or archived on the spot "just in case". That's just not feasible.
onlydeadheroes 7y ago
And that is not the only place knowledge gets locked behind: https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/chinas-devastating-lies/ https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/chinas-devas...

mokash 7y ago

Indeed. It seems that Facebook's network effect is at play here. As a platform, it is playing a massive role in communication and information sharing in an epidemic. Perhaps when this is all over some sort of open-collaboration framework should be devised for medical professionals (assuming one doesn't exist?). Also, someone could quite easily take the information from Facebook and put it somewhere else that's more accessible. Facebook groups are closed, right?

sjg007 7y ago

This just makes FB more of a public utility.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

buboard 7y ago

It s probably for the best. You dont want twitter crowds shutting down conversations and leading to analysis paralysis because every intervention is risky. I would go even further and say the records of these groups should be deleted after months, so as not to become lawsuit material months down the road

pengstrom 7y ago

Absolutely. Having the power that comes from network effects should come with matching responsibility.

sjg007 7y ago

Least of my concerns. It’s more important that the information be shared now.

dna_polymerase 7y ago

That's really one of those theoretical views. Nobody at Facebook is sitting there right now checking for the cure in the comments in order to start production of a vaccine at Facebook. In reality it is as open as it can be. What's really worrying is that decades after the WWW started as a project for researchers to share their findings, Facebook is the best way to do this.

im3w1l 7y ago

I wonder if Iran is allowed to take part in this discussion, being under US sanctions and all.

steveeq1 7y ago

nls/augment was developed in the '60s for precisely this type of thing.

mlrtime 7y ago

Do you really find it all that worrying, more so than the virus itself? I'm not a FB apologist but the fact that they have this network affect and that doctors can use it for free is outstanding. This would not have happened 20 years ago.

read_if_gay_ 7y ago
That’s not so much due to Facebook as it is to the internet.
- edouard-harris 7y ago
  Facebook has, in fairness, made this sort of collaboration far easier than it would have been in the days of the pre-Facebook Internet.
CaptArmchair 7y ago
The kicker is that this isn't really news for anyone who works in the realm of open science, information dissemination, digital archiving and so on. If you think salvaging information from social media is a challenge, consider how much gets lost in e-mail or byzantine folder structures on shared drives, or legacy document management systems, usb drives or personal laptops. The value of information isn't just determined by it's relevancy or "usefulness" in a particular context, but also by it's level of accessibility and discoverability. Moreover, let's not forget that a huge amount of that information is noise and only a fraction of that will converge in peer reviewed science down the line. And that's how human communication and sharing of information usually works. Not everything needs to be kept or archived on the spot "just in case". That's just not feasible.

onlydeadheroes 7y ago

And that is not the only place knowledge gets locked behind: https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/chinas-devastating-lies/ https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/chinas-devas...