3 ms·

> Except we’re talking about a geopolitical rival that now has a lever to influence the minds and opinions via an opaque algorithm and moderation policies. The

> Except we’re talking about a geopolitical rival that now has a lever to influence the minds and opinions via an opaque algorithm and moderation policies. There are American companies that seem fine with influencing the minds and opinions of users via opaque algorithms and moderation policies (looking at you, Facebook). How does the fact that I'm an American and it's an American company (with a global reach, I might add) benefit me or us as a society? If you have a problem with companies influencing minds and opinions, the nationality of the company is a really strange demarcation line, no?

andreilys 6y ago
I didn’t make any value statements of benefit. I merely stated that the two aren’t comparable. One can be used as a tool for subversion of a geopolitical rival, the other sells you things. The thing is you can’t decouple large companies from their governments, especially not in China. It presents a very easy avenue for spreading propaganda and suppressing dissent https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/25/revealed-how-tiktok-censors-videos-that-do-not-please-beijing https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/25/revealed-...
- darksaints 6y ago
  > The thing is you can’t decouple large companies from their governments, especially not in China. Funny, I'd say the US is just as bad as china with respect to government having their grimy little laws in large company data. Let's not forget how FISA can sign a warrant for vague national security reasons, and immediately have full access to internal company data, and they can also prevent the company from disclosing anything about it. But let's not stop there. The Cambridge Analytics problem, and Facebook's ridiculously hesitant response to it, shows that Facebook's data isn't just distributed to governments or even the highest bidder, but literally anybody who waves money in their face.
- save_ferris 6y ago
  > One can be used as a tool for subversion of a geopolitical rival, the other sells you things. Facebook doesn’t just “sell you things”, that’s a gross oversimplification of their objective as a social platform. They’ve refused over and over again to police political speech on their platform coming from incumbents. What about that isn’t spreading propaganda? You’re arguing that FB is just this place to see ads of things to buy when they’re constantly in the news for allowing race-baiting hateful political speech to spread. That’s absolutely comparable to some of what China does.

andreilys 6y ago

I didn’t make any value statements of benefit. I merely stated that the two aren’t comparable. One can be used as a tool for subversion of a geopolitical rival, the other sells you things. The thing is you can’t decouple large companies from their governments, especially not in China. It presents a very easy avenue for spreading propaganda and suppressing dissent https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/25/revealed-how-tiktok-censors-videos-that-do-not-please-beijing https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/25/revealed-...

darksaints 6y ago
> The thing is you can’t decouple large companies from their governments, especially not in China. Funny, I'd say the US is just as bad as china with respect to government having their grimy little laws in large company data. Let's not forget how FISA can sign a warrant for vague national security reasons, and immediately have full access to internal company data, and they can also prevent the company from disclosing anything about it. But let's not stop there. The Cambridge Analytics problem, and Facebook's ridiculously hesitant response to it, shows that Facebook's data isn't just distributed to governments or even the highest bidder, but literally anybody who waves money in their face.
save_ferris 6y ago
> One can be used as a tool for subversion of a geopolitical rival, the other sells you things. Facebook doesn’t just “sell you things”, that’s a gross oversimplification of their objective as a social platform. They’ve refused over and over again to police political speech on their platform coming from incumbents. What about that isn’t spreading propaganda? You’re arguing that FB is just this place to see ads of things to buy when they’re constantly in the news for allowing race-baiting hateful political speech to spread. That’s absolutely comparable to some of what China does.