3 ms·

Ex-Fb Eng here: Agree 100% with this. "Being bold" and "taking down content" should not be used in the same sentence. The leadership team, and many people tryi

Ex-Fb Eng here: Agree 100% with this. "Being bold" and "taking down content" should not be used in the same sentence. The leadership team, and many people trying to make Facebook great understand that. If you read his goodbye message, it doesn't sound reasoned at all. What is the alternative he is proposing exactly? It's implicitly silencing voices, based on what people at Facebook think is hate. When it comes to something so critical to society, moving fast on that is ridiculous.

sp332 6y ago
Facebook isn't the kind of platform where everyone is equal. Facebook's main function is to decide what people see, and what they don't see. That's what happens in everyone's news feed, and with the ads. For example, prioritizing "group" content over news predictably leads to more consumption of fake news and extreme content (and it was predicted: https://mondaynote.com/facebook-is-done-with-quality-journalism-deal-with-it-afc2475f1f84 https://mondaynote.com/facebook-is-done-with-quality-journal... ) The alternative is to accept that FB has this power, be accountable and transparent about it, and take responsibility for the type of content that gets promoted. There are more detailed suggestions along these lines here: https://www.wired.com/story/creating-ethical-recommendation-engines/ https://www.wired.com/story/creating-ethical-recommendation-...
- stopachka 6y ago
  Thank you for the deep response, alongside with the links. I agree that Facebook has a power to choose what content gets promoted, which is very dangerous. My key point is, that given this state, they must tread very, very carefully. The second order consequences to changes can be dire. A common argument is that inaction can be worse, but given that most solutions involve _more_ intervention rather than less, the tail only grows more catastrophic. Not only that, but I think Facebook has a lot less power here than people think. There are competitors, and not everyone will choose to reduce addictiveness for the greater good. These two questions I think are what leadership / great eng are grappling with the most. In my opinion, the solution involves removing slowly the intervention that Facebook already has, while introducing other means to keep people engaged (or else, they will simply leave and join whatever other thing will radicalize them)

sp332 6y ago

Facebook isn't the kind of platform where everyone is equal. Facebook's main function is to decide what people see, and what they don't see. That's what happens in everyone's news feed, and with the ads. For example, prioritizing "group" content over news predictably leads to more consumption of fake news and extreme content (and it was predicted: https://mondaynote.com/facebook-is-done-with-quality-journalism-deal-with-it-afc2475f1f84 https://mondaynote.com/facebook-is-done-with-quality-journal... ) The alternative is to accept that FB has this power, be accountable and transparent about it, and take responsibility for the type of content that gets promoted. There are more detailed suggestions along these lines here: https://www.wired.com/story/creating-ethical-recommendation-engines/ https://www.wired.com/story/creating-ethical-recommendation-...

stopachka 6y ago
Thank you for the deep response, alongside with the links. I agree that Facebook has a power to choose what content gets promoted, which is very dangerous. My key point is, that given this state, they must tread very, very carefully. The second order consequences to changes can be dire. A common argument is that inaction can be worse, but given that most solutions involve _more_ intervention rather than less, the tail only grows more catastrophic. Not only that, but I think Facebook has a lot less power here than people think. There are competitors, and not everyone will choose to reduce addictiveness for the greater good. These two questions I think are what leadership / great eng are grappling with the most. In my opinion, the solution involves removing slowly the intervention that Facebook already has, while introducing other means to keep people engaged (or else, they will simply leave and join whatever other thing will radicalize them)