3 ms·

Yes, I do not think so. I expect Facebook's goal to be to maximize shareholder value within the bounds of regulations. I do not expect an entity such as Facebo

Yes, I do not think so. I expect Facebook's goal to be to maximize shareholder value within the bounds of regulations. I do not expect an entity such as Facebook to behave in any other way. From Facebook's perspective, the current value system is possibly distorted, for example, because of a lack of competition. Suppose another social platform would enter the picture, and users would flock to that platform because it has a greater social responsibility. In that case, it might become Facebook's best interest to be more socially responsible as well. However, that has not happened yet. It is making me believe that the burden to solve this issue is with regulators, not Facebook.

nxc18 6y ago
Regulatory capture is a thing. Consider an aircraft company that wants to sell comparably cheap but dangerous products that cut corners and have hacky solutions to core engineering problems. Short term profit for shareholders is the only thing that matters, forever and always. The aircraft company has three categories of options: A) don’t murder people and take the time and energy to get it right. Maybe they’re less competitive some years than others B) The aircraft company can be a ‘neutral’ actor and still try to cut corners, but leave the regulator alone to actually do its job. Note this is in the company’s long term interest because the success of the air travel industry depends on its long term track record of safety and consumer confidence that planes are thoroughly designed to not smash themselves into the ground at 500 mph. C) The aircraft company can lobby heavily, get special government treatment, corrupt the regulator, and arrange things such that they can sell the deadly plane and try to get away with it. It’s all about the Benjamins, as they say; just not any Benjamins in the plane of course. Now imagine that aircraft company not only has the money to lobby aggressively, but also controls what many, many consumers see on a daily basis, can show advertisements to the entire population for free, runs algorithms that promote ‘engaging’ (shocking, manipulative, emotionally salient, regardless of accuracy) content.

nxc18 6y ago

Regulatory capture is a thing. Consider an aircraft company that wants to sell comparably cheap but dangerous products that cut corners and have hacky solutions to core engineering problems. Short term profit for shareholders is the only thing that matters, forever and always. The aircraft company has three categories of options: A) don’t murder people and take the time and energy to get it right. Maybe they’re less competitive some years than others B) The aircraft company can be a ‘neutral’ actor and still try to cut corners, but leave the regulator alone to actually do its job. Note this is in the company’s long term interest because the success of the air travel industry depends on its long term track record of safety and consumer confidence that planes are thoroughly designed to not smash themselves into the ground at 500 mph. C) The aircraft company can lobby heavily, get special government treatment, corrupt the regulator, and arrange things such that they can sell the deadly plane and try to get away with it. It’s all about the Benjamins, as they say; just not any Benjamins in the plane of course. Now imagine that aircraft company not only has the money to lobby aggressively, but also controls what many, many consumers see on a daily basis, can show advertisements to the entire population for free, runs algorithms that promote ‘engaging’ (shocking, manipulative, emotionally salient, regardless of accuracy) content.