3 ms·

First, it’s $7.5 billion freaking dollars. Of OpEx. Second, it’s 250k human moderators who will feel obligated to, you know, moderate stuff. They’re not paying

by zaroth 6y ago

First, it’s $7.5 billion freaking dollars. Of OpEx. Second, it’s 250k human moderators who will feel obligated to, you know, moderate stuff. They’re not paying $7.5 bil to just allow people to post whatever content they want now! Very quickly they will run out obviously clear-cut cases and will be moderating anything and everything under the sun. How anyone could think 250,000 people running around with mod powers on people’s Facebook walls is not deeply, deeply problematic... I cannot imagine.

mschuster91 6y ago
> First, it’s $7.5 billion freaking dollars. Of OpEx. So what? If that cost is necessary to run a platform that is safe for those who are on it (= from spammers, catfishers, threats, pedophiles or right-wing extremists) and that does not serve as a breeding ground for threats for society (= "freemen"/"Reichsbürger" groups, militias, neo-Nazis, antisemites, Qanon, ...), then this cost should be paid by the ones making the profit (=Facebook), not society. > Second, it’s 250k human moderators who will feel obligated to, you know, moderate stuff. So what? The digital equivalent of police(wo)men on patrol. Just because it's The Internet, it should not be a free-for-all land. > How anyone could think 250,000 people running around with mod powers on people’s Facebook walls is not deeply, deeply problematic The US alone has nearly 700k police officers for 300M people, that are running around with guns and regularly kill people, and yet society accepts this.