13 ms·
Senators Blast Facebook for Concealing Instagram's Risks to Kids
- jpollock 5y agoI'm wondering what kids historically said about glamour magazines.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- annoyingnoob 5y agoWhere kids can't post and do not see other kids? Probably not much because they are not the same thing.
- npunt 5y agoThis is both a difference of kind and of degree.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago"She said Facebook takes "the privacy, safety and well-being of all those who use our platform very seriously, ..."" The magic incantation. Flawed reasoning: "We take X seriously" therefore there are no problems with X. Contrast "seriously" with "seriously enough". There must be more to it. There must be some science behind the use of the "take X seriously" statements. "We've committed to not retaliating for this individual speaking to the Senate," she said. Do they know who it is. Do they believe retaliation would be legal. "Facebook's brand is bad, and I think Facebook, you know, would freely admit that," said Katie Harbath, a former public policy director at the company. "But, you know, nobody else is gonna come and defend the company besides themselves." Why won't anyone else come and defend the company. Wouldn't advertisers, users (ad targets) and investors want to defend the company. "In this next chapter of our company, I think we will effectively transition from people seeing us as primarily being a social media company to being a metaverse company," [Zuckerberg] told tech journalist Casey Newton this summer. Try to escape bad rep. Social media bad. "We are not social media. We are metaverse." "They've been able to weather these storms over and over again," said Yael Eisenstat, who worked at Facebook on elections integrity for political advertising in 2018. "What I think is different this time is that I don't think they're fully understanding that internal employees have questions now." After Facebook has "connected the world", then what. No more growth. What then.
- myfartsarefoul 5y agoWhen they try to change the way they’re viewed instead of bringing up relevant facts, you know that they know that they don’t have a leg to stand on. I say we do to Facebook what JFK wanted to do to the CIA. Imagine social media without a profit motive. Decentralize, distribute and encrypt the fuck out of it. I don’t want curated feeds, I want to keep in touch with people I know.
- dragonwriter 5y ago> I say we do to Facebook what JFK wanted to do to the CIA. Use it to invade Cuba?
- lugged 5y agoGet dead?
- hermitwriter 5y agoExcept like all of these services, people actual do engage more with a curated feed. I just wish there were at least an option to go chronological.
- ssss11 5y agoIsn’t the magic just that humans sometimes believe what is said rather than what is done? You need to watch what people do, and whether they actually do what they say.
- bilekas 5y agodon't forget : > "I want to be clear: This research is not a bombshell." It's not, because you knew about it.
- mbesto 5y agoSidenote: > "We take X seriously" therefore there are no problems with X. This is my favorite response doing Tech DDs. I meet execs who say "we take security seriously" all of the time. I enjoy the follow-on of "ok show us then"... Do you backup your DB? Do you test it? No? Do you encrypt everything at rest? No? Are you using MFA for all services that are accessible by developers? No? etc. etc. Then no, you don't take security seriously.
- ceejayoz 5y agohttps://twitter.com/morroweric/status/1443628623576109065 https://twitter.com/morroweric/status/1443628623576109065 > Sen. Blumenthal asks Facebook "Will you commit to ending Finsta?" > Facebook's safety chief has to explain that Finsta is slang for a fake account. Sigh.
- drc500free 5y agoSeems like the Senator was asking if they would commit to preventing secondary accounts used by adolescents. Which is hard but far from impossible.
- mataug 5y agoBased on viewing of the video, Senator Blumenthal doesn't understand what "Finsta" means. One needs to understand the concept of "Finsta" before they can ask that the concept be prevented.
- krisoft 5y agoBut if he wanted to ask that why didn’t he ask that?
- devwastaken 5y agoThat is impossible, especially when talking about kids. They'll do anything to get to coolmathgames, why should we think they can't make new accounts.
- Dracophoenix 5y agoAre they going to go after Microsoft, Yahoo, and Google because people have second emails?
- ceejayoz 5y agoSpam filters are apparently ripe for regulation. https://www.thedailybeast.com/gop-rep-greg-steube-asks-google-chief-why-are-my-campaigns-emails-going-to-my-dads-spam-folder https://www.thedailybeast.com/gop-rep-greg-steube-asks-googl... > Pichai attempted to explain individual email account settings to Steube, prompting the congressman to interject when the Google chief said the “primary tab” is for friends and family. “Well, it was my father who is not receiving now my campaign emails. So clearly that familial thing you’re talking about didn’t apply to my emails,” Steube exclaimed, conflating his personal emails with his political campaign’s.
- nkingsy 5y agoAntigone is the name of the executive who testified. Will the gods be mad that she was blasted for burying things?
- tclancy 5y agoI couldn’t get past it. Sent her to be executed.
- threatofrain 5y agoTo what degree should companies be responsible for goods which, without structured or disciplined use leads to harm, especially when the good in question has an apparently reasonable use case?
- fidesomnes 5y agoThose harmful selfies and beach body pics must be banned, think of the children!
- MAGZine 5y agoYou mean like alcohol? companies can definitely get in trouble if they overserve or serve minors.
- threatofrain 5y agoAlcohol would be a good example, as would be unhealthy foods from the restaurant industry and food supply chain. But restrictions to drugs are made on an ad-hoc basis and not from a general principle.
- ikr678 5y agoWhile not banned, a lot of countries restricted television advertising of unhealthy food to children during childrens programming. I dont know how effective this was/is, but I suspect it's been erroded by new marketing channels(internet etc) anyway.
- paxys 5y agoA better analogy is – should beverage companies get into trouble if minors routinely consume their products?
- titzer 5y ago> goods Drugs. The term you are looking for is drug, because numerous studies have shown the effect on brain chemistry[2] and behavior[1] from social media addiction could be as bad as hard drugs. [1] https://www.addictioncenter.com/news/2019/09/excessive-social-media-use/ https://www.addictioncenter.com/news/2019/09/excessive-socia... [2] https://neurogrow.com/what-social-media-does-to-your-brain/ https://neurogrow.com/what-social-media-does-to-your-brain/
- literallyaduck 5y agoInstead of "blasting" how about regulating it? Social media has proven time and again they are unwilling to do the right thing. They perform human experimentation and must be regulated for public safety. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/06/28/facebook-manipulated-689003-users-emotions-for-science/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/06/28/facebook... It is an on going activity.
- astockwell 5y agoThis. “Senators blast” everyone under the sun. Do something.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- burlesona 5y agoThe challenge is what, exactly, to regulate. Here are some ideas: Ban algorithmic content curation. If a product is going to have a "featured" section or "watch next" or whatever, that should have to come from a human editor who can be held accountable for their choices. This would force huge changes in a lot of services, but ultimately I think we've learned that engagement algorithms drive toxic feedback loops and echo chambers that their creators are not proud of. This outcome in inherent to any function that maximizes engagement, so we just have to stop. Ban one-bit reactions; ie. no like buttons that get people addicted to the high of "crowd approval." Just allow comments. Ban ad-targeting based on any protected class (age, race, gender). Make those requirements kick in for any app with greater than $10M ARR or 50,000 DAU.
- paxys 5y agoOr, how about we do none of these things and people who don't like social media just don't freaking use it.
- paxys 5y ago"Regulate" is everyone's magic word, but how exactly do they do it? What laws should they pass?
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago""IG stands for Instagram, but it also stands for Insta-greed," said Senator Edward Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts."
- arenaninja 5y agoWait until they hear about TikTok!
- jimt1234 5y agoSounds like social media platforms might end up like cigarette companies, where they finally acknowledge the harm of their product and add a disclaimer to avoid liability: "This product is designed to manipulate you. It will probably make your life worse." Or, like the drug companies: "If you have depression, suicidal thoughts or find yourself screaming at some rando on the internet, stop taking Facebook and consult a therapist." Maybe that's already in the EULA??? :shrug:
- echelon 5y agoMaybe a required 20px white on black label affixed to the top of the app at all times. Like a cookie banner, but not dismissible? THIS PRODUCT IS DESIGNED TO MANIPULATE YOUR EMOTIONAL STATE. [READ MORE] That seems totally reasonable to me. We should call our legislators and demand this. This would make society so much better if Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, Reddit, etc. were forced to bear this marking.
- koboll 5y agoHas there ever been a product that isn't designed to manipulate your emotional state?
- geoduck14 5y agoMy couch doesn't manipulate my emotional state Caresses the supple leather underneath me
- dogorman 5y agoNot that I don't support warning disclaimers on facebook, but "designed to manipulate your emotional state" certainly applies to all movies, music, most books, etc. A big difference between these things and facebook is that facebook is reactive. It constantly measures your emotional state and modifies what it presents you with. Movies, music and books don't do that (yet?) Facebook reacts to you reacting to facebook; putting you inside a control loop. Facebook is more akin to a car salesman than a movie director; a car salesman who knows virtually everything about you because he's MITMed your social interactions for years, and can modify his individualized approach to manipulating you minute by minute.
- hn_throwaway_99 5y agoI can think of no greater waste of human time or energy than these ridiculous Senate "hearings". It's just performance art, on all sides - they should just bring Yoko Ono in and call it a day. The sad thing is that Senators usually call these hearings so they can make tough sound bites against naughty companies, but they usually just end up sounding like idiots (see the other comment about Sen. Blumenthal's "Finsta" nonsense).
- conspiracist 5y agoIt’s a great case of controlled opposition because so many people - HN included - think it’s serious. This (and other prominent) companies are put in power by these people. It’s embarrassing that a community like HN is blind to this.
- supercanuck 5y agoSenators are accountable to the people, Facebook is accountable to its shareholders. It could be bozo the clown for all I care, but at least, someone is attempting to answer these questions on behalf of parents not technically capable enough to do something about this.
- ianai 5y agoFB is majority owned by Zuck.
- cratermoon 5y ago> FB is majority owned by Zuck. Which just makes the statement "Facebook is accountable to Mark Zuckerberg".
- effingwewt 5y agoI mean and they lie under oath without penalty, and if they ever settle on anything it's for peanuts compared to whay they rake in. I think we've given them more than enough chances they need to be completely dissolved nothing of value will have been lost.
- cratermoon 5y agoGood. Now ask about the risks to adults
- atatatat 5y agoThese are the same people who said pizza in school lunches == a vegetable, yeah?
- beezischillin 5y agoThis is completely subjective but it always seems to me like whenever these sitdowns happen it's nothing but an opportunity for politicians to posture and get their soundbites in to clip and re-use in Twitter shorts and campaign material with not much actually happening afterwards. The only time giant companies actually seem to change course is when rumors of upcoming regulatory pressure from the FCC or something like that start up. I understand that I might be cynical but even when they're not just producing cringe at these hearings, they always seem to do the Ted Cruz thing and so I've stopped expecting anything to actually happen...
- qualudeheart 5y agoFacebook and Instagram employees responsible should be sent off to work in agriculture or be drafted into the military. Military and agriculture are the foundations of every powerful state. The state would become more powerful and those employees reassigned to more productive tasks would be morally progressed.