5 ms·
Some "whistleblower" - seems to think big tech doesn't do enough censorship :p Talk about a wolf in sheeps clothing.
by EricE 5y ago
Some "whistleblower" - seems to think big tech doesn't do enough censorship :p
Talk about a wolf in sheeps clothing.
- option 5y agothis isn’t about censorship. It is about newsfeed algorithms which optimize “engagement”. As it turns out negative, controversial and divisive stuff is more engaging.
- deft 5y agoIt is about censorship. The Biden admin has repeatedly made it obvious they don't think FB etc are deleting enough and the feds will have to step in soon.
- option 5y agoI agree that Biden admin is all about censorship. But, after watching her interview, it doesn’t look to me that this whistleblower is.
- hunterb123 5y agoIt seemed like that to me, that's why she spit out everything from harming girls self esteem to ethnic cleansing accusations. She's not a "whistleblower", she's a planted pawn. Facebook hosts user content, they should just come out and say they want to censor user content. If this teenager study is so damning and sound, why aren't we asking ALL social media services to disallow children/teens? Why only focus on the content? (because it's not about the children)
- shadowgovt 5y agoPlanted pawn for whom? No need to assume conspiracy when simple variety in human opinion will do. I don't personally see any reason to believe she isn't what she seems to be: someone who got a job at Facebook, was deeply horrified by what the company considers perfectly acceptable, and decided to expose it because she expects it will horrify others.
- hunterb123 5y agoThe people who get to censor Americans now, your government overlords! The same people who are now interviewing her only 2 days later! Almost as if they were ready to go! Children won't be protected out of this, it's for censorship.
- kelseyfrog 5y agoIt's about the negative externalities of engagement optimization.
- AzzieElbab 5y agoyou realize that most controversial, negative and divisive stuff is pushed by corporate media 24/7, right?
- jokowueu 5y agoBoth are a problem
- AzzieElbab 5y agoIt is a recursive problem when you take into account how much power journalists have in shaping and vetting content on social media. As an example, this is why half of you in the US think that COVID has 50% hospitalization rate, while the other half thinks masks are entirely useless.
- deegles 5y agothere will always be something to "what about"
- AzzieElbab 5y agoYou misunderstood. I am saying fb mirrors and amplifies external trends
- vernie 5y agoYoU Do ReaLIZE
- inshadows 5y agoPrecisely. This "whistleblower" is just crying to government for more censorship. Thank you very much.
- quadrangle 5y agoI heard her argue against algorithmic curation, and that seems a distinct point. What do you hear her saying about censorship?
- shadowgovt 5y agoIt is entirely possible that big tech doesn't do enough censorship. Compared to the broadcast media that preceded it, there's nothing even remotely approaching the obscene, indecent, and profane content restrictions the FCC imposes. I'm not personally convinced FCC-level restrictions are necessary, but the question is a fair one to ask (and will be asked, again and again, forever... Such is the nature of media and society).
- jayd16 5y agoFacebook already controls the feed algorithm. Suggesting a change does not imply more or less censorship than what we currently have.
- wolfram74 5y agoThe recurring argument she makes is just that stop using algorithmic content discovery that optimizes engagement because it correlates so strongly with extremism. You could almost get rid of all moderation and just go to chronological and it would improve the public health dimension.
- suzzer99 5y agoI wish there was an option to make my Facebook feed chronological like there is with twitter.
- quadrangle 5y agoThere used to be that option. First it was default, then they switched it to opt-in, then they switched it to opt-in-repeatedly (every visit would default back to algorithm-curated), then they finally killed the chronological option.
- tqi 5y ago"stop using algorithmic content discovery that optimizes engagement because it correlates so strongly with extremism" Is there a meaningful difference between what Newsfeed is doing vs what the news director at say Fox News, MSNBC, et al?
- wffurr 5y agoIs there a meaningful difference between this one terrible thing and these other terrible things? I would say both are bad and should stop.
- wolfram74 5y agowhataboutism aside, the ehrlich quote "To err is human, but to really foul things up you need a computer". is salient, the news channels do eventually get okayed by human editors. Another salient point is how personalized the content can get with algorithms at the helm, everybody has a button that will set them off. Mass broad cast media is going to be further from the mark than something machine learning found. [0] https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=280241 https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=280241
- commandlinefan 5y ago> seems to think big tech doesn't do enough censorship It's worse than that. The "whistleblower" thinks that world governments don't mandate enough censorship of big tech - i.e. they're not doing their part to enable the regulatory capture that entrenches the established players.