8 ms·

Facebook harms children and weakens democracy: ex-employee

66 points by hariswill 5y ago

golemiprague 5y ago
I don't know any kid who use facebook and I don't need lectures about democracy from self proclaimed gatekeepers. The kids are in tiktok which is much more damaging to their well being than anything facebook have ever done but nobody wants to confront their Chinese debt holders. I feel that facebook gave me the option for the first time in my life to consume alternative information and point of views rather than being fed by all the media outlets.
CryptoPunk 5y ago
The ex-employee wants Facebook to engage in more censorship, spying and control. That's their definition of helping people and democracy. Like Glenn Greenwald said: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1434854149087182848 https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1434854149087182848 >>The entire "anti-disinformation"/"anti-extremism" industry is a gigantic fraud, funded by the same tiny handful of billionaires, governments and NGOs: a scam to control discourse while feigning neutral, non-ideological goals to battle "disinformation"
- gremloni 5y ago
  Classifying reigning in massive disinformation campaigns and divisive propaganda as censorship is disingenuous at best.
  - angelzen 5y ago
    The idea of viral news, where the masses somehow take the place of editorial control, is bananas. The average Jane simply has no mental energy to do it properly. No amount of algorithms and bureaucracy can paper over this fundamental reality. We need 5000 professional news outlets competing for the public's trust, not Facebook with a bureaucratic brain eating parasite.
    - quotemstr 5y ago
      You don't actually believe in democracy if you think that regular people shouldn't get to talk to each other to make political decisions and that some central committee gets to decide which ideas become popular.
      - angelzen 5y ago
        Regular people should talk to each other. But that is different than clicking 'like' button on a deluge of information nobody has the time to validate for accuracy or relevance. Worse, what actually gets propagated is not decided by regular people, rather by opaque algorithms controlled by a handful of mega-entities, Facebook / Twitter / Youtube; clicking the 'like' button is merely a loose signal. Democracy needs healthy competition in the news space.
        quotemstr 5y ago
        > But that is different than clicking 'like' button on a deluge of information nobody has the time to validate for accuracy or relevance. This is exhausting. Over and over again in this thread, I see people use dramatic rhetoric to describe in sweeping terms what Facebook should or should not be allowed to do, but there's seldom any discussion of actual concrete and specific rules. You say people shouldn't have like buttons? Well, what about HN? Why should't I be able to upvote a comment? Why shouldn't I be able to like a tweet? Is it okay if I have to type out "I like this" instead of clicking a like button? I get that you're dissatisfied with the current social media environment, but expressions of vague dissatisfaction combined with angry rhetoric don't move us forward. We need to put specific proposals on the table, not just rail against "opaque algorithms" generally. (Also, the algorithms being "opaque" isn't the problem. I'm sure that people would still have a problem with FB feed ranking even if the code were open source.)
        angelzen 5y ago
        > We need 5000 professional news outlets competing for the public's trust. The target has been stated. Are you in or are you happy with the social-media era status quo? If you are in, at least in principle, then constructive comments help. If you are out, and happy with FB+Twt+YtB running the show, perhaps with a politically appointed bureaucratic hypercentralized 'oversight board' on top, then enjoy the brave new world. No amount of specific proposals are going to change your mind.
  - CryptoPunk 5y ago
    >>Classifying reigning in massive disinformation campaigns and divisive propaganda as censorship is disingenuous at best. This is the kind censorship I've personally been subjected to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28411734 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28411734 Meanwhile on Twitter, the "fact-checkers" are now taking it upon themselves to try to discredit tweets that make the leading personalities of the political left look bad: https://i.ibb.co/N7XYpkH/Screenshot-20211005-081040-Facebook.jpg https://i.ibb.co/N7XYpkH/Screenshot-20211005-081040-Facebook... Like Greenwald said, it's a giant scam, with the "fact-checkers" amongst the most egregious purveyors of disinformation.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- worrycue 5y ago
  Frankly, Facebook doesn’t need to censor. They just need to rein in their algorithm that promote posts to people’s feeds. Watching the shorten 60 minute’s interview, I get the sense that’s the main problem. The algorithm promote stuff that maximizes “engagement” but the unfortunate side effect is that it sow division, reduces social trust, and creates civil unrest - among other side effects. Facebook’s own internal research has pointed out the effects of what they are doing. There aren’t laws against what they are doing but they should probably do a course correction - and laws can be created real quick.
  - inter_netuser 5y ago
    You ever wondered why this specific whistleblower is testifying in front of Congress, while James Damore is unable to openly say where he works and Assange is still in jail despite the fact that the original witness againt him recanted and admitted to false statements, a crime in itself? Not to mention Snowden. Strange.
    - CryptoPunk 5y ago
      This "whistleblower" is now being represented by the extremely partisan PR firm, Bryson Gillette, that current White House press secretary Jen Psaki used to work for: https://www.brysongillette.com/leadership/ https://www.brysongillette.com/leadership/
- paul7986 5y ago
  It's ridiculous to think a platform that most of humanity uses can be controlled to the liking of the left, the right, the upside down and etc ... cause all those groups make up humanity and we all do not nor will ever think exactly the same and we all have different motives and biases. Facebook is doing the thing that makes the most sense ... letting humanity be itself and profiting from it! Also, disinformation / misinformation has been around since the dawn of time .. have you ever played the telephone game when in school... you tell one person your story .. they tell another and another tells another and etc. Sooner or later that story becomes closer to fiction then fact... throw in people's own personal motives and biases and it becomes just about fiction!
  - lsiebert 5y ago
    If facebook merely showed the most recent posts in a timeline instead of letting an algorithm pick them, that might be a better argument.
    - paul7986 5y ago
      I guess but what I see on Facebook is all humanity within my circle doing what humanity does ..sharing their lives, varying opinions and etc
  - HeyZuess 5y ago
    > Facebook is doing the thing that makes the most sense ... letting humanity be itself and profiting from it! It's my understanding that is not what is happening in regards to "humanity be itself" rather the narrative is controlled by Facebook themselves and that narrative is based on more profit engineering and social engineering rather that going with the natural flow. That seems to be the problem.
    - paul7986 5y ago
      Not what I'm seeing on Facebook myself.. I'm seeing all types of humanity's viewpoints. Whistleblower is on a crusade for fame, notoriety and champion for her opinions & biases which we all have. I'm glad Facebook is ignoring her.
- CuriousSkeptic 5y ago
  In the hearing she recommended against censorship (content moderation really), on the basis that it’s futile and ineffective (she claimed algorithms can only flag 10% av what they look for). Instead she recommends softer actions, such as requiring users to actually click a link before sharing, which apparently has shown to an be effective dampener on the spread of disinformation.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
mypastself 5y ago
Is there an easy, non-paywalled way to access some of the original leaked documents? With the amount of discussion this has generated on HN in the past few days, I’m disappointed no one here seems interested in the actual content of the documents, only in interpretations. I don’t personally use any Facebook products, at least not knowingly, as I tend to agree with what seems to be the consensus opinion here. But I am questioning the political angle and calls for legal action. Perhaps if I had insight into the documents, I might judge for myself. A recent article about a leaked internal report about foreign actors, for example, involved misinterpretations by the news site, and further exaggerations by the commentariat: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28691585 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28691585
- avalys 5y ago
  Facebook has released the original decks, with their own annotations added on the side. https://about.fb.com/news/2021/09/research-teen-well-being-and-instagram/ https://about.fb.com/news/2021/09/research-teen-well-being-a...
  - mypastself 5y ago
    Thanks, I will take some time and study them.
blackoil 5y ago
In India, I see lots of poison on WhatsApp. It by design, architecture and implementation gives control of communication to the end user. One of the side effects of this can be that govt use all the noise to get e2e encrypted channels removed.
1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
"In a statement issued after the hearing, Facebook said it did not agree with Ms Haugen's "characterisation of the many issues she testified about". But it did agree that "it's time to begin to create standard rules for the internet."" Note the reframing from rules for social media to rules for the internet. What are the chances the entire web, or even the entire internet, will be made to suffer as a result of the hubris of a few overgrown websites.
sysihyk 5y ago
Frances Haugen, the former Facebook employee who testified before the Senate commerce committee today, has a history of left-wing activism and is working with the same lawyer who represented the alleged Ukraine whistleblower who sparked the second bogus Trump impeachment. Haugen testified before the Senate Commerce Committee today after getting the celebrity treatment from the establishment media, including a full-length interview on 60 Minutes. Haugen, unlike other Facebook whistleblowers who have been ignored by the media, has called for more censorship of the platform, not less — and, according to her remarks at the hearing today, wants the government to step in to make it happen. Not only that, but she believes that she, and people like her, should be in charge of regulating Facebook. “There needs to be a regulatory home where someone like me could do a tour of duty after working at a place like [Facebook], and have a place to work on things like regulation,” said Haugen.

66 points by hariswill 5y ago

I don't know any kid who use facebook and I don't need lectures about democracy from self proclaimed gatekeepers. The kids are in tiktok which is much more damaging to their well being than anything facebook have ever done but nobody wants to confront their Chinese debt holders. I feel that facebook gave me the option for the first time in my life to consume alternative information and point of views rather than being fed by all the media outlets.

CryptoPunk 5y ago

The ex-employee wants Facebook to engage in more censorship, spying and control. That's their definition of helping people and democracy. Like Glenn Greenwald said: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1434854149087182848 https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1434854149087182848 >>The entire "anti-disinformation"/"anti-extremism" industry is a gigantic fraud, funded by the same tiny handful of billionaires, governments and NGOs: a scam to control discourse while feigning neutral, non-ideological goals to battle "disinformation"

gremloni 5y ago
Classifying reigning in massive disinformation campaigns and divisive propaganda as censorship is disingenuous at best.
- angelzen 5y ago
  The idea of viral news, where the masses somehow take the place of editorial control, is bananas. The average Jane simply has no mental energy to do it properly. No amount of algorithms and bureaucracy can paper over this fundamental reality. We need 5000 professional news outlets competing for the public's trust, not Facebook with a bureaucratic brain eating parasite.
  - quotemstr 5y ago
    You don't actually believe in democracy if you think that regular people shouldn't get to talk to each other to make political decisions and that some central committee gets to decide which ideas become popular.
    - angelzen 5y ago
      Regular people should talk to each other. But that is different than clicking 'like' button on a deluge of information nobody has the time to validate for accuracy or relevance. Worse, what actually gets propagated is not decided by regular people, rather by opaque algorithms controlled by a handful of mega-entities, Facebook / Twitter / Youtube; clicking the 'like' button is merely a loose signal. Democracy needs healthy competition in the news space.
      - quotemstr 5y ago
        > But that is different than clicking 'like' button on a deluge of information nobody has the time to validate for accuracy or relevance. This is exhausting. Over and over again in this thread, I see people use dramatic rhetoric to describe in sweeping terms what Facebook should or should not be allowed to do, but there's seldom any discussion of actual concrete and specific rules. You say people shouldn't have like buttons? Well, what about HN? Why should't I be able to upvote a comment? Why shouldn't I be able to like a tweet? Is it okay if I have to type out "I like this" instead of clicking a like button? I get that you're dissatisfied with the current social media environment, but expressions of vague dissatisfaction combined with angry rhetoric don't move us forward. We need to put specific proposals on the table, not just rail against "opaque algorithms" generally. (Also, the algorithms being "opaque" isn't the problem. I'm sure that people would still have a problem with FB feed ranking even if the code were open source.)
        angelzen 5y ago
        > We need 5000 professional news outlets competing for the public's trust. The target has been stated. Are you in or are you happy with the social-media era status quo? If you are in, at least in principle, then constructive comments help. If you are out, and happy with FB+Twt+YtB running the show, perhaps with a politically appointed bureaucratic hypercentralized 'oversight board' on top, then enjoy the brave new world. No amount of specific proposals are going to change your mind.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  >>Classifying reigning in massive disinformation campaigns and divisive propaganda as censorship is disingenuous at best. This is the kind censorship I've personally been subjected to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28411734 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28411734 Meanwhile on Twitter, the "fact-checkers" are now taking it upon themselves to try to discredit tweets that make the leading personalities of the political left look bad: https://i.ibb.co/N7XYpkH/Screenshot-20211005-081040-Facebook.jpg https://i.ibb.co/N7XYpkH/Screenshot-20211005-081040-Facebook... Like Greenwald said, it's a giant scam, with the "fact-checkers" amongst the most egregious purveyors of disinformation.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
worrycue 5y ago
Frankly, Facebook doesn’t need to censor. They just need to rein in their algorithm that promote posts to people’s feeds. Watching the shorten 60 minute’s interview, I get the sense that’s the main problem. The algorithm promote stuff that maximizes “engagement” but the unfortunate side effect is that it sow division, reduces social trust, and creates civil unrest - among other side effects. Facebook’s own internal research has pointed out the effects of what they are doing. There aren’t laws against what they are doing but they should probably do a course correction - and laws can be created real quick.
- inter_netuser 5y ago
  You ever wondered why this specific whistleblower is testifying in front of Congress, while James Damore is unable to openly say where he works and Assange is still in jail despite the fact that the original witness againt him recanted and admitted to false statements, a crime in itself? Not to mention Snowden. Strange.
  - CryptoPunk 5y ago
    This "whistleblower" is now being represented by the extremely partisan PR firm, Bryson Gillette, that current White House press secretary Jen Psaki used to work for: https://www.brysongillette.com/leadership/ https://www.brysongillette.com/leadership/
paul7986 5y ago
It's ridiculous to think a platform that most of humanity uses can be controlled to the liking of the left, the right, the upside down and etc ... cause all those groups make up humanity and we all do not nor will ever think exactly the same and we all have different motives and biases. Facebook is doing the thing that makes the most sense ... letting humanity be itself and profiting from it! Also, disinformation / misinformation has been around since the dawn of time .. have you ever played the telephone game when in school... you tell one person your story .. they tell another and another tells another and etc. Sooner or later that story becomes closer to fiction then fact... throw in people's own personal motives and biases and it becomes just about fiction!
- lsiebert 5y ago
  If facebook merely showed the most recent posts in a timeline instead of letting an algorithm pick them, that might be a better argument.
  - paul7986 5y ago
    I guess but what I see on Facebook is all humanity within my circle doing what humanity does ..sharing their lives, varying opinions and etc
- HeyZuess 5y ago
  > Facebook is doing the thing that makes the most sense ... letting humanity be itself and profiting from it! It's my understanding that is not what is happening in regards to "humanity be itself" rather the narrative is controlled by Facebook themselves and that narrative is based on more profit engineering and social engineering rather that going with the natural flow. That seems to be the problem.
  - paul7986 5y ago
    Not what I'm seeing on Facebook myself.. I'm seeing all types of humanity's viewpoints. Whistleblower is on a crusade for fame, notoriety and champion for her opinions & biases which we all have. I'm glad Facebook is ignoring her.
CuriousSkeptic 5y ago
In the hearing she recommended against censorship (content moderation really), on the basis that it’s futile and ineffective (she claimed algorithms can only flag 10% av what they look for). Instead she recommends softer actions, such as requiring users to actually click a link before sharing, which apparently has shown to an be effective dampener on the spread of disinformation.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

mypastself 5y ago

Is there an easy, non-paywalled way to access some of the original leaked documents? With the amount of discussion this has generated on HN in the past few days, I’m disappointed no one here seems interested in the actual content of the documents, only in interpretations. I don’t personally use any Facebook products, at least not knowingly, as I tend to agree with what seems to be the consensus opinion here. But I am questioning the political angle and calls for legal action. Perhaps if I had insight into the documents, I might judge for myself. A recent article about a leaked internal report about foreign actors, for example, involved misinterpretations by the news site, and further exaggerations by the commentariat: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28691585 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28691585

avalys 5y ago
Facebook has released the original decks, with their own annotations added on the side. https://about.fb.com/news/2021/09/research-teen-well-being-and-instagram/ https://about.fb.com/news/2021/09/research-teen-well-being-a...
- mypastself 5y ago
  Thanks, I will take some time and study them.

blackoil 5y ago

In India, I see lots of poison on WhatsApp. It by design, architecture and implementation gives control of communication to the end user. One of the side effects of this can be that govt use all the noise to get e2e encrypted channels removed.

1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago

"In a statement issued after the hearing, Facebook said it did not agree with Ms Haugen's "characterisation of the many issues she testified about". But it did agree that "it's time to begin to create standard rules for the internet."" Note the reframing from rules for social media to rules for the internet. What are the chances the entire web, or even the entire internet, will be made to suffer as a result of the hubris of a few overgrown websites.

sysihyk 5y ago

Frances Haugen, the former Facebook employee who testified before the Senate commerce committee today, has a history of left-wing activism and is working with the same lawyer who represented the alleged Ukraine whistleblower who sparked the second bogus Trump impeachment. Haugen testified before the Senate Commerce Committee today after getting the celebrity treatment from the establishment media, including a full-length interview on 60 Minutes. Haugen, unlike other Facebook whistleblowers who have been ignored by the media, has called for more censorship of the platform, not less — and, according to her remarks at the hearing today, wants the government to step in to make it happen. Not only that, but she believes that she, and people like her, should be in charge of regulating Facebook. “There needs to be a regulatory home where someone like me could do a tour of duty after working at a place like [Facebook], and have a place to work on things like regulation,” said Haugen.