11 ms·

Does Facebook really consider this a failure if it increased clicks and engagement? Something to think about.

• exikyut 4y ago
  Hmm. Ostensibly Facebook has a party line and attendant menagerie of moderation and AI tooling as a broad response to self-harm, but at the end of the day all of that has its box to work within, and thinking and breathing this one subject does not define Facebook's identity and core DNA. And that may be the core of the problem. I wonder if the auto-assessment ML model passed right on by the described post *precisely because* the "clicks and engagement" ranked it as "good", where "good", intentionally or otherwise, has wound up becoming the TensorFlow distillation of "not our problem"... because *that* is where the focal point, the emergent foundation everything else finds itself orbiting around, at the end of the day. From the angle I'm squinting at this from, this situation seems unsustainable intractable. FB is attempting to "benignly police" N billion people at once in an effort to monetize a private (non-government, publicly-traded), commercially-delivered digital town square experience. IMHO there is no global point of cohesion that can encapsulate this effort, which is trying to unify multiple fundamentally incompatible dimensions at once. It doesn't work.
  • ev1 4y ago
    A real death notice removed as targeted harassment would also probably result in some form of public relations nightmare. It's not like the ML model will know about the severe and difficult to reverse reputational damage of a fake harassment death notice.