3 ms·

Why are you downplaying them as “a tech company selling ads” when the most relevant characteristic of theirs is facilitating genocide in Myanmar, then obstructi

Why are you downplaying them as “a tech company selling ads” when the most relevant characteristic of theirs is facilitating genocide in Myanmar, then obstructing the investigation, and fuelling ethnic violence in more places like Ethiopia? https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/myanmar-facebooks-systems-promoted-violence-against-rohingya-meta-owes-reparations-new-report/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/myanmar-faceb... https://time.com/5880118/myanmar-rohingya-genocide-facebook-gambia/ https://time.com/5880118/myanmar-rohingya-genocide-facebook-... https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/07/facebooks-role-in-myanmar-and-ethiopia-under-new-scrutiny https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/07/facebooks...

robertlagrant 2y ago
I'm not sure exactly what the extent of the "facilitation" was in the first link, so what I'm about to say might be a little vague, but the second doesn't appear to be about them covering up their role in said "facilitation", but rather their refusal to provide so much user data to The Gambia looking to prosecute Myanmar officials for war crimes. The way you've phrased that makes it sound as though Facebook were trying to hide the actions they took to facilitate things, which I think is a miscommunication.
PaulHoule 2y ago
I think the Myanmar experience has a lot to do with why Facebook tries to disappear politics talk on Threads. I mean, negative talk about your neighbors is how political violence starts. People on the Fediverse get high and mighty about the Myanmar incident but in a Fediverse world the Myanmar government would have run the big instance in their language and would have defederated anyone who tried to stop them, alternately outsiders could have defederated but then they wouldn't have any influence. Fediverse folks could have refused to run a server to support genocide but there is no way they could stop their software from supporting genocide. A centralized system like Facebook does have more control and more responsibility but when they took that responsibility later on Myanmar kicked them out https://apnews.com/article/myanmar-censorship-virtual-private-network-facebook-79fb4cc0c3c4317844d0c00b0be1d9d1 https://apnews.com/article/myanmar-censorship-virtual-privat...

robertlagrant 2y ago

I'm not sure exactly what the extent of the "facilitation" was in the first link, so what I'm about to say might be a little vague, but the second doesn't appear to be about them covering up their role in said "facilitation", but rather their refusal to provide so much user data to The Gambia looking to prosecute Myanmar officials for war crimes. The way you've phrased that makes it sound as though Facebook were trying to hide the actions they took to facilitate things, which I think is a miscommunication.

PaulHoule 2y ago

I think the Myanmar experience has a lot to do with why Facebook tries to disappear politics talk on Threads. I mean, negative talk about your neighbors is how political violence starts. People on the Fediverse get high and mighty about the Myanmar incident but in a Fediverse world the Myanmar government would have run the big instance in their language and would have defederated anyone who tried to stop them, alternately outsiders could have defederated but then they wouldn't have any influence. Fediverse folks could have refused to run a server to support genocide but there is no way they could stop their software from supporting genocide. A centralized system like Facebook does have more control and more responsibility but when they took that responsibility later on Myanmar kicked them out https://apnews.com/article/myanmar-censorship-virtual-private-network-facebook-79fb4cc0c3c4317844d0c00b0be1d9d1 https://apnews.com/article/myanmar-censorship-virtual-privat...