3 ms·

https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/

ninth_ant 2y ago
Musk and Zuckerberg have both allowed vile content to thrive and spread on their platforms under the guise of allowing free speech. Banning people from sharing links to public tracking data demonstrates that their commitment to speech is extremely shallow. This suggests that despite their claims, supporting free speech was never a priority on their platforms, and was simply cover for allowing content which helped metrics or aligned with their political goals.
- draw_down 2y ago
  [dead]
Terr_ 2y ago
Without additional context, that seems like a defense of Meta, however there's a further distinction to be made between: 1. The entity can not legally do X. 2. The entity can legally do X, but they're engaging in lies/hypocrisy/favoritism and deserves to be roundly called out for being a bad actor.
tasty_freeze 2y ago
Why did you post that comic? Is anybody confusing first amendment rights for what happened here? The point is that Zuckerberg has made a killing collecting data on people at a scale never seen before, and he dresses it up as "connecting people". But when someone collects HIS data, then needs to be removed the the extent he can. Musk is an even more obvious case of hypocrisy. The "free speech absolutist" is very selective about when it applies.
- emmelaich 2y ago
  > dresses it up as 'connecting people' What? That's literally why people use Facebook.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    In the same way Tinder "lets you find dates", I suppose so.
  - tasty_freeze 2y ago
    The question is about Zuckerberg's purpose. Does he need to collect all the data he does to connect people? No, he collects the data because he can monetize it. Connecting people is incidental. Does Facebook really need to know that you spent money buying adult diapers in order to help you see pictures of your niece across country or locate the old high school classmate that popped into your mind? That is why I said "dressing it up" - is is a pretext for his primary goal.
- draw_down 2y ago
  [dead]

Musk and Zuckerberg have both allowed vile content to thrive and spread on their platforms under the guise of allowing free speech. Banning people from sharing links to public tracking data demonstrates that their commitment to speech is extremely shallow. This suggests that despite their claims, supporting free speech was never a priority on their platforms, and was simply cover for allowing content which helped metrics or aligned with their political goals.

draw_down 2y ago
[dead]

Terr_ 2y ago

Without additional context, that seems like a defense of Meta, however there's a further distinction to be made between: 1. The entity can not legally do X. 2. The entity can legally do X, but they're engaging in lies/hypocrisy/favoritism and deserves to be roundly called out for being a bad actor.

tasty_freeze 2y ago

Why did you post that comic? Is anybody confusing first amendment rights for what happened here? The point is that Zuckerberg has made a killing collecting data on people at a scale never seen before, and he dresses it up as "connecting people". But when someone collects HIS data, then needs to be removed the the extent he can. Musk is an even more obvious case of hypocrisy. The "free speech absolutist" is very selective about when it applies.

emmelaich 2y ago
> dresses it up as 'connecting people' What? That's literally why people use Facebook.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  In the same way Tinder "lets you find dates", I suppose so.
- tasty_freeze 2y ago
  The question is about Zuckerberg's purpose. Does he need to collect all the data he does to connect people? No, he collects the data because he can monetize it. Connecting people is incidental. Does Facebook really need to know that you spent money buying adult diapers in order to help you see pictures of your niece across country or locate the old high school classmate that popped into your mind? That is why I said "dressing it up" - is is a pretext for his primary goal.
draw_down 2y ago
[dead]