6 ms·

Meta's new content policy will harm vulnerable users

26 points by cratermoon 2y ago

aaron695 2y ago
[dead]
eff-tagline 2y ago
[flagged]
- sapphicsnail 2y ago
  It's not even free speech. It's directly targeting specific people while continuing to protect others. They already censor a ton of things.
  - freen 2y ago
    Facebook hosts a party. If you don’t kick assholes out of your party, the party becomes less fun, and then there are only assholes in the party. Yes, it is in fact targeting specific people: those who make the party less fun and protecting those who are just trying to have fun at a party. https://x.com/IamRageSparkle/status/1280891537451343873?s=20 https://x.com/IamRageSparkle/status/1280891537451343873?s=20 https://www.boredpanda.com/bar-bartender-nazi-punk-iamragesparkle/ https://www.boredpanda.com/bar-bartender-nazi-punk-iamragesp... Tolerance is not a moral imperative, it’s a peace treaty. If you don’t participate in the peace treaty of tolerance with others, tolerance won’t be extended to you.
- freen 2y ago
  How dumb does one have to be to fail to realize that kicking an asshole out of a party (read website/app/whatever) isn’t the government censoring you. Xkcd covered this in detail, what a decade ago? https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/
  - freen 2y ago
    Gonna hazard that if the above gets moderated/deleted, our new friend “eff-tagline” won’t complain that my freedom of speech is being impinged.
    - Over2Chars 2y ago
      Yes, free speech advocates seem to lose enthusiasm for the freedom of speech they disagree with. Curious.
      - freen 2y ago
        They never seem to be grumpy about spam getting deleted. It’s always “why can’t I be mean to people without consequences?” Or, “I should be able to be racist/ableist/discriminatory and you have to host my vitriol or else you are violating my freedom of speech, private company!!”
        Over2Chars 2y ago
        I would love to be able to cure the problem of people being mean on the internet. I think it's a million dollar idea, if it's possible. I think it can be done, but it seems that incivility is seen as more profitable, or something? Twitter Japan, for example, is known for being fairly civil. I think even Elon Musk, at one point, said that Twitter Japan was a model for all of Twitter. Go Elon! Then Elon took over and actively, it seems to me, promoted incivility. I think he figured that making Twitter, now X, more controversial would promote engagement. But Twitter Japan showed that people could engage civilly and didn't need controversy to promote engagement. I suspect had Elon chose to make Twitter/X more like Twitter Japan, he wouldn't have lost his advertisers (which apparently were a major percentage of revenue). But the past is history, and Twitter/X is what it is, and is likely to stay that way I think.
  - eff-tagline 2y ago
    I’m glad you’ve shared your opinion that “free speech” strictly refers to government censorship. I disagree.
freen 2y ago
To people with a heart, yes, that’s a bug. For everyone else? It’s a feature. The cruelty is the point.
influx 2y ago
The EFF is on the wrong side of history on this one. Sad to see it.
- freen 2y ago
  Yup: MLK’s moral arc of the history definitely bends towards making fun of disabled people.
- beej71 2y ago
  How do you figure? The only thing I see that's wrong about this is that I don't pay the EFF to tell private companies what to do. I pay them to stop the government from turning fascist. They're not wrong about Facebook being a POS and these new policies making it moreso, though.
  - Over2Chars 2y ago
    The EFF won't stop anyone from turning fascist. That's not their mission. It sounds nice though. I wouldn't give the EFF a dime.
  - cratermoon 2y ago
    Out of curiosity, do you propose any remedy for companies being acting badly? What would you do, if anything, to curb companies doing things like what FB does? What sort of organizations have a role in watching over private companies, informing the public about their activities, and provide guidance on corrective actions?
    - beej71 2y ago
      I haven't been able to think of solutions that aren't worse than what they're doing. I'm extremely wary of the government forcing Facebook to behave a certain way because of the First Amendment.
      - cratermoon 2y ago
        Suggested viewing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V_AZRZfu9I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V_AZRZfu9I
Over2Chars 2y ago
How will it be any worse? 2021 article on how FB's response to CSAM were inadequate: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-59063768 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-59063768 (2021) FB creates extremists, and that's OK with them? https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/facebook-knew-radicalized-users-rcna3581 https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/facebook-knew-radical... (2024) drug sales https://nypost.com/2024/03/16/us-news/feds-investigating-meta-for-possible-role-in-illegal-drug-sales-on-facebook-instagram/ https://nypost.com/2024/03/16/us-news/feds-investigating-met... and on and on. It's hard to believe their mitigations are anything more than legal facades to protect them from maximum culpability. The emperor may be choosing to wear no clothes, but it was a sheer nighty before.
Fricken 2y ago
The Rohingya genocide was fomented on Facebook. Facebook ignored dire warnings for years from human rights organizations including Amnesty international, Humanrightswatch.org and the UN.

26 points by cratermoon 2y ago

aaron695 2y ago

[dead]

eff-tagline 2y ago

[flagged]

sapphicsnail 2y ago
It's not even free speech. It's directly targeting specific people while continuing to protect others. They already censor a ton of things.
- freen 2y ago
  Facebook hosts a party. If you don’t kick assholes out of your party, the party becomes less fun, and then there are only assholes in the party. Yes, it is in fact targeting specific people: those who make the party less fun and protecting those who are just trying to have fun at a party. https://x.com/IamRageSparkle/status/1280891537451343873?s=20 https://x.com/IamRageSparkle/status/1280891537451343873?s=20 https://www.boredpanda.com/bar-bartender-nazi-punk-iamragesparkle/ https://www.boredpanda.com/bar-bartender-nazi-punk-iamragesp... Tolerance is not a moral imperative, it’s a peace treaty. If you don’t participate in the peace treaty of tolerance with others, tolerance won’t be extended to you.
freen 2y ago
How dumb does one have to be to fail to realize that kicking an asshole out of a party (read website/app/whatever) isn’t the government censoring you. Xkcd covered this in detail, what a decade ago? https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/
- freen 2y ago
  Gonna hazard that if the above gets moderated/deleted, our new friend “eff-tagline” won’t complain that my freedom of speech is being impinged.
  - Over2Chars 2y ago
    Yes, free speech advocates seem to lose enthusiasm for the freedom of speech they disagree with. Curious.
    - freen 2y ago
      They never seem to be grumpy about spam getting deleted. It’s always “why can’t I be mean to people without consequences?” Or, “I should be able to be racist/ableist/discriminatory and you have to host my vitriol or else you are violating my freedom of speech, private company!!”
      - Over2Chars 2y ago
        I would love to be able to cure the problem of people being mean on the internet. I think it's a million dollar idea, if it's possible. I think it can be done, but it seems that incivility is seen as more profitable, or something? Twitter Japan, for example, is known for being fairly civil. I think even Elon Musk, at one point, said that Twitter Japan was a model for all of Twitter. Go Elon! Then Elon took over and actively, it seems to me, promoted incivility. I think he figured that making Twitter, now X, more controversial would promote engagement. But Twitter Japan showed that people could engage civilly and didn't need controversy to promote engagement. I suspect had Elon chose to make Twitter/X more like Twitter Japan, he wouldn't have lost his advertisers (which apparently were a major percentage of revenue). But the past is history, and Twitter/X is what it is, and is likely to stay that way I think.
- eff-tagline 2y ago
  I’m glad you’ve shared your opinion that “free speech” strictly refers to government censorship. I disagree.

freen 2y ago

To people with a heart, yes, that’s a bug. For everyone else? It’s a feature. The cruelty is the point.

influx 2y ago

The EFF is on the wrong side of history on this one. Sad to see it.

freen 2y ago
Yup: MLK’s moral arc of the history definitely bends towards making fun of disabled people.
beej71 2y ago
How do you figure? The only thing I see that's wrong about this is that I don't pay the EFF to tell private companies what to do. I pay them to stop the government from turning fascist. They're not wrong about Facebook being a POS and these new policies making it moreso, though.
- Over2Chars 2y ago
  The EFF won't stop anyone from turning fascist. That's not their mission. It sounds nice though. I wouldn't give the EFF a dime.
- cratermoon 2y ago
  Out of curiosity, do you propose any remedy for companies being acting badly? What would you do, if anything, to curb companies doing things like what FB does? What sort of organizations have a role in watching over private companies, informing the public about their activities, and provide guidance on corrective actions?
  - beej71 2y ago
    I haven't been able to think of solutions that aren't worse than what they're doing. I'm extremely wary of the government forcing Facebook to behave a certain way because of the First Amendment.
    - cratermoon 2y ago
      Suggested viewing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V_AZRZfu9I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V_AZRZfu9I

Over2Chars 2y ago

How will it be any worse? 2021 article on how FB's response to CSAM were inadequate: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-59063768 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-59063768 (2021) FB creates extremists, and that's OK with them? https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/facebook-knew-radicalized-users-rcna3581 https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/facebook-knew-radical... (2024) drug sales https://nypost.com/2024/03/16/us-news/feds-investigating-meta-for-possible-role-in-illegal-drug-sales-on-facebook-instagram/ https://nypost.com/2024/03/16/us-news/feds-investigating-met... and on and on. It's hard to believe their mitigations are anything more than legal facades to protect them from maximum culpability. The emperor may be choosing to wear no clothes, but it was a sheer nighty before.

Fricken 2y ago

The Rohingya genocide was fomented on Facebook. Facebook ignored dire warnings for years from human rights organizations including Amnesty international, Humanrightswatch.org and the UN.