News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid emp... by hartator on Thursday September 17, 2020 @06:30PM (#24510757)
I would still have a proper judge made a decision than Facebook. I can easily block people that share BS on Facebook but I don't want Facebook to make that decision for me. That overrides my own choice to follow them in the first place.
Re:FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid emp... by not2b on Thursday September 17, 2020 @07:22PM (#24511170)
Let's be more specific: you're in Myanmar (aka Burma), and there are Facebook groups calling for, and even organizing, massacres of the Rohingya minority. We should wait for a judge to shut that down? When the relevant judge is part of the people organizing the massacres? And no, this isn't hypothetical, this happened, and it happened on Facebook.
Re:FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid emp... by hartator on Thursday September 17, 2020 @07:57PM (#24511396)
Is not about stopping the post of fb anymore but arresting these people. Yes a judge should make that decision.
Re:FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid emp... by monocasa on Friday September 18, 2020 @12:18AM (#24512961)
The state of Burma allowed the massacres though. You can't trust a judge to shut it down.
Re:FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid emp... by DaiPlusPlus on Friday September 18, 2020 @08:01AM (#24515607)
After that episode Facebook should have been subject to an immediate inquiry and then US courts should have ordered FB to not operate in Burma/Myanmar until further notice.
Re:FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid emp... by rahulsbisen on Friday September 18, 2020 @03:20AM (#24513885)
Well so you want FB to step outside law and filter content. I don't see a way they can be right here.
Re:FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid emp... by eli on Thursday September 17, 2020 @07:16PM (#24511123)
What is a “proper judge”? You mean you want the courts to moderate your social platform?
Re:FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid emp... by DaiPlusPlus on Thursday September 17, 2020 @07:58PM (#24511404)
> You mean you want the courts to moderate your social platform?

Honestly? Yes. At least that way there's impartiality, accountability, an appeals process, and enforcement.

If Facebook self-moderates you get all of the same downsides of "big government"[1] moderation and none of the benefits listed above.

[1] I assume your argument is predicated in terms of "big government" as though an unregulated and for-profit company having a near-monopoly on key parts of modern society is somehow superior to any kind of state involvement in reigning-in excesses that the free market fails to address.

Re:FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid emp... by stale2002 on Thursday September 17, 2020 @07:51PM (#24511360)
> You mean you want the courts to moderate your social platform?

In situations regarding literal terrorist propaganda, and active calls for violence (Which were the examples given), which are already illegal?

Yes. The courts are the proper place for determining how literal terrorism/imminent threats of violence should be handled.

I don't think this is controversial, to say that people who make imminent calls to violence, as has been already defined as being illegal by the court system, should be handled by the law.

Most everything else should be not blocked by the platform, though.