News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Facebook banned me for life because I help people use it ... by asdvasdi on Thursday October 07, 2021 @02:25PM (#28790272)
Asking honestly, curious to know what would do you think is a good response from the company now? Considering, a few months ago, the company took down high profile accounts and content on its platform because it deemed something dangerous and lot of people were mad that company did that and it was censorship. Now the people are mad at the company because they didn't do enough moderation to ensure user health and well being. The company tried launching a version of the product with higher parental controls to let parents take more control, and people were mad and made the company stop those efforts. At this point in the company, what would you think is an acceptable response? Is there even a response that makes everyone happy?
Re:Facebook banned me for life because I help people use it ... by themitigating on Thursday October 07, 2021 @03:04PM (#28790745)
You know most people want Facebook to go down. If they are on the right it's because of the censorship which prevents them from using misinformation to win votes. On the left it's the misinformation.
Re:Facebook banned me for life because I help people use it ... by ImPostingOnHN on Thursday October 07, 2021 @04:32PM (#28791678)
I am not confident that "make everyone happy", either equally, or even in varying amounts, should even be the primary objective here

a good response would be one that starts with respectable principles and values and proceeds according to those, even when it costs money

of course, that won't happen voluntarily, because money

Re:Facebook banned me for life because I help people use it ... by nradov on Thursday October 07, 2021 @04:58PM (#28791970)
In a company that operates worldwide, which country's or culture's principles and values should take precedence?
Re:Facebook banned me for life because I help people use it ... by ImPostingOnHN on Thursday October 07, 2021 @04:59PM (#28791995)
a good start would be for them to pick any that they can consistently apply and then seek feedback, but ideally it would explicitly describe what the trade-offs are between user safety and profits

at the moment, the only principles they consistently apply seem to be: protect zuckerberg first, company profits second, everything else third, but that's just my perception -- they should make clear what their principles are so we can judge whether or not they consistently stick to them, and whether or not we need legislation to nudge those priorities around for the good of society