Slashdot Mirror
Mark Zuckerberg's Real Campaign: Save Facebook (axios.com)
From an Axios report: Mark Zuckerberg started 2017 scoffing at the idea of Russia election manipulation on Facebook, and looked like he was contemplating his own possible run for the presidency. Facebook's CEO ends 2017 a very changed man: scrambling to curtail (some of) the manipulation he now acknowledges exists, and to save the most powerful platform in human history. A Facebook exec tells us: "This is the year people will see we get that there's real work to do. We have to change."
Decided on a Facebook hiatus this month. Frankly, I don’t really feel I miss much and I posted frequently. Sometimes, you think “this is cool, I should share it”. That feeling usually drops away after 10 minutes. I conclude that it really wasn’t that important then.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
The world would be a better place without Facebook and Twitter. It would result in less outrage politics, less radicalization of loaners, less keeping up with Jonses, less depressed people, less echo chambers, safer roads, better sleep. If deleting Facebook and Twitter was a pill, we would all be taking it instead of vitamins.
Hmm .... reading between the lines, I would guess that Zuckerberg's real concern is that engagement metrics are falling for Facebook users. I can't imagine that he gives a flip one way or the other about "fake news" or manipulation, as long as people use Facebook.
Just this morning, I unfollowed yet another friend who couldn't resist screaming at everyone with yet another political post. It's getting very, very tiring. Facebook has caused friends of mine to stop speaking (in person) to each other. It's a great platform for seeing family photos, but beyond that I no longer see much utility in using a platform that exists to promote and monetize "us vs. them" mindsets.
Facebook can't die quickly enough.
That The Facebook needs saving is encouraging news... that seems to indicate its popularity and influence is waning.
Even if this is true, it's sad to realize the genie is out of the bottle on this type of social media platform, and something else will replace or compete with Zuck's digital progeny.
Here's to hoping we don't get a replacement that's actually worse, on the order of trading Saddam Hussein for ISIS.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Accusations are today's proof of guilt.
Prima facie rules our collective perception.
I did a test on this in high school, because I recognized the phenomenon, though didn't know the word for it. I demanded my friend give me back my coat (his coat that he was wearing) in front of the teacher: "Hey, give me back my coat!". Despite my friend's claim that it was his coat, and without anything more from me, the teacher made him give me his coat. I explained later and returned his coat.
One test does not prove anything, but one needn't look far to see more examples.
Facebook absolutely depends on bad behavior in order to maintain the amount of power it has. The only "campaign to save Facebook" that we can realistically expect is a PR campaign. Actual positive change would harm FB's shareholders.
I remember reading a story about a man who was Facebook mobbed by a woman who accused him of being a pedophile because her kids were in part of a selfie he took. She later apologized and admitted that she was an idiot. The best way to deal with a troll mob is really simple:
1. Lock the account of EVERYONE who shared it.
2. Force them to read a notice that they participated in a troll mob based on defamatory/abusive content.
3. Threaten them that if it happens again within 90 days, they'll be locked out for 30 days.
4. If it happens three times in a year they get a lifetime ban from all Facebook social networks and using Facebook Connect to login to third party services.
Of course that is what he would say. Otherwise he and his company are complicit in a crime.
The crime of selling 100k worth of ads, that promoted both sides ? Which statute does that break exactly ? The fact is : the "Facebook election manipulation" thing ended being a big nothing burger. Once the actual meat came out, we found out that again, MSM was pushing a fake news narrative of "Facebook exploitation" that just didn't happen in the way they needed to in order to make Trump look bad. He again ended being right about the MSM only being out to attack him.
If anything, the ads just served as confirmation bias to people on either side, and were used more to sow discord than to actually influence the election one way or another.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
Fuck you, Zuckerburger.
Start by changing your stupid Hr department, who routinely discriminate against age, and keep black lists of people critical about HR SJW practices.
That's my real personal experience.
Facebook needs to do far more than just curtail fake news. It tries to curtail "hate speech", however does not have a clear policy on what exactly constitutes "hate speech". As a result, Facebook moderators routinely curtails the free expression of conservative ideas. Just because a person disagrees with you does not make it "hate speech". Just because you do not like what a person has posted does not make it "hate speech". In truth, very little of what gets labeled as "hate speech" is truly "hate speech". Facebook should remember that it MUST embrace the concept of ideological neutrality or it will be working hand in hand with those that produce fake news.
SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0
0 rows returned
Let him scramble and let him fail. Facebook never did anything really innovative anyway. It's like one giant, topicless bulletin board where everyone posts shit about their lives most people don't want to read anyway. Facebook ruined the concept of friendship and relegated it to something far less meaningful and rich. Instead the platform has been divisive, promotes hatred, and promotes revisionist history. I'm now 60 days free from that giant clusterfuck known as Facebook. Facebook is psychologically toxic!
Its hard not to read posts like the grand parents and think anything other than anti-zionism/anti-semitism and or rabid anti-Trump hysteria is behind it. The whole Jerusalem embassy thing is crazy to be upset over.
Its simply a recognition of facts.
1) Israel is a sovereign nation.
2) Israel physically controls Jerusalem
3) Israel says Jerusalem is its capital and has government offices etc there.
4) The PLO has zero chance of occupying and controlling Jerusalem now or in the forseable future.
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = Yes Jerusalem is the capital of Israel; disagreeing with that is just maintaining a silly fiction.
5) Arafat and Abbas have been offered almost everything they want in the past and walked away; they don't want peace; their idea of negotiating is demanding everything while continuing to sow hatred and encourage terrorism toward Israel and its people.
6) The peace "process" won't be hurt by this. Current Israeli politics are no where near putting Jerusalem on the barging table again ( even if it has been there in the past ). We have been trying to help negotiate a peace for 40 years! The previous "process" was not working, you can't undermine a process that is already hopeless!
7) Half the Senators who went on the Sunday shows to criticize the move VOTED FOR IT. Literally NOTHING of substance has changed in the past 25 years as far PLO/Israeli peace situation except domestic political sentiment; Muslims have somehow been advanced in the victim hierarchy ahead of jews.
Maybe the GP is upset about the NATO comments Trump made. Hmm well lets see he got a commitment form our EU allies to actually hold up their end of the bargain and make the defense investments the treaty requires. Oh how terrible.
Maybe the GP is upset with Trump's China rhetoric. Hmm well its had little impact on US-China relations that I can see, maybe its engendered a little more cooperation regarding DPRK from them as an olive branch maybe they are just seeing the light on the hazards of letting the Kims keeping developing nukes. Who even knows? - I guarantee you nobody at the State Department; not Trump appointees or career diplomats.
Maybe the GP is upset about all the territory ISIS has lost?
Maybe the GP is upset about the fact that the Saudis are actually reforming their terror sponsoring ways?
Face it Trump FP policy has been at WORST a wash. At best he has actually made some minor progress advancing American's interests; something the last two administrations both failed at almost entirely.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Fake news spreads very fast. People will post things that they agree with (or find interesting) without thinking and checking to see if it is true. One harmless but false post that I recently seen on Facebook posted by a couple of my FB friends is that in 2018 1/1, 2/2, 3/3, ...12/12 will all occur on a Sunday. It is a fun fact if it was true, but with just a little bit of thinking it is easy to realize that it is false. Yet I have a couple of FB friends who posted it without thinking. Posting without thinking and checking is a problem Facebook can not solve.
By the time a human looks at the post and determines it is fake news, the post has been reposted hundreds of times. An algorithm can find some fake news posts but how many false positives would there be. People would also figure ways around (or game) the algorithm, so it would be an ongoing battle. And what determines fake new? Is it one misleading statement? Does a slanted story with only one side counts as fake news? Is an opinion that is misleading fake news? It is hard.
Then there is the issue of censorship. Is it right for Facebook to ban posts? Should Facebook mark posts as possible fake news and put it far down in its curated list of posts? I think something can be done, but it is not an easy problem to solve, and it will never be completely solved.
Admittedly, it doesn't. I'm just stating and supporting the parent post's claim that for most people, the truth of it doesn't matter (at least that's how I interpreted it).
I'm sure Russians did work to influence our election. I'm also sure they've been doing this for longer than I've been alive, and that we do the same. And other nations and other elections, and all directions. It's nothing new.
You only say that because you want to sell your games.
However my Facebook messages are mostly around the following.
a: What time are we around for a game of GURPS?
b: Actually I am not ready for a GURPS session, how about if we play munchkin.
a: That sounds good, I am free Saturday
b: Saturday works how about you c
c: Yea Saturday works
The real problem is that people seem to want to friend everyone, including toxic people for them. So other then friendly communication you are bombarded with political rambling, or baby pictures, or photos of all their travels.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
They have no business being involved at all. If Facebook facilitated their actions then there is a good chance Facebook was complicit in attempted election rigging and quite possibly in violation of federal election laws.
Your link points to donations or contributions to campaigns. None of this involves ads on Facebook. AKA : you're a purveyor of Fake news now.
There are plenty of articles on this very topic.
WaPo. LmAo. No seriously, again, state the statutes, not a vague link to "Donations by foreign nationals are prohibited". None occurred here and thus those statutes are irrelevant to the discussion.
Russians buying ads is by definition an attempt to influence the election.
Sure, but you're missing the point (which of course I expected of a biased individual out to "get Drumpf!"). They influenced BOTH SIDES. The goal was not to get a particular candidate elected, it was simply to create chaos. And you're now colluding with them, as you bought into their divisive rethoric and are the source of the chaos.
I understand you desperately want the Trump presidency to be illegitimate. It's not. It's 100% legit. How about you start rooting for your country instead of trying to destroy its institutions from within ?
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
Most people detest facebook, even those who use it.
...They seem to have a pretty dedicated following. ...It is entirely what you make of it. If you friend mostly idiots that just post pics of their dinner, you'll just see a bunch of dinner pics. If you friend informative sources, you'll see informative content.....
Agreed. Facebook is what you make of it. People blame Facebook instead of evaluating their own behavior and interactions that make Facebook what it is.
Human nature/psychology is more likely to react to, respond, and share inane, extreme, and negative stuff than it is to intelligent, moderate, nuanced stuff, so naturally the former floats to the top of many Facebook users "experience." This phenomenon is not unique to Facebook though... Just look at the Slashdot commentary and note how often the negative, angry, and sometimes unabashed trolling comments generate the most responses [like the original post in this very discussion]. Humanity's fundamental fascination with conflict and cat pictures won't be cured by destroying Facebook. Killing Facebook would be like cutting off the head of a hydra, where two [or more] options would arise in its place fulfill people's desire for conflict and cat pictures, whether they are aware of their desires or not.