Slashdot Mirror
Facebook is Rating Users Based On Their 'Trustworthiness' (engadget.com)
Facebook has begun to assign its users a reputation score, predicting their trustworthiness on a scale from zero to 1. From a report: Facebook hasn't been shy about rating the trustworthiness of news outlets, but it's now applying that thinking to users as well. The company's Tessa Lyons has revealed to the Washington Post that it's starting to assign users reputation scores on a zero-to-one scale. The system is meant to help Facebook's fight against fake news by flagging people who routinely make false claims against news outlets, whether it's due to an ideological disagreement or a personal grudge. This isn't the only way Facebook gauges credibility, according to Lyons -- it's just one of thousands of behavior markers Facebook is using. The problem: much of how this works is a mystery. Facebook wouldn't say exactly how it calculates scores, who gets these scores and how other factors contributed to a person's trustworthiness.
Trustworthiness is the new truthiness?
Gee whiz Zuckerbook, you're starting to sound an awful lot like living under the communist Chinese government, aren't you?
Black Mirror should not be a reference guide for real life.
I can't wait for government integration a la China.
It's most likely a neural network, and as they have no idea how the neural network *really* makes decisions, they can't describe their system. [There are clever techniques for inferring how a neural network makes scoring decisions, but there is no way to know the "real" method in general.]
Facebook knows a lot about you. How long before Facebook starts creating more "ratings" and selling this data to employers, landlords, and government? Employers, landlords and Government would be more than happy to use these ratings for hiring, firing, rental decisions, investigations, and prosecutions much like your credit rating is used for many different purposes now.
Now I can be secretly tracked and blacklisted by glorious capitalists instead of dirty communists.
I feel so much better.
There's a movie about where all this is leading. It certainly didn't predict it would happen THIS way, but the idea is there. Ugly.
Who is going to rate Facebook's 'trustworthiness'? Anyone....anyone??
This won't end well, I suspect.
Wish I had some mod points for you today.
Hey, Windows users, there is no such thing as "forward" slash, there is only slash and backslash.
I'm sure someone knows the truth? Or is it a true democracy, rule by big angry mob?
As apposed to Slashdot, where your Karma is calculated by mod points assigned by bots pretending to by humans.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Look at the early comments to this article is so evident of the troll farms Russia and America is using to sway the public. BeauHD has all of the historical posts. Not to hard to throw some machine learning up and calling out the obvious shills
I've noticed that when commenting on friends' posts or public posts from political parties, messages supporting conservative parties or criticising Islam or immigration tend to be filtered out, whereas liberal comments or support are in the 'top filtered' section.
I'm sorry, your social score is too low.
China Assigns Every Citizen A ‘Social Credit Score’ To Identify Who Is And Isn’t Trustworthy
So they're implementing Cory Doctorw's Whuffie?
"Lot's" in my parent comment should have been "Lots".
..." Worse than nebulous, which is "unclear, vague, or ill-defined". Probably foolish.
The linked story says, "As nebulous as the rating system is
Washington Post story: Facebook is rating the trustworthiness of its users on a scale from zero to 1. Quote from that story: "... Facebook has given people more options, some users began falsely reporting items as untrue, a new twist on information warfare..."
Another quote: "But how these new credibility systems work is highly opaque..."
Facebook is basically trying to define truth by using user input. Obviously this can be manipulated but I think by adding their own input to week out untrustworthy users, they just might be able to pull it off. There are a lot of variables that can be factored in to deem someone trustworthy but many factors can also be gamed. However, with additional input on who is a bad actor then it also discredits the users that trusted that user.
Russia is definitely going to fuck with this system but I don't think it will be a case of cat and mouse because there is a continuing basis for trustworthiness. It's just crazy enough to work.
The real news here is that Facebook may actually start doing some good instead of being a total parasite!
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
As apposed to Slashdot, where your Karma is calculated by mod points assigned by bots pretending to by humans.
Actually it's more humans acting as bots, by running tons of alt-accounts to farm moderation points...
No self-respecting bot maker cares enough about Slashdot to build bots for it. :-)
At least Slashdot has meta-moderation as well to provide another layer of correction.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I am curious how this does not end up having real world effects similar to China's Social Credit System, which is nowhere I want to be.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System
What could go wrong?
Start by defining "trustworthiness".
Starting at the top, I wouldn't trust Zuckerberg himself to babysit a pet, out of suspicion he'd get it chipped for later tracking without my knowledge or consent, all the while he truly believed he's doing me a favor and making the world a better place.
Since facebook is so neutral and trustworthy itself, we'll just have it rate everybody (well, everybody that they allow to remain there at all).
What could possibly go wrong?
Does not compute.
Mention Infowars (even in jest) - rep score 0 forever until the end of you or Facebook.
Post link to Huffington Post article - A++++ GOLD STAR WOULD ALLOW TO POST AGAIN.
I posted just one political comment on Facebook once, expressing a desire that those on the left and right should talk to each other and not shut people out - so I'm pretty sure my trust score is like -5 out of 0-1.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I don't feel like it's worth it any more.
They delete all the good posts and leave the garbage / click bait.
"The problem: much of how this works is a mystery"
AI algorithms and knowledge-bases/trained models are already too complicated in their function for most people to understand. And they will get even more obscure and indirect in future versions, most likely.
Just as you don't know how I reached a decision or assessment, you won't be able to know how an AI reached a decision or assessment. We are just going to have to get used to that.
The chances are very high that the AI way of assessing will be more objective and principled, going forward, than most individuals' way of assessing.
If you like, to make people less suspicious, perhaps a convention of publishing the code and data in the assessment system (anonymized when references personal data) might be established. But how will this help? A few experts would be able to check it and vouch for its reasoning integrity, but nobody seems to believe experts these days since many of them seem "bought" anyway.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Seriously, who takes any kind of random internet user flagging/rating and uses it raw like it's gospel? Unless you're reviewing each and every report that comes in I'd start evaluating if this user has flagged something before and whether it's been valid or the user has been crying wolf. And if I don't have any direct data points well I'll check correlations with other users I do got data on. Of course that's not enough or you'll have people flag bad videos that they uploaded to build credibility then hit on the innocent, but maybe you can catch patterns like that too.
But no matter what kind of system you build not rating the reporter seems awfully naive. Sure it hinges on Facebook correctly identifying ground truth, but in the case of outright trolling it should be pretty clear that this content did not merit a take down. If it's a gray area, well I think Facebook could very easily throw their own bias into it without bothering with what users think...
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Sounds like a private corporation is taking the United States down the Chinese path of Social Credit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
How long before businesses check your facebook "trustworthy rating" before you can get a loan, rent a home or even get a job.
Considering I report every single 'sponsored post' bullshit ad they present me as a scam or offensive I'm sure my score is horrible. To be honest I do find all the ads quite scammy and offensive, so my truthiness score should be high at least.
With that said, I wonder how many engineers fb has dedicated to getting those paid posts visible beyond ad blockers. Today they're back after a few week hiatus :/
This user's browser somehow doesn't load the ads. Score modifier: -0.20.
User's post once mentioned the banned word "kodi." Score modifier: -0.15.
User never posts anything: -0.10.
User only logs in once per week: -0.10.
User's face tagged by at least two other users with scores of 0.60 or higher, and photo is sufficient to be hashed for database: +0.10.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
That social media stuff, these "influencers", well, it's dead. We all know it's about advertising. Gimme ONE person that likes advertising.
What if you have a personal grudge because someone is abusing their power and reputation?
How does this not just feed into the problems which kept #MeToo in the woodwork for so many years, rather than providing positive change.
GDPR states that: "The data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her.
Paragraph 1 shall not apply if the decision:
is necessary for entering into, or performance of, a contract between the data subject and a data controller;
is authorised by Union or Member State law to which the controller is subject and which also lays down suitable measures to safeguard the data subject’s rights and freedoms and legitimate interests; or
is based on the data subject’s explicit consent."
I am not a lawyer, but this sounds like libel to me.
Trustworthiness is conditional and changes over time.
"The problem: much of how this works is a mystery"
Really? You'd have to be living under a rock to not know that they deem those with left leaning ideologies as trustworthy and anyone who doesn't buy into marxist, collectivist or identity politics as untrustworthy, just like Twitter, Google, etc, ad nauseam.
Black Mirror "Nosedive" - here it comes & a question: Do YOU really want to go through what Lacey Pound did? Don't think it can't happen to you IF you speak your mind/heart & it's contrary to "the party line"...
* Especially when "mass/mainstream media" is owned by NEWSCORP where their 'editorial staff' dictate this: "Want to know what's good for YOU? I will tell you what is..."
(When the "censor beams" are on MAXIMUM, as they were levelled @ Alex Jones of INFOWARDS by Google, Fakebook etc. (we all KNOW who owns them as they do the IMF as well)).
One of the MOST profound lessons I ever got was from a Philosophy professor: QUESTION EVERTHING... especially the motives for this lunacy!
APK
P.S.=> The moment the "truncheon is used in lieu of conversation" (quote V for Vendetta) that way? You KNOW something's wrong - logical debate w/ FACTS behind statements are what SHOULD be used - & as you can see? Lately, they're not - COLLUSION between large corporate bodies on Jones is EXACTLY (almost) what happened in the film "The Informant" w/ Matt Damon folks - YOU are not only the product as the customer, NOW? You're the enemy too (how insane)... Especially when CIA seed money is used to startup Google etc. via InQTel to use sociology against YOU to see how you react (PRS the Hegellian Dialectic), sheeple... apk
Who is watching to make sure these "trustworthy" people don't monetize their achievement? Everything goes if someone is willing to pay enough for it. Facebook is just encouraging career propagandists. What kind of background checks are being done?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
I have already rated Facebook. They get a zero.
Facebook is a blight upon humanity that should be abandoned by all and abolished as a grievous mistake that we as a species should never have made.
That is all.
Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
If I had to "rate" these comments and all the other funny stuff that fb has to offer... grow some balls and show everything posted.
Is Zuckerberg is planning on the user's right hand, or perhaps the forehead?
"...to help Facebook's fight against fake news by flagging people". I suggest they make rep score of zero a red flag and a rep score of 10 a blue flag. It will make it easier to identify someones politics. Or are they just going to shadowban "red flags" like twitter?
Look at the early comments to this article is so evident of the troll farms Russia...
Troll kolkhozy in Russia, you mean.
This is LITERALLY a "Black Mirror" episode on netflix, where people's entire self-worth is garnered by their social media score. This is big gov't censorship at it's worst (albiet Facebook is "sort of" a private company). Add that to the fact Facebook is incredibly biased towards the left, censors conservatives and actual truth at all turns, this is literally the end of free speech and the beginning of the "1984" book/movie. As another poster pointed out, link, post or like anything to do with InfoWars or pro-Trump, and your trustworthiness will instantly plummet based on their completely hidden "algorithms". Wow
Facebook is an opt-in service
No it's not. We've known for years that Spybook has profiles on individuals who have never signed up.
Or what is .5 trustworthy?
Forget Democrats, Republicans, Socialist... let's just jump right into Communism. You've probably heard this a thousand times, this is straight out of the movie "1984" - I for one personally hate that movie. But Facebook has gone too far, and as of today, I will be deleting my social media accounts to disassociate myself from this type of Orwellian behavior. Where's Antifa? Where's the democrats screaming about freedom of speech, individual rights, and freedom period? Where's the republicans raising flags and launching investigations into this? Alas, I have my own theory. This is all about money - period, and no side is prepared to go up against the billions of dollars Facebook has and will use it fight or buy-off anyone. I am severely fatigued about hearing all this crap and its not only affecting my personal life, but my ability to stay focused at work dealing with complex issues. What has this country become? Wasn't the 21st century suppose to look different - instead here we are heading in a direction that past generations predicted in books and movies. What happened to the world where we can supposedly all get along, respect each others opinions instead of fighting over them. Not interested in leaving the U.S., this is the only country I know, so don't even go there. If it goes down a dangerous path, then I too must follow that path. I'm neither rich nor have the influence to contribute to a change; my only power is to join in an uprising when that day comes - if it ever comes. Maybe too late.
You don't get a loan, or a job, or food because you are not Chinese patriotic enough! Learn to say Nee How or else we will be goodbye!
This is disturbing on so many levels.
"...fight against fake news by flagging people who routinely make false claims against news outlets, whether it's due to an ideological disagreement or a personal grudge."
So, let me get this straight.
If someone posts facts on illegal immigration/national security they may get down rated?
If someone posts facts on islamic terrorism they may get down rated?
If someone post facts, albeit unflattering, about a political/high profile person they may get down rated?
Helloooooo fascist, Orwellian, nazi, dystopic oligarchy.
Yikes. What could possibly go wrong???
Then you have nothing to worry about
Is one of two possible values really a scale?
enlightenment is seeking to understand everything as it is.
Is as it is leaves no room for dishonesty, untruth, or error.
Namaste
We knew we were going down a rabbit hole and this ball hasn't stopped rolling. It's going to get a lot worse.
They don't sell their data.
True, they give access to internal data away for free. Cambridge Analytica, perhaps you heard of it and facebook user data ending up in Russua?
See subject & "the other poster" (yours truly) https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... & I go thru it everyday on /. (downmod bombing OR even the current owner attempting to not only FILTER me out (which he failed in miserably) but also DELETING my posts @ times UNTIL he was exposed in it)).
APK
P.S.=> Why? For ME doing the RIGHT THING by others, ala https://news.slashdot.org/comm... ?? Yes, that is EXACTLY why (as it adversely affects "the powers that be" tracking/infecting/slowing you on many levels + profiting by your ignorance also - it's SO easy to see thru, it's not funny (especially when a truncheon is used in lieu of conversation (which they tried to do but I blew away naysayers w/ FACTS in favor of hosts file usage 1,000's of times since 2012 here, so they gave up & try "Character Assasination" LIES now vs. me instead - weak & is assumes people are STUPID (they are NOT once they wake up from "the MATRIX")))... apk
If I'm testing productivity, trustworthiness or date-ability, I don't want to give away my method of measurement otherwise it will be gamed. Sure I could spend a large amount of time and accurately measure something but for something like productivity it might mean giving 3 people the exact same thing to do. The cost is too high, so I will used a proxy that mostly works. Women use confidence as a proxy for dating all the time and some men knowing that and are successful at faking it. If you boss uses lines of code as a proxy for productivity and you know it, then you comment the hell out of the code. Governments use proxies all the time, like wait times for specific procedures, except they tell everyone what the proxy is and it gets gamed.
another system to game.
Anything that quickens the inevitable decline and destruction of Facebook is A-OK in my book. The faster Facebook destroys itself the better the world will be.
Burn baby burn!
Equifax replacement? They maybe entering into finance areas?
Because Joe Q Facebook user reads /. and relies on it to get a political opinion to base who to vote on.
drumpfs 'merka/china will use twooter for auth, not fb.
Glad to see that you got a mod point, though you could have done much more than reveal a tiny bit of insight. In Facebook's case, of course they can't stand the thought of letting us rate THEIR reputation--but they don't actually care because they are only concerned with one metric: Market Cap. On that foundation, there are several secondary metrics, of which time is the most important one. The more human time wasted on Facebook, the bigger the market cap. I think wasted time is bad, but Facebook INSISTS that bigger market cap is good.
There are solution approaches to the problems of bad actors (human and otherwise). I'm even an advocate of EPR (Earned Public Reputation), largely because I think it can be implemented in a symmetry way. However human reputation cannot and should not be reduced to a single number. Human beings are complex and trying to reduce that complexity to a single number is basically insane. A single number can only represent a single dimension, and the question becomes "What are they actually measuring?"
Amusingly enough, I recently submitted a proposal for a multidimensional metric for use on Wikipedia. As the idea mutated, it became two symmetric multidimensional metrics, one for contributors, and one for the articles that they contributed to. MEPR-C is proposed as the Multidimensional Earned Public Reputation of Contributors with the corresponding MEPR-A for articles. ADSAuPR, atAJG.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik...
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
I can see it now :
- all liberals and people who like CNN and MSNBC marked as very trustworthy
- anyone who does not like them marked as not trustworthy
- anyone who likes fox news marked as not trustworthy
I use to watch FB "trending news" very closely. Without fail it was always pro-liberal anti-republican. In the RARE case the news was something that made republicans look good they always had a headline that obscured this fact. Accident I am sure.
It seems to me that, eventually, people will realize that Facebook is not a good idea.
How long before the Facebook "truth" rating is part of my credit score?
The Chinese are already playing with this
> it's just one of thousands of behavior markers Facebook is using
Seriously? There are *thousands* of behavior markers that Facebook tracks, and we're only talking about one of them?
China already has this, Mr. 'I speak mandarin' Zuckerberg. It's called the Social Credit System: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Just wait until government agencies start asking for this info.
Reputation always existed. HOW you do the ratings system matters - you put a # on it and make it centralized and how you calculate it are the BIG factors. Relative ranking by different people is more realistic. People with your biases also like/hate ____... Truth may be concrete but people's opinions, IQ, ignorance are all relative. Rating somebody who's 100% honest but believes in GOD as less trustworthy because when it comes metaphysics they are irrationally think gay people bring natural disasters... might make sense to YOU but think of your non-mainstream positions on GMO or whatever corporate/gov backed false narrative of the time period. Later you could be proven correct; however, your score will not be adjusted...
Your crazy racist uncle who goes on senile rants all the time already has a poor reputation. If you are a Foxtard, your reputation for common sense is already gone among most the planet. If you are educated, informed and point out lies etc, you have a bad reputation among other groups as being a deep state conspirator or communist or whatever.
WE SHOULD HAVE SOME KIND OF CREDIBILITY RATING SYSTEM. It's a necessity. Credit ratings for example. How you do this is a huge problem. It is needed more than before; in the information age you do not need to censor anything; which draws attention, simply bury and smear it -- nobody has the time... or seems to remember when they do dig into something to verify the reliable sources.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
So if I like something that turns out not true, I could be labeled untrustworthy? Really Facebook, your going to start judging people now based on what they do on your site. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.
See subject (dealing w/ trolls impersonating OR libeling me etc.) https://news.slashdot.org/comm... & I knew SOMETHING WAS way, Way, WAY WRONG once I saw "Free Speech Zones" vs. peaceful protesters - I thought the ENTIRE NATION was a "Free Speech Zone", for Pete's sake!
* ... & as you can see from the link I just posted above (ongoing for me for YEARS now, since 2012 when I released my hosts engine program)? They're doing EXACTLY what I noted to me, "Black Mirror NOSEDIVE" style... or trying to.
Yea, it's pretty COMEDIC when a DOLT comedian like Steven Colbert is considered valid news... disgusting. Mockery + Character Assasination thru it is the LAST REFUGE of those defeated in debate is why.
APK
P.S.=> It's folks like you that give me hope & I think most everyone KNOWS what's up, even those just "going along to get along" doing nothing (all evil needs is for good men to do nothing) do too - they're scared - I don't blame them but it's short-sighted thinking doing that & SELFISH (what about your kids & their kids futures?) - it's easy to sell FEAR & to use it against folks for the EXACT reasons I noted above (self-interest, even albeit if only temporary & personal), FEAR also makes you susceptiable to suggestion & to cry "BIG GOV'T. OR CORPORATIONS SAVE ME" which is EXACTLY what they want - continuity of gov't. (not that I don't but FAIR & JUST GOOD government, not bought & paid off puppets of corps in the house & senate) ... apk
How about getting to know someone personally instead? Your Apples to Oranges comparison isn't valid. Like a global cashless society it gets abused. How so? Ok. Julian Assange is the PRIME EXAMPLE thereof!
He spoke out against the "powers that be" exposing their lies & misdoings. What did they do IMMEDIATELY? Shut off his financing for wikileaks & donation abilities.
Think if YOU spoke out vs. them & they found it they wouldn't cut off your "UBI" bullshit your type seems to want (which makes you a subservient on a plantation taking away your drive to excel & be a possible competitor those in POWER (often by bogus means no less))?
THINK AGAIN!
"Sorry sir (slave): There seems to be a problem in your # of the BEAST system identifier 666 UPC symbol on your right hand done in invisible RFID tracking ink, Mr. cattle/sheep we herd - GOOD LUCK EATING!"
APK
P.S.=> As I said - Assange IS your prime example... apk
APK is the one who fears facts and lies.
Like how he claims the Chinese copied him but can't produce any evidence.
How about when he states that hosts does port filtering but again can't backup his statement which was shown to be false.
There is also his list of "experts" who support him but it turns out they don't say what he is claiming.
This also ignores his out of context quotes he uses to lie by omission.
The problem with APK is that his entire reputation is built upon the lie he told years ago that hosts is an effective security solution. It has been exposed numerous times as being a lie and when exposed APK fails to argue logically and instead will try to deflect criticism, change the subject, move the goal posts, return to a previously disproven statement, demand you prove you did better than his file concatenator, or just call people names. He will continue to lie by stating that he won or "dusted" you while failing to refute anything you said, will never provide real evidence, and generally try to dodge the issue.
Face it APK is one of the most detested individuals here for good reason. When ever his poor behavior, awful logic, over statements, and horrendous writing are called out he has a fit and has done so for years across the internet. He is a spammer, and is an abusive insecure little man who is washed up and never amounted to anything. Until he produces actual verifiable facts supporting his case nothing he says should be taken seriously.
You come across as a theoretical scientist who has not much ventured into the nuanced real world of humankind.
Please watch the movie Roshomon and then let's continue the conversation about objective truth and subjective truth.
100 REM PISS OFF CODE FASCISTS 200 GOTO 100
See subject: Why else do you STALK me spreading lies by UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous then? Pretty obvious & dusting you 2x today here https://news.slashdot.org/comm... + here too https://news.slashdot.org/comm... was (gotta say it, lol - it's "tradition" vs. "your kind" pusscake ANTIFA anonymous punk) just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2ez'" & it always is vs. jokes like YOU that HIDE from me using UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous troll postings STALKING me (or even IMPERSONATING ME as Arstechnica was caught doing (glad you used them - I shot them down SO BADLY they lost websites over it, lol)).
APK
P.S.=> Your JEALOUS is showing "Lil' Jowie" - you WISH you were me (especially since your nigh constant IMPERSONATIONS of myself prove that much for me, & everyone sees you & "your kind", weak disgusting REPREHENSIBLE losers do it)... apk
Enough already....I can't believe there is anyone who actually uses FB actively. I have an account but haven't updated/posted anything in years & it's probably time to just ditch the account.
FB wants to be China...no thanks.
'Rated reputations'? Yeah, no possible way for that to go wrong.
settings -> check "I am an advanced user"
my rules -> add the following three lines to block all requests from any domain to the following facebook domains:
* facebook.com * block
* facebook.net * block
* fbcdn.net * block
hit save
hit commit
if you want to access facebook the website, add the additional three lines
facebook.com facebook.com * noop
facebook.com facebook.net * noop
facebook.com fbcdn.net * noop
and save and commit
depends if we can get that value from the graph api. if not then it doesnt really matter at all, some internal number for their bullshit. we track how many users report problems and how many were flagged as NOTABUG and id be a liar if i said didnt use that ratio to determine if i should even dignify the report with a response lol. but that is an internal affairs issue. if we can get this value out of the graph api though and it gets used for like... job applications, interest rates, immigration... granted if the score was provable as legit it could mean something but there is no way anyone could calculate it without some form of bias. so it really should not be.
I am APK the great "LORD of HOSTS", a.k.a. AlecStaar from ArsTechnica or Alexander Peter Kowalski.
See subject & APK Hosts File Engine 2.0++ 64-bit for Linux h t t p : / / I . a m . a . f u c k i n g / a s s h o l e . r e t a r d . z i p (remove spaces between characters & download).
I am the godlike creator of various GUI front-ends for other people's configuration files.
Calling people ne'er-do-wells or Jealous JOWIEs is how I think I win every argument
When people state the truth about me I get really mad and accuse them of projecting which is something I do all the time.
Don't call me out on anything unless you are willing to prove you too can write some strings to a file programmatically
Spamming and being a general pain in the ass is what I do
Listen as I relive my glory days of being a college athlete in the early 80s
You must be conspiring with the Jews and Soros if you disagree with me
Bask in my greatness as I can do a ping as a non root user.
Watch as I whine about my work being flagged as malware by anti-virus software.
Witness my descent into madness
APK
...they've implemented binary?
Your sig here!
See subject: I don't know WHO you are UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous troll but I know WHAT you are - a psycho loon STALKING me OR even IMPERSONATING me & failing your "poor imitation" proving you WISH you were me (but you & "your kind"? Mere DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" PUSSCAKE snowflakes?? You can't EVER be - your type is a "NOTMAN" loser).
* GROW UP & GET ON TOPIC freak.
APK
P.S.=> Do you want to know WHY you're such a fail (proof was here https://news.slashdot.org/comm... & here today too https://news.slashdot.org/comm... vs. me in you FAILING, lol)? You waste time in that WASTED LIFE of yours by STALKING me OR IMPERSONATING me fool... apk
My last posts were in 2012, one of which has been mysteriously removed.
They were very intentional posts, after spending 6-8 months of tedious exercise to delete all of my old posts (6 months to delete 6 years of contents).
The first post was about a kind of silly PAC, the beard PAC, because we need a president with a beard again already IMO.
The second post was not as silly, but pointed out how Facebook got a tax REFUND that year, to the tune of 490 Million USD.
"The Citizens for Tax Justice says Facebook got a $429 million tax refund from the U.S. government"
My post got removed by Facebook, during their 'Fact checking' crusade; a post that had been up on my profile for 5+ years.
And it is fact, and true.
But my post is not truthy according to the truthbreakers, and therefor I am not trustworthy.
ctj.org is probably a terrorist group according to Facebook.
The media has been criticizing Mark Zuckerberg for months about fake news on Facebook. Now Facebook does something about it, and what's the first thing they do? Complain!
How long until the moderate left wing finally see this as dangerous too? Will they ever see the awful traps like this for what they are before they themselves are ensnared or only after their usefulness becomes a burden? Speak only the party's words or be outcast!
Facebook account required by everyone you do business with and if you have the wrong truthiness score, oh dear!
The scientific study of moral/ethical systems is a subset of study of self-organizing systems and emergent behaviour and emergent stable complexity (e.g. life) in open thermodynamic systems.
The role of moral/ethical systems is as embodied information patterns that constrain the behaviour of elements of the emerged stable/metastable complex systems, with the effect of the behaviour constraint being energy efficiency of survival of the emerged stable complex matter/energy patterns, through the general mechanism of allowing organized co-operation of generally independent-action-capable sub-parts.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
So they're effectively silencing you without silencing you. I can see it now, "You have a rating less than one. You must be an untrustworthy person. Therefore whatever you say is false because fb would never lie/make a mistake ever." I wonder if you could sue for defemation of character?
The president's lawyer was discussing perjury traps when he said "Truth is not truth".
In context, he was saying that if the president were to testify and tell the truth and if this conflicted with the testimony of former FBI director Comey, it would be possible that Special investigator Mueller (who is a many years long best friend of Comey) could decide to believe Comey and thus the truth uttered by Trump would be presumed to be not the truth - and in that entirely possible solution truth is not truth. Remember that this investigator is currently trying to jail general Flynn for lying to the FBI even though the FBI's report on their interview of Flynn says Flynn did not lie - and the Mueller investigators lied to Flynn to trick him into pleading guilty to lying to the FBI (that's even more context).
Sadly, in the modern era of crap journalism and rapid-fire meme generation fueled by misquotes and intention context stripping, we are seeing an endless supply of such snarky memes.
Troll farming is a global business, Comrade Wang.
I personally warned people back in the Clinton admin when Hillary Clinton got her hubby Bill to bring Donna Shalala into the federal government from the leftist cesspool of the University of Wisconsin at Madison. She was plugged-into the federal government as the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) and immediately started pushing "speech codes" in that department. Over time, her Orwellian speech codes and political correctness were spreading throughout the federal government. When I used to warn people that this stuff was toxic and would spread into the civil society, liberals laughed and said it would never happen.
Before the 1990s, there was no such thing as "political correctness" in the United States; Americans were free to speak their minds without losing their jobs and/or being destroyed in public. Anybody can go look at people in the 1980s on YouTube (like president Reagan, comedian Yakov Smirnoff, etc) cheerfully making fun of the then-considered bizarre idea of "political correctness" in communist societies like the Soviet Union.
As with the old story about the naked emperor, this garbage will all collapse and people will regain the power of free though and free speech the moment normal people refuse to play the game and simply return to speaking truthfully.
sounds like chinese social score..great going fb
That's another irony meter trashed by an overload
On a scale of 0 to 1, Facebook has rated themselves at 100. Please. Trust the Zuck.
Another step on the road to a "social credit score".
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Say Facebook outs you with a low rating of trustworthiness, you apply for a loan, job, etc and you get denied. The rating would have a negative impact to one's character or business (defamation of character). Let's say you could prove them wrong or better yet Facebook could prove they are right. What are your thoughts?