Another FB worker quits in disgust, saying it 'is on the wrong side of history'

sfgate.com

13 points·elsewhen··7 comments

This is all well and good, bit I'm surprised how much the discussion centers on Facebook and leaves out the other social networks.

In particular, Reddit seems to be large enough to be influential, yet I've never seen it mentioned in articles like this one.

In case of Reddit, lack of Personalization of content.

Facebook has become a mess, that's why a few years ago Elon Musk removed Tesla, SpaceX, and his page from the platform.

The New Zealand shooting, that guy live-streamed the massacre on Facebook, what kind of monitoring algorithms are working at the FB backend that couldn't catch such mess.

Maybe a good choice, but a bad reason.

I don't think it is correct to assume that something like QAnon is responsible for significant violence compared to neocons rising flags for war. And those voice will be amplified as authoritative/official instead.

It is not the source of hate and that won't improve by banning on loose group affiliation. It is naive to believe algorithm supported banning would improve anything to be honest.

Strange they would bring up Kyle Rittenhouse, but not mention that Facebook is blocking links to donate to his legal defense, effectively impeding him in getting a fair trial (and censoring support pages, so his public perception is likewise under attack): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24397246

Now why would a reporter choose to omit that?

His fair trial will be the same as the one he gave his victim.

So should we just do away with trials in cases of homicide? Discard any outdated ideas about reasonable doubt or self-defense?

Did https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Frank_Garrett, executed for a crime that DNA evidence later tied to someone else, also get "the same trial as the one he gave his victim"?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com