Emails also showed that Meta would allow praise of the right-wing Azov battalion, which is normally prohibited, in a change first reported by The Intercept.
Meta spokesman Joe Osborne previously said the company was "for the time being, making a narrow exception for praise of the Azov Regiment strictly in the context of defending Ukraine, or in their role as part of the Ukraine National Guard."
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Oct 26, 2021 - 5:53pm
Manbird wrote:
Half the country has just completely cut loose from any sense of decency - from disgusting vulgarity everywhere to school board fights to assassination and kidnapping plans. Strange days.
I certainly am not a defender of Facebook and its practices, but is this not â at least partly â a case of us having met the enemy and realizing it is us?
Half the country has just completely cut loose from any sense of decency - from disgusting vulgarity everywhere to school board fights to assassination and kidnapping plans. Strange days.
I didn't read the link yet but I posted something on a friend's FB post of a WaPo article (below) that I think is germane I wrote:
It's easy to think that Facebook implemented these downsides deliberately. Before these added emojis, someone would post something sad or wrong and people would click "like," then immediately explain that they didn't "like" it but wanted to respond somehow, "I wish there was a sad face" etc. I think it's unfair to Facebook that we blame them for our own response to things. Certainly I click "like" on a joke or post mostly as an acknowledgment of the person's post or comment as often as I do to indicate that I actually like what they posted. If I click one of the others, it is indeed more of an endorsement of the post. So... facebook's five points is probably valid. The fact that they then show us content that is likely to elicit a similar response is also a user requested feature: "I don't want to see this sort of thing on my timeline!" used to be something people said every single day. They took years to study the emojis and implemented them. Other features got a trial for a year or so then quietly went away. Even if FB sees something going haywire, they can't just wish it away and revert to some earlier system because that had problems they don't want to return to.But it's good to understand that by clicking a "sad" emoji, I'm likely to see more sad posts. Which is not what I want from my user experience. But come to think of it, I use the other emojis sarcastically as often as not.
I certainly am not a defender of Facebook and its practices, but is this not â at least partly â a case of us having met the enemy and realizing it is us?
We are not to blame, much in the same way we've come to appreciate the use of opioids. FB prays on individual weakness and exploits users on a scale unavailable without machines. They are the drug dealer on the playground....handing out samples and ramping up the "high" over time.
Sure, we are not all addicted, but enough of us are to create problems.
I certainly am not a defender of Facebook and its practices, but is this not â at least partly â a case of us having met the enemy and realizing it is us?
We are not to blame, much in the same way we've come to appreciate the use of opioids. FB prays on individual weakness and exploits users on a scale unavailable without machines. They are the drug dealer on the playground....handing out samples and ramping up the "high" over time.
Sure, we are not all addicted, but enough of us are to create problems.
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Oct 26, 2021 - 6:19am
I certainly am not a defender of Facebook and its practices, but is this not â at least partly â a case of us having met the enemy and realizing it is us?
