Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
extender
Topic Author
Posts: 979
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:52 am

Facebook Whistleblower

Mon Oct 04, 2021 9:29 am

Anybody catch the 60 Minutes piece last night?

Link to video.

Interesting, to say the least.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Mon Oct 04, 2021 9:58 am

Yep, good stuff. Some in upper management involved with operations were obviously uncomfortable with how certain programs would impact revenue - that has become pretty clear. To the extent the company is unable to balance revenue generation and negative impact, there needs to be more investigation and internal oversight with teeth.

That said, VP of Global Affairs Nick Clegg was on CNN last night and made a pretty nuanced and impassioned defense of how challenging this issue is to actually manage. He suggested that an algorithmic change is not the simple fix people claim it is, and that the media is essentially misleading the public by suggesting events like Jan. 6th are 'caused by' social media. He rightly said it's convenient to blame a company for that when there's a larger and more difficult discussion to be had about how people's grievances and cultural change spur such events.

“I think the assertion [that] January 6th can be explained because of social media, I just think that’s ludicrous,” Clegg told the broadcaster, saying it was “false comfort” to believe technology was driving the US’s deepening political polarisation.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/ ... pitol-riot

On the other hand, in the same interview, he resisted the CNN host's challenge that FB should release all of their internal data to disprove WSJ's claims - a pretty weak response. At the end of the day, scale is the big challenge here - even if they want to target specific types of emotional reactions to be a more neutral or positive platform culturally, it's hard to do at their current size.

FB has about 60K employees, only 10K of which are doing content monitoring activities. They have what, 2.4 billion daily users? Clegg claimed that internal data showed only 0.05% of interactions were still hate speech, thanks to their AI. Even so, under the numbers above, if each user only posted once a day, that would still represent 12 million hate communications a day for 10K employees to look into. That just isn't possible.

https://www.cityam.com/nick-clegg-refut ... ol-attack/
 
User avatar
DIRECTFLT
Posts: 2718
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:00 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Mon Oct 04, 2021 10:35 am

Instagram aside, I think that the whistleblower was more deeply concerned about the way FB was used in other countries, over what's happening in the US. People in the US have MANY Social Media options for messaging and organizing. Not so much in some other countries.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Mon Oct 04, 2021 12:43 pm

DIRECTFLT wrote:
Instagram aside, I think that the whistleblower was more deeply concerned about the way FB was used in other countries, over what's happening in the US. People in the US have MANY Social Media options for messaging and organizing. Not so much in some other countries.


That's a major problem. According to some of the stuff that was leaked from their internal analysis, FB's algorithms don't work well to catch hate speech with several minor languages the platform is popular in, and the vast majority of their content monitoring work around hate and misinformation is focused on English content.

"But one statistic that jumped out for me from the Wall Street Journal was that for all their disinformation and misinformation work in 2020, only 13% of that work was outside of the United States.

"For a service that is 90% outside of the United States - and one that has had enormous impact, in a very negative way, on the politics of countries like the Philippines, Poland, Brazil, Hungary, Turkey - they are not doing anything to remediate all that."


https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-58678332
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Mon Oct 04, 2021 1:20 pm

I thought that "whistleblowing" was in the case of illegal activities being exposed. But AFAIK, "hate speech" is protected by the Constitution as "free speech" no matter how vile and how much we may disagree with it.
See e.g. R.A.V. v. St. Paul, ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.A.V._v. ... f_St._Paul ).
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Mon Oct 04, 2021 1:22 pm

Dieuwer wrote:
But AFAIK, "hate speech" is protected by the Constitution as "free speech" no matter how vile and how much we may disagree with it.
See e.g. R.A.V. v. St. Paul, ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.A.V._v. ... f_St._Paul ).


What does that principle or a court case against a municipality have to do with Facebook?
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 14162
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Mon Oct 04, 2021 2:01 pm

The issue here is one we all know about. Misinformation spreads rapidly on Facebook amongst those that wish to consume it. This whistleblower is basically stating that Facebook is profiting off of that misinformation, much like a drug dealer does off of his clients. Sure this stuff is bad for everyone in the long run, but in the short run, it gives people euphoria and a false sense of "zen" with what they believe is working for them. In the long run, misinformation destroys everyone as people no longer believe what is real anymore, and they waste money and time trying to prove that they are not the problem, and that everyone else is.

Facebook execs, and YouTube are running a business, and do they want to slow down their profit model to be better for society? Probably not, as some of the most shocking things drive profit.
Does government need to step in where these Execs are not self censoring? Free Speech is all well and good, but when you have enough unaware people believing things are not happening, it creates physical danger for others. Jan 6, bad laws against voting, bad candidates for office, bad behavior by kids at school(Tik Tok bathroom challenge), teenage girls self anxiety, all of these things are bad.

Simple posts that say "Like and share" create go along to belong attitudes that are dangerous and help certain organizations target susceptible individuals.

People say that social media is free speech, but there are real consequences, and do the consequences travel at the speed of misinformation? I don't think so.
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Mon Oct 04, 2021 4:35 pm

No demand = no supply.
You want to prevent drug abuse? Make sure demand isn't there by educating people about the health effects and teach them to live a healthy life. You want to prevent consumption of "misinformation"? Educate people and teach them how to develop critical thinking skills.
Facebook = bad? Simply cancel your account. I don't have one, and you don't need one either.
 
twosoun
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2021 1:45 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Tue Oct 05, 2021 12:07 am

Dieuwer wrote:
No demand = no supply.
You want to prevent drug abuse? Make sure demand isn't there by educating people about the health effects and teach them to live a healthy life. You want to prevent consumption of "misinformation"? Educate people and teach them how to develop critical thinking skills.
Facebook = bad? Simply cancel your account. I don't have one, and you don't need one either.

Oh are you telling me the “Hugs not drugs” campaign in middle school werent enough to stop users from doing drugs? *eyeroll* Its not that easy, chap.

There are a myriad of other factors beyond our control that mediate usage/uptake and must be regulated as well. Its not that easy and you are grossly over simplifying the complexity here


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Tue Oct 05, 2021 12:30 am

twosoun wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
No demand = no supply.
You want to prevent drug abuse? Make sure demand isn't there by educating people about the health effects and teach them to live a healthy life. You want to prevent consumption of "misinformation"? Educate people and teach them how to develop critical thinking skills.
Facebook = bad? Simply cancel your account. I don't have one, and you don't need one either.

Oh are you telling me the “Hugs not drugs” campaign in middle school werent enough to stop users from doing drugs? *eyeroll* Its not that easy, chap.

There are a myriad of other factors beyond our control that mediate usage/uptake and must be regulated as well. Its not that easy and you are grossly over simplifying the complexity here


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Exactly. A lot of nuance missing from a conversation where much is required.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Wed Oct 06, 2021 11:28 pm

Hilarious take here from Ben Shapiro: the entire FB flap is a Dem plot to control alternative media. I guess he neglected to mention that he’s personal friends with Zuck and has skin in the game :lol:

https://youtu.be/lqBl4OfLnGw
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 1:47 am

Still have not seen any EVIDENCE that this woman is a real "whistleblower" and not a disgruntled ex-employee who is looking for attention/payday.
Did Facebook break any laws? Spread child porn for instance??
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 1:55 am

Dieuwer wrote:
Still have not seen any EVIDENCE that this woman is a real "whistleblower" and not a disgruntled ex-employee who is looking for attention/payday.
Did Facebook break any laws? Spread child porn for instance??


What evidence have you seen that she is a disgruntled employee looking for a payday?
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 1:56 am

Aaron747 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
Still have not seen any EVIDENCE that this woman is a real "whistleblower" and not a disgruntled ex-employee who is looking for attention/payday.
Did Facebook break any laws? Spread child porn for instance??


What evidence have you seen that she is a disgruntled employee looking for a payday?


Don't deflect.
The onus is on 60 Minutes and the ex-employee to prove she is a real whistleblower. SImply saying "I am a wistleblower" isn't gonna cut it.

Wikipedia: "A whistleblower (also written as whistle-blower or whistle blower) is a person, usually an employee, who exposes information or activity within a private, public, or government organization that is deemed illegal, illicit, unsafe, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer funds."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower

Once again, what illegal activities did Facebook do? Did they commit fraud? Abused tax payer money??
Last edited by 737307 on Thu Oct 07, 2021 1:59 am, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 1:57 am

Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
Still have not seen any EVIDENCE that this woman is a real "whistleblower" and not a disgruntled ex-employee who is looking for attention/payday.
Did Facebook break any laws? Spread child porn for instance??


What evidence have you seen that she is a disgruntled employee looking for a payday?


Don't deflect.
The onus is on 60 Minutes and the ex-employee to prove she is a real whistleblower. SImply saying "I am a wistleblower" isn't gonna cut it.


Not a deflection. You made a claim opposite the reported narrative - the onus for evidence is on you.
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 1:59 am

Aaron747 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

What evidence have you seen that she is a disgruntled employee looking for a payday?


Don't deflect.
The onus is on 60 Minutes and the ex-employee to prove she is a real whistleblower. SImply saying "I am a wistleblower" isn't gonna cut it.


Not a deflection. You made a claim opposite the reported narrative - the onus for evidence is on you.


Nope. She claims to be a whistleblower. PROVE IT.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:02 am

Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:

Don't deflect.
The onus is on 60 Minutes and the ex-employee to prove she is a real whistleblower. SImply saying "I am a wistleblower" isn't gonna cut it.


Not a deflection. You made a claim opposite the reported narrative - the onus for evidence is on you.


Nope. She claims to be a whistleblower. PROVE IT.


She released internal documents and presentations that she, as a data scientist, had access to. What more do you want? This is just childish and silly :whistleblower:

https://techcrunch.com/2021/10/04/leak- ... -says-mep/
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:04 am

Aaron747 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

Not a deflection. You made a claim opposite the reported narrative - the onus for evidence is on you.


Nope. She claims to be a whistleblower. PROVE IT.


She released internal documents and presentations that she, as a data scientist, had access to. What more do you want? This is just childish and silly :whistleblower:

https://techcrunch.com/2021/10/04/leak- ... -says-mep/


So what? Do these documents show Facebook acted illegally? Do these documents show Facebook committed fraud? Or do they perhaps show that Facebook is engaged in illicit activities? Yes Facebook mostly likely spread "disinformation" and perhaps even stirred the pot. Then again, NOTHING of this is illegal.
SCOTUS has ruled in many cases in the past the even hate speech or "disinformation" is protected speech, however vile and however disagreeable it is.
Last edited by 737307 on Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:09 am, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:07 am

Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:

Nope. She claims to be a whistleblower. PROVE IT.


She released internal documents and presentations that she, as a data scientist, had access to. What more do you want? This is just childish and silly :whistleblower:

https://techcrunch.com/2021/10/04/leak- ... -says-mep/


So what? Do these documents show Facebook acted illegally? Do these documents show Facebook committed fraud? Or do they perhaps show that Facebook is engaged in illicit activities?


They show they have misrepresented the nature of some of their programs and processes to the public. The leaks were to the media, not any regulatory body. You're barking up the wrong tree entirely. Just plain silly.
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:09 am

Aaron747 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

She released internal documents and presentations that she, as a data scientist, had access to. What more do you want? This is just childish and silly :whistleblower:

https://techcrunch.com/2021/10/04/leak- ... -says-mep/


So what? Do these documents show Facebook acted illegally? Do these documents show Facebook committed fraud? Or do they perhaps show that Facebook is engaged in illicit activities?


They show they have misrepresented the nature of some of their programs and processes to the public. The leaks were to the media, not any regulatory body. You're barking up the wrong tree entirely. Just plain silly.


Did they break the law, yes or no.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:14 am

Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:

So what? Do these documents show Facebook acted illegally? Do these documents show Facebook committed fraud? Or do they perhaps show that Facebook is engaged in illicit activities?


They show they have misrepresented the nature of some of their programs and processes to the public. The leaks were to the media, not any regulatory body. You're barking up the wrong tree entirely. Just plain silly.


Did they break the law, yes or no.


Irrelevant. That's your personal goalpost. Nobody else is talking about that.
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:18 am

Aaron747 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

They show they have misrepresented the nature of some of their programs and processes to the public. The leaks were to the media, not any regulatory body. You're barking up the wrong tree entirely. Just plain silly.


Did they break the law, yes or no.


Irrelevant. That's your personal goalpost. Nobody else is talking about that.


Nope. It is very much relevant.
60 Minutes interviewed the former facebook employee as being a whistleblower. Thereby making it about somebody who.... "exposes information or activity within a private, public, or government organization that is deemed illegal, illicit, unsafe, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer funds."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower

So, once again: what laws did Facebook break? What illegal activities did they do? What fraud? What taxpayer funds were abused?
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 14162
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:23 am

Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:

Did they break the law, yes or no.


Irrelevant. That's your personal goalpost. Nobody else is talking about that.


Nope. It is very much relevant.
60 Minutes interviewed the former facebook employee as being a whistleblower. Thereby making it about somebody who.... "exposes information or activity within a private, public, or government organization that is deemed illegal, illicit, unsafe, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer funds."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower

So, once again: what laws did Facebook break? What illegal activities did they do? What fraud? What taxpayer funds were abused?

Unsafe is rather broad, and i will say that allowing people to yell fire in a crowded theatre would apply here. Hate speech is not protected, and Facebook allowing such to go unfettered is definitely illegal. Especially if they have it upon themselves to remove the content.
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:24 am

casinterest wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

Irrelevant. That's your personal goalpost. Nobody else is talking about that.


Nope. It is very much relevant.
60 Minutes interviewed the former facebook employee as being a whistleblower. Thereby making it about somebody who.... "exposes information or activity within a private, public, or government organization that is deemed illegal, illicit, unsafe, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer funds."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower

So, once again: what laws did Facebook break? What illegal activities did they do? What fraud? What taxpayer funds were abused?

Unsafe is rather broad, and i will say that allowing people to yell fire in a crowded theatre would apply here. Hate speech is not protected, and Facebook allowing such to go unfettered is definitely illegal. Especially if they have it upon themselves to remove the content.


Hate speech definitely is protected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_spee ... 0viewpoint.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:25 am

Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:

Did they break the law, yes or no.


Irrelevant. That's your personal goalpost. Nobody else is talking about that.


Nope. It is very much relevant.
60 Minutes interviewed the former facebook employee as being a whistleblower. Thereby making it about somebody who.... "exposes information or activity within a private, public, or government organization that is deemed illegal, illicit, unsafe, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer funds."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower

So, once again: what laws did Facebook break? What illegal activities did they do? What fraud? What taxpayer funds were abused?


Totally irrelevant. Try Oxford English or Mirriam-Webster next time.

OE:

A *source who makes public information about alleged wrongdoing, typically by or within the organization in which they are employed

https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10 ... 241-e-1482

MW:

one who reveals something covert or who informs against another

https://www.merriam-webster.com/diction ... stleblower

Friendly FYI: the world is not Wikipedia, and Wikipedia is not the world.
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:29 am

Aaron747 wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

Irrelevant. That's your personal goalpost. Nobody else is talking about that.


Nope. It is very much relevant.
60 Minutes interviewed the former facebook employee as being a whistleblower. Thereby making it about somebody who.... "exposes information or activity within a private, public, or government organization that is deemed illegal, illicit, unsafe, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer funds."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower

So, once again: what laws did Facebook break? What illegal activities did they do? What fraud? What taxpayer funds were abused?


Totally irrelevant. Try Oxford English or Mirriam-Webster next time.

OE:

A *source who makes public information about alleged wrongdoing, typically by or within the organization in which they are employed

https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10 ... 241-e-1482

MW:

one who reveals something covert or who informs against another

https://www.merriam-webster.com/diction ... stleblower

Friendly FYI: the world is not Wikipedia, and Wikipedia is not the world.


Irrelevant. the world is not Oxford, and Oxford is not the world.
I guess we should leave it at that, You can believe whatever you want.
AFAIC, there is nothing "whistle-blowy" about anything of this, unless it goes to trial.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 14162
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:30 am

Dieuwer wrote:
casinterest wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:

Nope. It is very much relevant.
60 Minutes interviewed the former facebook employee as being a whistleblower. Thereby making it about somebody who.... "exposes information or activity within a private, public, or government organization that is deemed illegal, illicit, unsafe, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer funds."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower

So, once again: what laws did Facebook break? What illegal activities did they do? What fraud? What taxpayer funds were abused?

Unsafe is rather broad, and i will say that allowing people to yell fire in a crowded theatre would apply here. Hate speech is not protected, and Facebook allowing such to go unfettered is definitely illegal. Especially if they have it upon themselves to remove the content.


Hate speech definitely is protected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_spee ... 0viewpoint.


Not when it is used with certain symbolism ,such as gross images or harmful behaviors. Much of what was seen all over facebook. Also facebook profiting off of hate speech and disparaging people of certain groups creates issues within legal areas.
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:32 am

casinterest wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
casinterest wrote:
Unsafe is rather broad, and i will say that allowing people to yell fire in a crowded theatre would apply here. Hate speech is not protected, and Facebook allowing such to go unfettered is definitely illegal. Especially if they have it upon themselves to remove the content.


Hate speech definitely is protected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_spee ... 0viewpoint.


Not when it is used with certain symbolism ,such as gross images or harmful behaviors. Much of what was seen all over facebook. Also facebook profiting off of hate speech and disparaging people of certain groups creates issues within legal areas.


It seems that advocating illegal conduct is protected under the First Amendment unless the speech is likely to incite “imminent lawless action.”

https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/articl ... urg-v-ohio
Last edited by 737307 on Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 14162
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:35 am

Dieuwer wrote:
casinterest wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:

Hate speech definitely is protected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_spee ... 0viewpoint.


Not when it is used with certain symbolism ,such as gross images or harmful behaviors. Much of what was seen all over facebook. Also facebook profiting off of hate speech and disparaging people of certain groups creates issues within legal areas.


Are you making an assertion? If so, then please prove it.


How about the fact that Facebook Fraudulently asserted that they were removing hateful posts ,and falsely assuring everyone that they were safe on Facebook, when the exact opposite is true. If someone searches for and follows hate speech , then they will get more of it. That would come under Fraudulent behaviors. Hate speech can be banned from private platforms, and most Americans understand this. So if you go to Facebook you would not expect to see it if Facebook says it is not there.
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:41 am

casinterest wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
casinterest wrote:

Not when it is used with certain symbolism ,such as gross images or harmful behaviors. Much of what was seen all over facebook. Also facebook profiting off of hate speech and disparaging people of certain groups creates issues within legal areas.


Are you making an assertion? If so, then please prove it.


How about the fact that Facebook Fraudulently asserted that they were removing hateful posts ,and falsely assuring everyone that they were safe on Facebook, when the exact opposite is true. If someone searches for and follows hate speech , then they will get more of it. That would come under Fraudulent behaviors. Hate speech can be banned from private platforms, and most Americans understand this. So if you go to Facebook you would not expect to see it if Facebook says it is not there.


We will have to wait for the SEC to comment, and see if any of this goes to trial.
It is easy to get all emotional about Facebook on a.net and come up with arguments why it is a "bad company". But in the end, a judge will have to give a verdict (if it gets that far). Not a bunch of nobodies on an internet forum.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 14162
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:44 am

Dieuwer wrote:
casinterest wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:

Are you making an assertion? If so, then please prove it.


How about the fact that Facebook Fraudulently asserted that they were removing hateful posts ,and falsely assuring everyone that they were safe on Facebook, when the exact opposite is true. If someone searches for and follows hate speech , then they will get more of it. That would come under Fraudulent behaviors. Hate speech can be banned from private platforms, and most Americans understand this. So if you go to Facebook you would not expect to see it if Facebook says it is not there.


We will have to wait for the SEC to comment, and see if any of this goes to trial.
It is easy to get all emotional about Facebook on a.net and come up with arguments why it is a "bad company". But in the end, a judge will have to give a verdict (if it gets that far). Not a bunch of nobodies on an internet forum.


Facebook will have it's day in court, but the real issue is that they must acknowledge that they cannot pretend to eliminate something that they are busy profiting from. They profit from lies , shock , and hate speech. Much like many other media outlets.
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:48 am

casinterest wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:
casinterest wrote:

How about the fact that Facebook Fraudulently asserted that they were removing hateful posts ,and falsely assuring everyone that they were safe on Facebook, when the exact opposite is true. If someone searches for and follows hate speech , then they will get more of it. That would come under Fraudulent behaviors. Hate speech can be banned from private platforms, and most Americans understand this. So if you go to Facebook you would not expect to see it if Facebook says it is not there.


We will have to wait for the SEC to comment, and see if any of this goes to trial.
It is easy to get all emotional about Facebook on a.net and come up with arguments why it is a "bad company". But in the end, a judge will have to give a verdict (if it gets that far). Not a bunch of nobodies on an internet forum.


Facebook will have it's day in court, but the real issue is that they must acknowledge that they cannot pretend to eliminate something that they are busy profiting from. They profit from lies , shock , and hate speech. Much like many other media outlets.


It seems that Facebook is on the attack and denies everything.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/mark-zu ... d=80432492

I personally think this "case" will go nowhere.
Sure, politicians might rant in front of the camera about "bad Facebook", but in the end they love the "donations" corporations like Facebook are making to their pocketbooks.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 14162
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:54 am

Dieuwer wrote:
casinterest wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:

We will have to wait for the SEC to comment, and see if any of this goes to trial.
It is easy to get all emotional about Facebook on a.net and come up with arguments why it is a "bad company". But in the end, a judge will have to give a verdict (if it gets that far). Not a bunch of nobodies on an internet forum.


Facebook will have it's day in court, but the real issue is that they must acknowledge that they cannot pretend to eliminate something that they are busy profiting from. They profit from lies , shock , and hate speech. Much like many other media outlets.


It seems that Facebook is on the attack and denies everything.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/mark-zu ... d=80432492

I personally think this "case" will go nowhere.
Sure, politicians might rant in front of the camera about "bad Facebook", but in the end they love the "donations" corporations like Facebook are making to their pocketbooks.




I can open my feed and see many examples of blatant hate speech and misinformation, but i choose to keep certain items consistently reported to Facebook which means i am not presented with the misinformation contacts continually post. However if I go to their feeds, I will see it nonetheless. These people keep getting reinforced in a echo chamber of their own creation, and it warps their realities. It is a problem for the rest of the world when they continue to assert false information under the guise that they think that Facebook is protecting them. Zuckerberg's claims above highlight that he continues to assert that Facebook has a handle on it, when they clearly do not.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:56 am

Dieuwer wrote:
casinterest wrote:
Dieuwer wrote:

Are you making an assertion? If so, then please prove it.


How about the fact that Facebook Fraudulently asserted that they were removing hateful posts ,and falsely assuring everyone that they were safe on Facebook, when the exact opposite is true. If someone searches for and follows hate speech , then they will get more of it. That would come under Fraudulent behaviors. Hate speech can be banned from private platforms, and most Americans understand this. So if you go to Facebook you would not expect to see it if Facebook says it is not there.


We will have to wait for the SEC to comment, and see if any of this goes to trial.
It is easy to get all emotional about Facebook on a.net and come up with arguments why it is a "bad company". But in the end, a judge will have to give a verdict (if it gets that far). Not a bunch of nobodies on an internet forum.


SEC regulates financial fraud. This is all just uninformed silliness.
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:58 am

Aaron747 wrote:
SEC regulates financial fraud. This is all just uninformed silliness.


Facebook Whistleblower Frances Haugen Releases Her 8 Damning SEC Complaints

https://gizmodo.com/facebook-whistleblo ... 1847802360

The SEC did comment, in fact...kinda.

The SEC told 60 Minutes it “does not comment on the existence or nonexistence of a possible investigation.”
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16496
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 3:18 am

Dieuwer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
SEC regulates financial fraud. This is all just uninformed silliness.


Facebook Whistleblower Frances Haugen Releases Her 8 Damning SEC Complaints

https://gizmodo.com/facebook-whistleblo ... 1847802360

The SEC did comment, in fact...kinda.

The SEC told 60 Minutes it “does not comment on the existence or nonexistence of a possible investigation.”


Well at least that'll stop the 'PROVE she's a REAL whistleblower' bellyaching :boggled:
 
737307
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:03 pm

If we go by the Oxford definition of "Whistleblower", then I know at least half a dozen whistleblowers. But I doubt 60 Minutes will be interested talking to them, as it probably is not as "big" as Facebook.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 14162
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:15 pm

Dieuwer wrote:
If we go by the Oxford definition of "Whistleblower", then I know at least half a dozen whistleblowers. But I doubt 60 Minutes will be interested talking to them, as it probably is not as "big" as Facebook.


What is the relevance of this statement? You asked for examples of whistleblower, and you got it.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 11533
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:25 pm

The idea that someone is accusing a business of doing what is best for itself, and that some of that may not be to the ultimate benefit of the public is ludicrous.

Are food commercials 100% accurate? Is eating more food healthy and of general benefit to society? Is buying more stuff and maxing out your credit good for the person and society? Is anyone forced to join and stay with Facebook? Do people have the ability to control and make their on decisions on what is good and bad for them of the choices of services across society?

This "whistleblower" is saying something similar to "and the restaurant KNEW that the food they were advertising and selling would be unhealthy to the person that ate it!" It is in some way like that moron who did the "Super Size Me" documentary. Yes, if you give over complete control of your life and thinking to a company, it is not good for you or anyone.

Some good may come from this but it doesn't mean the person was right.

Tugg
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 14162
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

Re: Facebook Whistleblower

Thu Oct 07, 2021 6:24 pm

Tugger wrote:
The idea that someone is accusing a business of doing what is best for itself, and that some of that may not be to the ultimate benefit of the public is ludicrous.

Are food commercials 100% accurate? Is eating more food healthy and of general benefit to society? Is buying more stuff and maxing out your credit good for the person and society? Is anyone forced to join and stay with Facebook? Do people have the ability to control and make their on decisions on what is good and bad for them of the choices of services across society?

This "whistleblower" is saying something similar to "and the restaurant KNEW that the food they were advertising and selling would be unhealthy to the person that ate it!" It is in some way like that moron who did the "Super Size Me" documentary. Yes, if you give over complete control of your life and thinking to a company, it is not good for you or anyone.

Some good may come from this but it doesn't mean the person was right.

Tugg



That is not the issue though. They claim they are cleaning up the site, but in reality they are not doing that. They are letting items slide for money.

The better analogy would be that the Restaurant got a D rating , promised to do better, but decided it was better to false advertise and provide D quality food on an A-E failing scale.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CaptHadley, flyguy89, Georgetown, jetwet1 and 41 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos