This is quite concerning
This a huge step back for transparency with Meta (shocker). Access to this data is important for a variety of reasons, and using the recent EU laws as an excuse is deplorable (again, shocker from Meta).
It’s clear the data companies were left alone for too long to rule the schoolyard. It’s going to take some time to treat them and others what decorum looks like without throwing an absolute hissy fit.
Here’s hoping the EU, which seems to be the only teacher on the playground willing to discipline anyone, will set them straight.
Tear the government down, start from scratch.
As a bonus; we also solve the problem with having police.
I can’t wait to become the United States of Walmart. Thanks for that.
Walmart can’t do shit without the cops.
And do you realize how much they’re subsidized by the state? When has the state ever stopped Walmart from doing anything?
I thought we were starting over. What makes you think there won’t be cops?
It’s cute how people think scrapping the constitution and starting over will somehow make things better.
Imagine thinking the owning class wouldn’t be the ones creating the new constitution…
Something needs to change, but once we open that can of worms were going to see things like:
“All citizens are required to give all personal data to meta whether using the platform or otherwise.”
“Oil will be enshrined as the National Energy Source™”
“Union activity is an act of economic terrorism.”
Why do you think there will still be wal-mart?
And why do you think the constitution binds anyone who matters? You’re treating it like a fucking magic spell.
They are among the top five richest corporations in the world and the leading employer in the world, last I checked. You going to dissolve that power? No? They have money and power, they will make the rules. You have to either find a way to dissolve them (good luck with that!), or you have to have another big power structure to keep them in check. That’s how it works.
This power structure is based on faith and agreement. Its more fragile and fractious than you think.
And what the fuck are you smoking if you think the government is opposed to corps? Can I have some?
How do you prevent it from turning into a “might makes right” system ?
Mutual aid
Is mutual aid more likely without a government?
Read ‘a paradise built in hell’. Short answer: so fucking much more.
Looked it up, it relates to the behavior after a natural disaster. I think that’s quite a specific situation that gives everyone a common goal to work on for a relatively short period. I also think it suddenly interrupts a situation where there was a government, so people are still acting as citizens. Outside of such event, I am not sure people would work together as much. I can think of many examples where the weakening or absence of government leaves room for religious extremist organization (Irak under ISIS) or criminal organizations (Haiti currently) which are pretty much “might is right”.
You looked up a book. Therefore you know its contents.
Okay.
Mutual aid has nothing to do with governments or the state.
So it’s not relevant to this thread?
Or just not being a dick and having community responses to power imbalances.
That’s mutual aid. The whole point is to flatten hierarchies by not being charity.
Point of mutual aid is bringing up and inclusion while getting necessary shit done, and yeah it does some smoothing on top, but other mechanisms can be helpful.
We should teach critical thinking and logic skill from month one. There will be so much propaganda and misinformation from this point on, being able to spot it, most of the time with common sense, would nip most of this crap in the butt.
In before 5 yo
Mommy, “because I say so” is an appeal to authority, I will not abide by such logical fallacy. Please provide me with a systematic review of relevant double blind studies to convince me that I should eat my greens."
I try to use “because I said so” as little as possible. It’s a lot more work, but they know why they’re doing most of what they need to do, and they know why they’re avoiding what they should not do.
Edit: I’ve noticed that making an effort to avoid “because I said so” has built up a habit of thinking about why I’m telling them to do something before I say it out loud. Often times, this changes what I’m about to tell them to do.
You’re a good parent.
That would be the ideal world. There is plentiful research to show that eating vegetables is good for you. If you can’t figure that little out, why are you a parent?
I guess 99% of parents would not be able to look for this research and will rely on “common sense” instead (also a fallacy), it doesn’t make them bad parents. I was not being serious anyways.
Come on, you know those who have the influence over this don’t want it. Remember: Donald Trump loves the uneducated 👍
And still it would not be enough. You need to trust some core institutions and delegate on some people who know more than you, you can’t be an expert on everything. Even smart people can be deeply wrong if they trust the wrong people or if they think their expertise makes them an expert on everything. You also need a little intellectual humility.
This is why the position I take is that when there is any room for doubt, lean into whichever belief would lead to the most compassionate outcome.
There will always be uncertainty, always facts that you can’t know, but the compassionate choice is pretty much never wrong, at worst it might be inefficient, but that’s okay. Anyone who’s trying to convince you that something that harms or dehumanizes anyone is necessary probably has an ulterior motive and is profiting somehow off of the harm and dehumanization.
I think the issue is more that people like propaganda and misinformation as long as they agree with it.
There just seems to be something about seeing your own opinions coming out of a man in a tie or printed in a large serif font that gives people the same feeling as a cat having its neck scratched.
And of course, once you hear one of your opinions come out of them, it’s easier to agree with the other ones as well.
im ok with propaganda as long as its clear that it’s propaganda.
You know, much like how criminals understand that committing crime is bad, and yet they continue to commit crime. Seems like a rather apt solution IMO.
You do know that this comment could be posted word for word on a right wing post and everybody would agree with it just as well? The term “critical thinking” alone is so worthless, not to mention “common sense”. Some people justify ancient aliens with that phrasing. I don’t mean to criticize you, I just have this thought so often when scrolling through this polarized world… And I really don’t know what to do about it. Everything feels so lost.
The term “critical thinking” alone is so worthless
No, it’s not. There’s a very specific definition - to think critically, i.e. to not accept any idea without first investigating it and analysing its merit. That’s the absolute basis of all philosophy and science.
Critical thinking and common sense are not even close to being the same. Perhaps finding the definition of critical thinking would be a prudent thing before dismissing it as a buzz word.
Talking on the internet is such a weird thing. Where did I say that those two things are the same? Did you not hear my cry for help in the statement above? Instead of going for the attack?
I have this thought a lot too when people discuss things like teaching “media literacy”. I dunno. I’ve seen enough people completely abuse logical fallacies that I really wonder whether or not we’re all logically consistent conscious beings, or if we’re all just kind of flying by the emotionally charged pants seats, and making shit up later to retroactively justify it. People cry strawman, red herring, goalpost moving, when realistically people are just changing the subject to something that they think they know more on, because things aren’t formalized into a rigorous debate where everything is organized and structured and we all actually know what the definitions of things are supposed to be. It’s hard enough to get people to even agree on a definition, because people are so insulated to their little bubbles. Getting past that semantic difference and into the actual debate seems more to me like a structural problem, where people are arguing with the wrong people, than like, a problem you could solve with just raw education. Seems like a structural problem related to the death of the monoculture, and the rapid propagation of regional cultures, even regional cultures online.
At least one person seems to get my dilemma. Thank you. I’m really looking for help on this one. Just to find a way to solve this riddle for better understanding.
We should outlaw political advertisement on social media? Kind of like how cigarette advertisement was eliminated from movie theater ads.
The fines should be stacked as factors - unmitigated offenses will build up and incur exponentially growing fines. Very large incentive to shut that shit down.
Politics should be advertised by performance review, not marketing.
No politics was a rule on many forums. One of the things social media did away with.
Or someone should do something that will actually have literally any impact.
Sounds like Zuck is hoping for a one-party Fascist autocracy in the US.
It would benefit a social cause that is near and dear to his heart: making Mark Zuckerberg extremely wealthy
I think he thinks he is building The Matrix, and will get godmode.
The Architect lacks morals, but I will take an intelligent and not-specifically-malicious (nor greedy) being like that over Zuckerberg. Because of who he was and his aims, the Architect could be reasoned with.
“We will give you tax breaks, you’ll help us build out theocratic fascism!”
(If anyone asks: Facebook already got caught spying on abortion providers in red states, expect even worse once Project 2025 is enacted.)
yet another year goes by where tech companies seem to be influencing the state.
What a fascinating time to live in.
Fascist-inating indeed.
Fascist-enabling eh?
Of course they are. There’s money involved.
weird how money seems to play a role in something thats supposed to be controlled by the people
Since corporations are people now, it is.
i thought the whole point of corporations was that they werent people
Well the people want more money. They can’t have enough of it
To be fair, corporations have always influenced the government. For better, or for worse.
still trying to figure out why. Seems like the counter intuitive thing to happen. But what do i fucking, i’m just a citizen of the US, the US government is responsible to me, it’s not like i have a say in this or anything.
Don’t want to repeat myself, so I’ll just point you to this comment from me.
We’re heading towards cyberpunk
i’m interested to see what all the offshoots of cyberpunk are.
We’ve already got solarpunk.
My hope is that the FBI asked them to shut this down on NSA’s behalf, so threat actors feel more comfortable as they aren’t being watched, studied, and analyzed by every OSINT collective in existence.
My fear is that they know what happened the previous 2 elections and this year will be the worst yet, and they don’t want their users knowing how badly they got duped and feeling bad/dumb enough to leave the platform. Also advertising $$.
Dark money from other countries is a good boogeyman, but it’s basically irrelevant. Biden and Trump are going to spend between 2 and 3 billion on the election collectively. The hundreds of thousands or millions a foreign government may spend is a rounding error.
It has nothing to do with money spent. One is active hatefully divisive propaganda infesting the minds of the country on a total scale. We have multiple US Senators and Congresspeople saying the eclipse and earthquakes are a sign from God ffs. Have you been on reddit in the last few months? If not, I urge you to take a peek. Even in small hobbyist subreddits now every other post is pure hate or FUD, and every other comment is someone taunting people to fight them with divisive and very obvious left/right comments, much worse than the typical “lol seems like a typical lib/cuckservative.” It comes in waves, which I assume is reddit finding and banning them, making them rotate accounts and continue the karma generating process so they can post and comment in karma limit subs (the idiotic questions.)
It has nothing to do with money spent. One is active hatefully divisive propaganda infesting the minds of the country on a total scale.
I call this the cooties theory of ideas. If it were true, then why are billions of dollars spend on propaganda every year? Do they just like wasting money? Were Edward Bernays and Walter Lippmann just cranks? Does Russian meme technology have a secret sauce?
Its the devil you know vs. the devil you don’t. One is trying, at least in some part, to quell fears and stabilize the nation and economy. The other is actively creating division and fear at every turn. Or course project mockingbird, any Hollywood movies or shows featuring the military, etc.
Does Russian meme technology have a secret sauce?
I guess you could call it secret sauce. A department of the military for offensive informational warfare, with lots of training, tooling, time and resources. I’m sure we do the same thing but there’s a reason our adversaries have heavily censored internet access and they can’t freely go onto YouTube or Google and search for topics of interest, or use reddit or Facebook openly without a VPN. They know what their capabilities can do to cripple a nation from the inside and make everyone hate each other and the government. There’s no way they’d let us do the same to them, but there is going to be a major revolt when the US decides to do it here.
Russia/etc. can always make up by lower-cost bot-activity.
I kind of can’t stand Biden, in spite of the many surprisingly good things he’s done in the last few years.
But god damn if this isn’t the kind of action from Meta that can only help Trump.
I am sorry to feel that this decision from Meta has much more to do with certain ongoing wars and preferred candidates than any “EU legislation.”
Meta wants Trump. Meta wants fascism.
Meta knows these Trump Republicans can be easily duped.
in spite of the many surprisingly good things he’s done in the last few years
…that’s about when I stopped reading.
He isn’t great, but he has done some pretty good thing. (Lots of not good things too, obviously.) He’s taken steps with student loan forgiveness, he’s empowered the FTC and DOJ to enforce anti-trust regulations that haven’t been used in far too long, and he’s done a good number of other things too, but nothing else large is coming to mind at the moment.
They suck at communicating, but they have actually done some good. Biden is far from my choice of president, but it does seem like the progressive faction has at least moved him in the right direction. It’s far from ideal, but he isn’t that bad.
Lol you think progressives moved him
He is STILL desperately trying to win conservatives. DNC fucking DESPISES us.
Yeah, conservative for sure want to forgive student loan debt…
Pathetic
Care to use your words and explain? It sounds like you just want to complain and only make things worse. What did I say that wasn’t true?
Meta
integrity
lmao
I work in integrity at Meta. It’s mostly about staying legally compliant with the countries we make $ in. You have to keep in mind we have like 4 billion users, and own 5 out of the top 10 most used apps (hello antitrust?), so it’s a pretty big deal here.
You actually work at Meta no cap?
no cap fr fr 🥦
Tell us more stories. I have former relationships with your trust and safety folks among others. Never heard from integrity
Telegram, WhatsApp, and iMessage are all e2e encrypted but backups aren’t. That’s how your messages get read.
Messenger is actually the most secure platform out of the 4 because there’s no unencrypted cloud backups. However, there’s discussion on rolling back the encryption on Messenger because it’s too good and causing UX pains.
its* tool for election integrity.
I like it how people use meta and then also hate and complain about it. Let’s gooooo!
he knows where his bread is buttered
I wonder if Zuckerberg knows that his bunker won’t save him?
A practical demonstration may be necessary
Concerning is that someone thinks that something from meta can be used as a tool for election integrity
Weird this is again making the rounds after the news is 2 years old.
Weird this is again making the rounds after the news is 2 years old.
Looks like they delayed the shutdown, but then announced last month that they’re going to do it finally.
From the article that you linked…
Today’s report says Meta began an official process to shut down the tool in February but paused it due to the EU’s Digital Services Act push.
What is CrowdTangle
Well it says in the title, so….
We are at the point where people don’t even read the entire headline.
We’re at the point of what?
nobody reads the headline because the headline is often just wrong, or flat out lying to you.
Nobody reads the contents of the article because 90% of the time it’s just blabbering on about how social media was in 2009, or how their grand mother used to make cookies, or how printing is so annoying because the ink ALWAYS seems to be running out.
Rather than actually fucking talking about the topic on hand. Not to mention all the ads and placements that are put over this shit, the ad block blocker pop ups, the paid services like the NYT forcing you into not reading it at all “because you’ve used your reading quota for the month” The sheer amount of fucking time it takes to load what is basically just HTML text on a background, but it isn’t because it uses JS because fuck you i guess.
The internet is incredibly hostile these days. It’s impossible to do something on it without a door to door salesman pestering you every fucking step of the way.
the title doesn’t explain shit. Sure it’s a “tool for election integrity observer” but that’s barely an explanation. Incredibly broad. Can still be a lot of things. Sounds as if Facebook is guarding the entire election
CrowdTangle is Meta’s tool for election integrity, they’re shutting it down without a replacement.
I read the title but that barely says anything. It’s extremely broad
Don’t encourage the behaviour. As the saying goes… Give a man a fish and you’ve fed him for a day… Teach a man to fish and you’ve fed him for life.
I literally rearranged the headline wording
👍 Precisely.
Or to quote Terry Pratchett:
Give a man a fire and he’ll be warm for a day; set a man on fire and he’ll be warm for the rest of his life.
Fool me once, shame on me, but teach a man to fool me and I’ll be fooled for the rest of my life.
