
Zuckerberg: this election is not going to be business as usual - tosh
https://m.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10112270823363411
======
bvanderveen
So when can we address the elephant in the room and admit plainly that
Facebook has net negative value for humanity and if Zuckerberg were a moral
agent and not an alien lizard king he would have years ago liquidated the
thing and imputed its net assets to the shareholders?

~~~
alphachloride
For me, Facebook is unquestionably a net positive value. I get to keep tabs on
friends without actively having to reach out. So people don't become strangers
over time. I can discover events around me and expand my social circle. I can
be start a business with a free web presence and attract customers.

The downsides that are mentioned are deteriorating discourse, misinformation,
false expectations and social pressure etc. I like to think I have avoided
these.

That's 1 data point against. I'll have to see more thorough evidence to
concede FB is a net negative.

~~~
doktorhladnjak
Unquestionably? How many of those "friends" that you keep tabs on have you
talked to recently? And I don't mean leaving a comment or reading about their
lives. One of the most dangerous negative effects of Facebook is that it makes
people _feel_ socially connected to someone when they really have no social
interaction or connection at all.

~~~
alphachloride
Yes, unquestionably it is a net positive for me. I have talked to a small
minority of my friends that I keep tabs on. Without facebook, I would have
talked to an even smaller number.

I don't see how the number of chats I have is an exclusive measure of value of
that platform. That is but one metric.

------
mlazos
Wow some of the contents of this post scare me, I can’t believe we are at the
point where Facebook has to remove content that intimidates election
officials. I’m scared both because Facebook has this much power and also
because of the issues they’re addressing. I wish our democracy was a little
more civil. This is also partially facebook’s fault because they definitely
have increased polarization through personalization.

At the same time I think some of these policies are reasonable but I think
they should just ban political ads altogether.

~~~
skee0083
We don't have a democracy. It's a republic. Basically a fake democracy.

~~~
SahAssar
The terms democracy and republic are not mutually exclusive. There are many
different types of both and some overlap.

~~~
banmeagaindan2
Even Sparta had some democracy.

------
cblconfederate
With all this navel-gazing in american social media that lasts for months and
months, i wonder why other media don't jump into the opportunity to steal
their international users. Honestly the talk of US politics is excessive and
disproportionate even for a supeerpower, and it's spilling over so much and
everywhere that it has become repulsive.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
I'm not sure what you're referring to. Most Facebook users don't read
Zuckerberg's posts, and won't hear much about US politics unless their friends
choose to discuss it.

~~~
cblconfederate
I don't mean just this post. Users are being exposed to policies related to US
elections through warnings, limits to how often they can post, limits in
messenger, ban of specific content, popup messages etc etc. It's impossible to
miss

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
I admit I'm not exactly a power user, but I've never noticed US election
content on Facebook even though I actually am in the US.

------
sixothree
His friendliness with this president in particular and willingness to
capitulate to him worries me more than any remedy he could propose at this
point.

------
iszomer
Tim Pool recently did a segment with Drew Hernandez detailing the potential
that this might be a set up. In their scenario, both political parties will
claim victory but the extremely biased mainstream media will "finalize" their
narrative while the other will be instantly silenced.

~~~
stuntkite
I just recently was introduced to Tim Pool. I don’t think I fully understand
his agenda but he for sure has one. This election will certainly be
contentious, but this prediction seems designed to inflame and promise that
it’s impossible for any actor to be trustworthy and all systems will fail.
Which is maybe true, but fear mongering like this is profitable and dangerous.

------
titzer
> and I generally believe the best antidote to bad speech is more speech

...

> We've already strengthened our enforcement against militias, conspiracy
> networks like QAnon, and other groups that could be used to organize
> violence or civil unrest in the period after the elections. We have already
> removed thousands of these groups and removed even more from being included
> in our recommendations and search results. We will continue to ramp up
> enforcement against these groups over the coming weeks.

This seems to be a pattern in corporate speak. State general principle and
then promptly demonstrate zero actual commitment to that principle through
actions that speak louder than words.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
That doesn't seem fair. There's a clear distinction to be made between stating
bad points of view and encouraging political violence.

------
freen
Folks would do well to learn about smedley butler and the business plot.

~~~
np_tedious
I agree that this episode should be better known. Can you clarify the
connection you see here?

------
freen
Certainly not when one candidate commits a crime in the very act of accepting
the nomination.

