Zuckerberg's Nightmare
October 26, 2021 5:30 PM Subscribe
The Facebook Papers: In the wake of last week's Congressional testimony, "[j]ournalists from a variety of newsrooms, large and small, worked together to gain access to thousands of pages of internal company documents obtained by Frances Haugen [@FrancesHaugen], the former Facebook product manager-turned-whistleblower."
Reporting and analysis on various aspects of the Facebook Papers have been provided by a variety of news outlets, including:
Reporting and analysis on various aspects of the Facebook Papers have been provided by a variety of news outlets, including:
- The Wall Street Journal (previously on Metafilter): "Facebook Inc. knows, in acute detail, that its platforms are riddled with flaws that cause harm, often in ways only the company fully understands. That is the central finding of a Wall Street Journal series, based on a review of internal Facebook documents, including research reports, online employee discussions and drafts of presentations to senior management."
- The Washington Post: "A trove of internal Facebook documents reveals that the social media giant has privately and meticulously tracked real-world harms exacerbated by its platforms, ignored warnings from its employees about the risks of their design decisions and exposed vulnerable communities around the world to a cocktail of dangerous content."
- New York Times: "Key revelations included how Facebook executives handled politicized lies, including Donald J. Trump’s claims of election fraud. Often, the company chose to let misinformation spread widely, to keep more people logging on. The series also noted the lengths that Facebook went to in its desperation to hang on to its audience as young people drifted away from its platforms."
- Rolling Stone: "“The Facebook Files,” as the stories were dubbed, revealed the extent to which the company was aware of the damage its platforms were doing to everything from the push to get Americans vaccinated to the self-esteem of teenage girls. Misinformation was spreading. Hate speech was rampant. People were even using Facebook to sell human organs."
- NPR: "Haugen alleges that the trove of statements and data prove that Facebook's leaders have repeatedly and knowingly put the company's image and profitability ahead of the public good — even at the risk of violence and other harm."
- CNN: "One of the documents details a June 2019 study called "Carol's Journey to QAnon," designed to see what pages and groups Facebook's algorithms would promote to an account designed to look like it was run by a 41-year-old conservative mom named Carol Smith. After "Carol" followed verified pages for conservative figures such as Fox News and Donald Trump, it took just two days for Facebook's algorithm to recommend she follow a QAnon page."
- Time: "The documents, confirmed by multiple news outlets, reveal that problems with hate speech and disinformation are dramatically worse in the developing world, where content moderation is often weaker. In India, Facebook reportedly did not have enough resources or expertise in the country’s 22 officially recognized languages, leaving the company unable to grapple with a rise in anti-Muslim posts and fake accounts tied to the country’s ruling party and opposition figures."
- The Atlantic: "Facebook employees have long understood that their company undermines democratic norms and restraints in America and across the globe. Facebook’s hypocrisies, and its hunger for power and market domination, are not secret. Nor is the company’s conflation of free speech and algorithmic amplification. But the events of January 6 proved for many people—including many in Facebook’s workforce—to be a breaking point."
Also just came across Katie Harbath's ongoing, updated spreadsheet of news stories about the Facebook Papers. It's organized by date of publication.
posted by spamandkimchi at 6:20 PM on October 26, 2021 [7 favorites]
posted by spamandkimchi at 6:20 PM on October 26, 2021 [7 favorites]
From Slate: The Facebook Crisis in India Might Be the Worst Facebook Crisis of All
Yet what the Facebook Papers confirm is not just that the network failed to curb Hindu nationalist hate speech and inadequately directed resources to monitor a nation with 340 million users; it also actively granted impunity to the worst offenders.posted by clawsoon at 6:21 PM on October 26, 2021 [20 favorites]
And according to Haugen, this was one of her foremost concerns when she began to reach out to reporters with the internal information she held.
It's such a tragedy, because I've heard that Facebook has been making misinformation worse in India for a long time, and only now are Americans beginning to care. Is it any surprise that Facebook offered to "connect India to the internet" by giving them free access to Facebook... but just Facebook.
I mean, the guys early mantra was "companies over countries" for fucks sake, he was "leaning in" to corporate oligopoly control and the end of the State. Cheryl Sandberg also pulled some racist bullshit against George Soros because seriously who gives a fuck about consequences, right? What else do we need to know about their intentions at this point?
posted by deadaluspark at 6:30 PM on October 26, 2021 [36 favorites]
I mean, the guys early mantra was "companies over countries" for fucks sake, he was "leaning in" to corporate oligopoly control and the end of the State. Cheryl Sandberg also pulled some racist bullshit against George Soros because seriously who gives a fuck about consequences, right? What else do we need to know about their intentions at this point?
Zuckerberg: They "trust me." Dumb fucks.Like Maya Angelou said, when someone tells you who they are, believe them the first time.
posted by deadaluspark at 6:30 PM on October 26, 2021 [36 favorites]
Gotta love the chutzpah of Zuck's response: essentially, "It's the media's fault for turning this towering mountain of documented facts into a negative narrative about FB." Zuckerberg, Sandberg, Clegg--so many sociopaths among this company's bigwigs.
posted by Lyme Drop at 6:38 PM on October 26, 2021 [27 favorites]
posted by Lyme Drop at 6:38 PM on October 26, 2021 [27 favorites]
Haugen and Zhang are brave women to take on and expose Facebook in such a public fashion, especially given the company's financial and political ties and obligations to authoritarian regimes, as much as its financial predilections to sell eyeballs to fascists. This might prove to be the best chance we'll have in a long while to rein in information warfare profiteers of this sort: the future does not look hopeful for democracy and human rights, if we choose to continue to let our governments do nothing.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 6:40 PM on October 26, 2021 [37 favorites]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 6:40 PM on October 26, 2021 [37 favorites]
At this point is there any doubt that use of Facebook by anyone in a wealthy nation is an unconscionable act?
The company and its assets are without a doubt bad for democracy, the world, and the self.
Please #deletefacebook
posted by dobbs at 6:42 PM on October 26, 2021 [25 favorites]
The company and its assets are without a doubt bad for democracy, the world, and the self.
Please #deletefacebook
posted by dobbs at 6:42 PM on October 26, 2021 [25 favorites]
Apple threatened to ban Facebook over concerns it facilitated buying, trading maids
Two years ago, Apple threatened to pull Facebook and Instagram from its app store over concerns that the platforms were being used to trade and sell maids in the Mideast.
After publicly promising to crack down, Facebook acknowledged in internal documents that it was “under-enforcing on confirmed abusive activity” that saw Filipina maids complaining on the social media network of being abused. Apple relented, and Facebook and Instagram remained in the app store.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 6:44 PM on October 26, 2021 [11 favorites]
Two years ago, Apple threatened to pull Facebook and Instagram from its app store over concerns that the platforms were being used to trade and sell maids in the Mideast.
After publicly promising to crack down, Facebook acknowledged in internal documents that it was “under-enforcing on confirmed abusive activity” that saw Filipina maids complaining on the social media network of being abused. Apple relented, and Facebook and Instagram remained in the app store.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 6:44 PM on October 26, 2021 [11 favorites]
We need to hold social media platforms responsible for the content the promote. If they want to be a common carrier like exemptions for user generated content then they can’t be deciding which content to promote and recommend based on what you watch, like or follow. That change to section 230 should have a big impact on this problem.
posted by interogative mood at 7:08 PM on October 26, 2021 [25 favorites]
posted by interogative mood at 7:08 PM on October 26, 2021 [25 favorites]
Charlie Warzael had some thoughts that resonated with me.
I don’t know what comes next but I’m concerned. I’m concerned that Facebook is too big. I’m concerned that people might tuning out due to over-saturation. I’m concerned that the ‘fixes’ that could come from this momentum are going to be extremely treacherous, too. I’m also concerned that we’re late (not too late…just late). It strikes me as noteworthy that we’ve caught up to what Facebook hath wrought (2012-2020) and Mark Zuckerberg and executive leadership seem to regard that version of Facebook as almost an outdated node of the company.posted by PhineasGage at 7:20 PM on October 26, 2021 [7 favorites]
That change to section 230 should have a big impact on this problem.
In general, I agree with you—but getting that described correctly to address the ills of the Facebook and YouTube algorithms without causing new major problems is something that I don’t fully trust the US Congress to do correctly. You define it wrong and the related posts section at the bottom of this thread could be a major issue for the existence of this very site.
And even if they define it right, there’s still the courts to worry about. Antitrust law being used against unions, the various computer crimes acts being misused: there’s a multitude of ways redefining 230 could go very, very wrong.
Honestly, breaking up Facebook—forcing it to divest Instagram and WhatsApp—gets you a ton of the benefits without the risk of the US government trying to regulate the algorithms themselves. And Facebook knows that, which is why they are stitching those apps together now after years of keeping them in their own gardens.
posted by thecaddy at 8:00 PM on October 26, 2021 [15 favorites]
In general, I agree with you—but getting that described correctly to address the ills of the Facebook and YouTube algorithms without causing new major problems is something that I don’t fully trust the US Congress to do correctly. You define it wrong and the related posts section at the bottom of this thread could be a major issue for the existence of this very site.
And even if they define it right, there’s still the courts to worry about. Antitrust law being used against unions, the various computer crimes acts being misused: there’s a multitude of ways redefining 230 could go very, very wrong.
Honestly, breaking up Facebook—forcing it to divest Instagram and WhatsApp—gets you a ton of the benefits without the risk of the US government trying to regulate the algorithms themselves. And Facebook knows that, which is why they are stitching those apps together now after years of keeping them in their own gardens.
posted by thecaddy at 8:00 PM on October 26, 2021 [15 favorites]
I doubt Zuckerberg is even breaking a sweat. Who, exactly, is going to take action against Facebook?
posted by lefty lucky cat at 8:39 PM on October 26, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by lefty lucky cat at 8:39 PM on October 26, 2021 [8 favorites]
You define it wrong and the related posts section at the bottom of this thread could be a major issue for the existence of this very site.
So get rid of it? I'm sure someone uses those links occasionally, but it's not like those recommendations are central to the mefi business model. Meanwhile, it kneecaps (the most problematic aspects of) Facebook and every future Facebook-alike.
posted by Dysk at 8:40 PM on October 26, 2021
So get rid of it? I'm sure someone uses those links occasionally, but it's not like those recommendations are central to the mefi business model. Meanwhile, it kneecaps (the most problematic aspects of) Facebook and every future Facebook-alike.
posted by Dysk at 8:40 PM on October 26, 2021
Who, exactly, is going to take action against Facebook?
Elizabeth Warren! Whom Zuck identified to his employees as an existential threat, one they would "go to the mat" to defeat, right around the same time he reportedly had dinner with that other guy. Oh, to be a fly on the wall.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 8:49 PM on October 26, 2021 [25 favorites]
Elizabeth Warren! Whom Zuck identified to his employees as an existential threat, one they would "go to the mat" to defeat, right around the same time he reportedly had dinner with that other guy. Oh, to be a fly on the wall.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 8:49 PM on October 26, 2021 [25 favorites]
Who, exactly, is going to take action against Facebook?
BGP peers?
I’m only half kidding. The established power structures may be structurally unable to take effective action without also creating a whole lot of collateral damage that most of the affluent West can neither imagine, let alone be able to respond to manageably. Love me some Liz Warren but will believe it when I see it. Zuck & Co have everything to lose by FB going away (or changing to the extent needed, which may be the same thing effectively for them). Is Liz or anyone else in D.C. going to take off the gloves and go to the mat with that crew of sociopaths?
The action may indeed need to come from the outside, is what something in my gut is telling me.
We may yet count ourselves fortunate for BGP’s shortcomings….
posted by armoir from antproof case at 9:05 PM on October 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
BGP peers?
I’m only half kidding. The established power structures may be structurally unable to take effective action without also creating a whole lot of collateral damage that most of the affluent West can neither imagine, let alone be able to respond to manageably. Love me some Liz Warren but will believe it when I see it. Zuck & Co have everything to lose by FB going away (or changing to the extent needed, which may be the same thing effectively for them). Is Liz or anyone else in D.C. going to take off the gloves and go to the mat with that crew of sociopaths?
The action may indeed need to come from the outside, is what something in my gut is telling me.
We may yet count ourselves fortunate for BGP’s shortcomings….
posted by armoir from antproof case at 9:05 PM on October 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
Face It, Facebook Won’t Change Unless Advertisers Demand It.
posted by PhineasGage at 9:22 PM on October 26, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 9:22 PM on October 26, 2021 [2 favorites]
Advertisers won't demand it because why would they choose to lose money.
posted by deadaluspark at 10:02 PM on October 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by deadaluspark at 10:02 PM on October 26, 2021 [1 favorite]
"In India, Facebook reportedly did not have enough resources or expertise in the country’s 22 officially recognized languages, leaving the company unable to grapple with a rise in anti-Muslim posts and fake accounts tied to the country’s ruling party and opposition figures."
huh.
posted by Time To Sharpen Our Knives at 10:48 PM on October 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
huh.
posted by Time To Sharpen Our Knives at 10:48 PM on October 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
Before learning about the spreadsheet, i was going through the reporting via Tech Policy Press, who's updating this page with a roundup of articles as well, which i appreciated for the brief description of each piece.
posted by cendawanita at 11:03 PM on October 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 11:03 PM on October 26, 2021 [3 favorites]
It's funny because there's also so much reporting about how Facebook desperately wants to woo younger generations. Because if there's anything teens love it's milquetoasty 30-50 year olds appeasing people in power to sell ads...
posted by smelendez at 12:44 AM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by smelendez at 12:44 AM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
Teens don't care about ads, they just want to be somewhere away from their parents and grandparents.
posted by subdee at 3:40 AM on October 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by subdee at 3:40 AM on October 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
A reminder: "It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS." --Les Moonves on the Trump campaign, February 2016.
There's plenty of blame to go around among the people who run both broadcast and social media. I won't shed a tear for Zuckerberg when he goes down, but I can't help but think he'll end up being a designated scapegoat so we can "put this all behind us".
posted by gimonca at 5:12 AM on October 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
There's plenty of blame to go around among the people who run both broadcast and social media. I won't shed a tear for Zuckerberg when he goes down, but I can't help but think he'll end up being a designated scapegoat so we can "put this all behind us".
posted by gimonca at 5:12 AM on October 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
Facebook is a cancer, it is actively making society worse across the entire damn planet. At this point, is it time to take off and nuke the site from orbit? It’s the only way to be sure.
More explicitly: breaking the company up is not enough. Removing the leadership is not enough. Fining them heavily is not enough. Jail time would be a start… but not enough.
posted by caution live frogs at 5:57 AM on October 27, 2021 [14 favorites]
More explicitly: breaking the company up is not enough. Removing the leadership is not enough. Fining them heavily is not enough. Jail time would be a start… but not enough.
posted by caution live frogs at 5:57 AM on October 27, 2021 [14 favorites]
I doubt Zuckerberg is even breaking a sweat.
I disagree. Facebook wouldn't be lying to Congress about its practices if it didn't fear Congress' ability to regulate them, and it wouldn't be doing so much PR damage control if it didn't care about public perception of the company.
posted by Gelatin at 7:15 AM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
I disagree. Facebook wouldn't be lying to Congress about its practices if it didn't fear Congress' ability to regulate them, and it wouldn't be doing so much PR damage control if it didn't care about public perception of the company.
posted by Gelatin at 7:15 AM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
Has anyone calculated how many deaths can be attributed, in an actuarial sense, to Facebook's promotion of propaganda and misinformation? How many murders? If I had the expertise that's the essay I would be writing.
posted by schadenfrau at 7:35 AM on October 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by schadenfrau at 7:35 AM on October 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
Face It, Facebook Won’t Change Unless Advertisers Demand It.
Huh.
You know, lately I've been making a point of "blocking" all ads when I see them on Facebook. But I think instead, I'm going to reach out to each of the advertisers instead, and tell them that I am BOYCOTTING them EXPRESSLY BECAUSE they are advertising on Facebook. (I mean, there was no chance I had of ever buying a high-end mechanical pencil or a shiatsu massage chair anyway, but THEY don't need to know that.)
Who's with me?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:43 AM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
Huh.
You know, lately I've been making a point of "blocking" all ads when I see them on Facebook. But I think instead, I'm going to reach out to each of the advertisers instead, and tell them that I am BOYCOTTING them EXPRESSLY BECAUSE they are advertising on Facebook. (I mean, there was no chance I had of ever buying a high-end mechanical pencil or a shiatsu massage chair anyway, but THEY don't need to know that.)
Who's with me?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:43 AM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
"Who uses FACEBOOK???""
- my 16 YO neighbor yesterday, said with such a look of horrific disgust it made me choke on my drink
posted by I_Love_Bananas at 8:32 AM on October 27, 2021 [21 favorites]
- my 16 YO neighbor yesterday, said with such a look of horrific disgust it made me choke on my drink
posted by I_Love_Bananas at 8:32 AM on October 27, 2021 [21 favorites]
My 16 YO neighbor yesterday, said with such a look of horrific disgust it made me choke on my drink
A friend of mine works at a high end development company and Facebook is one of his clients. He tells me 90% of the people he interviews for new positions won't work on Facebook projects and that they're finding it very difficult to find any talented programmers who don't want this stipulation in their contract. This was last year before all this stuff leaked.
posted by dobbs at 8:36 AM on October 27, 2021 [15 favorites]
A friend of mine works at a high end development company and Facebook is one of his clients. He tells me 90% of the people he interviews for new positions won't work on Facebook projects and that they're finding it very difficult to find any talented programmers who don't want this stipulation in their contract. This was last year before all this stuff leaked.
posted by dobbs at 8:36 AM on October 27, 2021 [15 favorites]
But does your 16 YO neighbor use Instagram or other Facebook properties? :/
posted by eviemath at 8:42 AM on October 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by eviemath at 8:42 AM on October 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
Facebook Employees Ripped Sheryl Sandberg Over Exec Hosting a Party for Brett Kavanaugh: In an internal message, Sandberg said it was totally fine for Joel Kaplan to throw the Supreme Court Justice a party and attend his swearing-in.
posted by Lyme Drop at 8:56 AM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by Lyme Drop at 8:56 AM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
I disagree. Facebook wouldn't be lying to Congress about its practices if it didn't fear Congress' ability to regulate them, and it wouldn't be doing so much PR damage control if it didn't care about public perception of the company.
Congress is completely paralyzed by fifty Republican and two Democratic Senators, and in a year or so there will be a Republican majority in both the House and Senate so I will say it again: Zuckerberg isn't breaking a sweat. He considers Congress to be a complete joke and on that point I agree with him. Lying to Congress and doing PR damage control are lines on a spreadsheet to Facebook. Just another Tuesday.
posted by lefty lucky cat at 9:01 AM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
Congress is completely paralyzed by fifty Republican and two Democratic Senators, and in a year or so there will be a Republican majority in both the House and Senate so I will say it again: Zuckerberg isn't breaking a sweat. He considers Congress to be a complete joke and on that point I agree with him. Lying to Congress and doing PR damage control are lines on a spreadsheet to Facebook. Just another Tuesday.
posted by lefty lucky cat at 9:01 AM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
Kids are off Facebook and Instagram. My kids had Instagram but found their friends don't use it. They are on TikToc and WhatsApp.
Apple has hurt Facebook by making privacy an opt out of proposition, thus, Zuckerberg's race to META. Just Apple saying "Do you want to give up your privacy here?" on apps has really changed the tech landscape. Sounds like lots of digital advertising businesses will be on sale soon as their data access slowly dries up.
What hurts Facebook? In concert: SEC investigations, House Investigations, Regulations. They have a bazillion dollars so they are going to pay, but will they change? No. They need to be broken up for many reasons. Their business model is anchored in amorality and user neglect. Kara Swisher has done some great podcasts on this subject.
Ms Haugen is amazing. The way that she can craft an answer and relate why it matters to the government officials she is testifying before...well...that's a masterclass. I find few people who are so intelligent and so able to synthesize information to relevance to the listener. I wish there were a million of her in the tech industry.
Appreciate the post.
posted by zerobyproxy at 9:05 AM on October 27, 2021 [11 favorites]
Apple has hurt Facebook by making privacy an opt out of proposition, thus, Zuckerberg's race to META. Just Apple saying "Do you want to give up your privacy here?" on apps has really changed the tech landscape. Sounds like lots of digital advertising businesses will be on sale soon as their data access slowly dries up.
What hurts Facebook? In concert: SEC investigations, House Investigations, Regulations. They have a bazillion dollars so they are going to pay, but will they change? No. They need to be broken up for many reasons. Their business model is anchored in amorality and user neglect. Kara Swisher has done some great podcasts on this subject.
Ms Haugen is amazing. The way that she can craft an answer and relate why it matters to the government officials she is testifying before...well...that's a masterclass. I find few people who are so intelligent and so able to synthesize information to relevance to the listener. I wish there were a million of her in the tech industry.
Appreciate the post.
posted by zerobyproxy at 9:05 AM on October 27, 2021 [11 favorites]
Fun fact: According to Frances Haugen, Facebook is understaffed because a lot of skilled people just don't want to be near that trashfire.
posted by suetanvil at 9:07 AM on October 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
posted by suetanvil at 9:07 AM on October 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
#deletefacebook
I've been ranting about Facebook for over a decade now. Longer, really, because it goes back to when it was still TheFacebook and it was restricted to edu domain emails.
I remember the first time I saw it and it was basically HotOrNot mixed with all of the subtlety of a volunteer CIA database of dossiers on people.
The first time I saw it on a coworkers computer I knew I wanted nothing to do with that all you can eat shit soup and salad buffet and I knew with increasing existential dread that it was going to be very, very bad news.
Watching Facebook grow from a weird little niche site for rich and pretty people going to Ivy league colleges to the all consuming walled garden it is today has been seriously depressing and alarming and the entire time I've been begging people to not use it and not to join in, that no, it wasn't the same as MySpace or Friendster.
No, boycotting ads and still using Facebook isn't going to solve this. No, cutting back your use and curating your feeds isn't going to solve this.
You and your data and engagement are the primary product. The ads they serve and the fake news they spread are just side hustles for Facebook. You are the product. Your attention and engagement is the product. They've been harvesting that data and selling it to anyone who has the cash to buy it. Governments, corporations, advertising firms, even clandestine surveillance data purveyors and dealers from extrajudicial organizations can all buy and use that data.
The only way to defeat Facebook is to DELETE FACEBOOK and stop using it.
Even the advertisers that people often propose to boycott are addicted to Facebook. Boycotts won't stop them from using Facebook because that data is too easy, good and cheap to turn down.
It's been absolutely alarming over the last 15 years or so watching everyone from individuals and families to small businesses and even civil rights activists increasingly relying on Facebook for communication and organization. For fuck's sake, even anarchist protest action groups and privacy advocates are using Facebook.
Want to defeat Facebook? Stop thinking in terms of reform, legislation or monopoly busting. Stop thinking in terms of privacy legislation and milquetoast laws to try to control this beast and making a deal with a metaphorical demon that it's going to be ok and you're making a difference by blocking ads or dialing back your use of Facebook.
You have to make an individual choice to take a stand. You have to be ready to make a huge sacrifice about the convenience of using it and DELETE FACEBOOK.
And even then, I don't know how much that's going to help, but there theoretically has to be some tipping point and critical mass where if enough people stop using Facebook entirely that it will - again, theoretically - cause either a mass exodus or enough loss of profits for Facebook that they become ineffective and unprofitable.
As good as I am at ranting about privacy concerns I don't even have the words and language to describe exactly how much of an existential threat Facebook is to democracy, the rule of law and on through to civil rights and privacy issues.
I don't think even George Orwell has the words or bleak imagination for this task. It's that dire and that much of a threat. George Orwell would lose his damn mind if he saw this shit. He'd probably say something like "Oh, pocket telescreens? Really? Oh, this is so much worse than I imagined it could ever be. Please pass the gin."
Stop thinking about Facebook as a friendly, useful thing and start thinking about it in existential threat terms like you're inviting a fascist into your home and offering them your best food, chairs and seat at the table. I don't know, maybe imagine you're offering hospitality to the classical Christian devil or demons or something. Imagine you're sharing your innermost life and intimacy with a seductive, charismatic serial killer or mass murderer or a narcissistic sociopathic abuser.
Because that's the real Facebook.
Facebook is not your friend. Facebook wants to control you, abuse you and turn your vulnerabilities and insecurities against you and weaponize them. Facebook doesn't care about you. Facebook will never care about you and no amount of legislation will change that. Facebook wants you to be miserable and to be in a state of endless ideological warfare and squabbling over disinformation and correcting untruths because it increases engagement.
For over a decade now I've been begging anyone who would listen to disengage and delete Facebook.
Please, I'm begging you. Please delete Facebook. Nuke it from orbit and don't look back. This is really the only way to defeat Facebook.
posted by loquacious at 9:51 AM on October 27, 2021 [23 favorites]
I've been ranting about Facebook for over a decade now. Longer, really, because it goes back to when it was still TheFacebook and it was restricted to edu domain emails.
I remember the first time I saw it and it was basically HotOrNot mixed with all of the subtlety of a volunteer CIA database of dossiers on people.
The first time I saw it on a coworkers computer I knew I wanted nothing to do with that all you can eat shit soup and salad buffet and I knew with increasing existential dread that it was going to be very, very bad news.
Watching Facebook grow from a weird little niche site for rich and pretty people going to Ivy league colleges to the all consuming walled garden it is today has been seriously depressing and alarming and the entire time I've been begging people to not use it and not to join in, that no, it wasn't the same as MySpace or Friendster.
No, boycotting ads and still using Facebook isn't going to solve this. No, cutting back your use and curating your feeds isn't going to solve this.
You and your data and engagement are the primary product. The ads they serve and the fake news they spread are just side hustles for Facebook. You are the product. Your attention and engagement is the product. They've been harvesting that data and selling it to anyone who has the cash to buy it. Governments, corporations, advertising firms, even clandestine surveillance data purveyors and dealers from extrajudicial organizations can all buy and use that data.
The only way to defeat Facebook is to DELETE FACEBOOK and stop using it.
Even the advertisers that people often propose to boycott are addicted to Facebook. Boycotts won't stop them from using Facebook because that data is too easy, good and cheap to turn down.
It's been absolutely alarming over the last 15 years or so watching everyone from individuals and families to small businesses and even civil rights activists increasingly relying on Facebook for communication and organization. For fuck's sake, even anarchist protest action groups and privacy advocates are using Facebook.
Want to defeat Facebook? Stop thinking in terms of reform, legislation or monopoly busting. Stop thinking in terms of privacy legislation and milquetoast laws to try to control this beast and making a deal with a metaphorical demon that it's going to be ok and you're making a difference by blocking ads or dialing back your use of Facebook.
You have to make an individual choice to take a stand. You have to be ready to make a huge sacrifice about the convenience of using it and DELETE FACEBOOK.
And even then, I don't know how much that's going to help, but there theoretically has to be some tipping point and critical mass where if enough people stop using Facebook entirely that it will - again, theoretically - cause either a mass exodus or enough loss of profits for Facebook that they become ineffective and unprofitable.
As good as I am at ranting about privacy concerns I don't even have the words and language to describe exactly how much of an existential threat Facebook is to democracy, the rule of law and on through to civil rights and privacy issues.
I don't think even George Orwell has the words or bleak imagination for this task. It's that dire and that much of a threat. George Orwell would lose his damn mind if he saw this shit. He'd probably say something like "Oh, pocket telescreens? Really? Oh, this is so much worse than I imagined it could ever be. Please pass the gin."
Stop thinking about Facebook as a friendly, useful thing and start thinking about it in existential threat terms like you're inviting a fascist into your home and offering them your best food, chairs and seat at the table. I don't know, maybe imagine you're offering hospitality to the classical Christian devil or demons or something. Imagine you're sharing your innermost life and intimacy with a seductive, charismatic serial killer or mass murderer or a narcissistic sociopathic abuser.
Because that's the real Facebook.
Facebook is not your friend. Facebook wants to control you, abuse you and turn your vulnerabilities and insecurities against you and weaponize them. Facebook doesn't care about you. Facebook will never care about you and no amount of legislation will change that. Facebook wants you to be miserable and to be in a state of endless ideological warfare and squabbling over disinformation and correcting untruths because it increases engagement.
For over a decade now I've been begging anyone who would listen to disengage and delete Facebook.
Please, I'm begging you. Please delete Facebook. Nuke it from orbit and don't look back. This is really the only way to defeat Facebook.
posted by loquacious at 9:51 AM on October 27, 2021 [23 favorites]
Kids are off Facebook and Instagram. My kids had Instagram but found their friends don't use it. They are on TikToc and WhatsApp.
But WhatsApp is also owned by Facebook.
posted by eviemath at 9:55 AM on October 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
But WhatsApp is also owned by Facebook.
posted by eviemath at 9:55 AM on October 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
According to Frances Haugen, Facebook is understaffed because a lot of skilled people just don't want to be near that trashfire.
On a personal level, I really wish this all had come to light years ago, back when only some of us could see the writing on the wall and the rest thought it was a cool new enterprise. A good friend moved to take a job at Facebook (against my friendly jabbing protests) and was killed on his way into work one morning. I honestly don't think he would have taken the job, knowing what's now known about the company.
posted by hwyengr at 9:57 AM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
On a personal level, I really wish this all had come to light years ago, back when only some of us could see the writing on the wall and the rest thought it was a cool new enterprise. A good friend moved to take a job at Facebook (against my friendly jabbing protests) and was killed on his way into work one morning. I honestly don't think he would have taken the job, knowing what's now known about the company.
posted by hwyengr at 9:57 AM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
There's been a pretty strong mefi consensus that asking people to not use facebook is privileged and basically offensive. This thread is focusing on the negative, but the massive benefits to people (whose importance is acknowledged on mefi) has been covered ad nauseum.
posted by Wood at 10:05 AM on October 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by Wood at 10:05 AM on October 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
It’s like wheat. Tasty but slow poison. I can’t get my friends off either one. I don’t bust their chops about it but dang, watching the wreckage in slow motion is so depressing.
posted by seanmpuckett at 10:12 AM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by seanmpuckett at 10:12 AM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
When I was job hunting, I applied for a job at Facebook in content curation, based on two ideas:
posted by mephron at 10:15 AM on October 27, 2021
- Hey, it's money and it pays well
- Someone has to try to change things or nothing's going to change
posted by mephron at 10:15 AM on October 27, 2021
I don't see how "the best thing you can do is delete facebook" remains accurate when teens and younger adults are leaving Facebook in droves, and it doesn't seem to be doing anything but making FB worse.
posted by sagc at 10:16 AM on October 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
posted by sagc at 10:16 AM on October 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
After publicly promising to crack down, Facebook acknowledged in internal documents that it was “under-enforcing on confirmed abusive activity” that saw Filipina maids complaining on the social media network of being abused. Apple relented, and Facebook and Instagram remained in the app store.
Oh, Philippine Facebook is just full of recruiters looking for young pretty women for work. Sometimes "private events" and sometimes not that. It is basically ubiquitous and nothing is done to stop it.
posted by joelr at 10:20 AM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
Oh, Philippine Facebook is just full of recruiters looking for young pretty women for work. Sometimes "private events" and sometimes not that. It is basically ubiquitous and nothing is done to stop it.
posted by joelr at 10:20 AM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
There's been a pretty strong mefi consensus that asking people to not use facebook is privileged and basically offensive.
That’s a mischaracterization. Folks have pointed out that claiming that anyone can leave Facebook with no negative impacts on their life, or that anything positive that currently happens on Facebook could just as easily or without additional cost happen on a different platform ignores some lived realities in a way that tends to come across as privileged and/or clueless. Note that this says nothing one way or the other about whether Facebook has been net positive, net negative, or net neutral. One can discuss that question, and discuss the many harms caused by Facebook, without telling people that their personal experiences aren’t what they say their personal experiences are, or without being ignorant of the economics of cell phone access in other countries.
posted by eviemath at 10:40 AM on October 27, 2021 [17 favorites]
That’s a mischaracterization. Folks have pointed out that claiming that anyone can leave Facebook with no negative impacts on their life, or that anything positive that currently happens on Facebook could just as easily or without additional cost happen on a different platform ignores some lived realities in a way that tends to come across as privileged and/or clueless. Note that this says nothing one way or the other about whether Facebook has been net positive, net negative, or net neutral. One can discuss that question, and discuss the many harms caused by Facebook, without telling people that their personal experiences aren’t what they say their personal experiences are, or without being ignorant of the economics of cell phone access in other countries.
posted by eviemath at 10:40 AM on October 27, 2021 [17 favorites]
I closed my FB account a few years ago. After the first week or two of withdrawal I haven't missed it a bit. (Closing my NextDoor account didn't even prompt a day of withdrawal pangs.) I do have friends and family who still really value FB for hobbyist and local community connections, which just hadn't applied to me.
posted by PhineasGage at 11:13 AM on October 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by PhineasGage at 11:13 AM on October 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
There's been a pretty strong mefi consensus that asking people to not use facebook is privileged and basically offensive.
Then maybe people who have privilege should be making extra effort to help those who need it.
I used the word "sacrifice" here for a reason: "You have to be ready to make a huge sacrifice about the convenience of using it and DELETE FACEBOOK."
And I mean that. I'm know I'm essentially asking for the impossible and it drives me a little bonkers.
I'm know that I'm essentially asking people to mobilize for war like it's WW2 and plant metaphorical cybernetic victory gardens and do more than simply stop using a social media website.
I understand that Facebook goes far above and beyond just staying in touch with friends and family and sharing photos. I understand that Facebook has, well, absorbed a great deal of access to things like employment, housing, mutual aid and all kinds of access at all levels of privilege.
On a local or national scale I would be probably described as being less privileged than the mean or average. I have also directly experienced disenfranchisement and reduced access by refusing to participate in Facebook all of these years, and I find this aspect of the problems with Facebook from people refusing to use it at all is under-represented because using Facebook is the default, and not using it is the outlier.
Even just on the social side of things there's so, so much I've missed out on from friends and family by not being on Facebook. I only get crumbs and snippets of that side of online social life, occasional emails or text messages and images. I also miss out on a ton of social events or social gatherings.
My choice to not use Facebook is not from a place of privilege. I'm not saying that deleting Facebook is going to be easy, whether individually or collectively.
I'm not saying I'm a martyr, or better than anyone because I have survived without Facebook. I'm not feeling or expressing or taking any joy in anything shitty or petty like "hah, I'm right! I told you so!"
I'm saying I've been scared and confused. I've even felt like I was being gaslit for expressing my thoughts about about the dangers of Facebook for so long. I've felt shut out from modern social life and even access to services.
From out here it feels like I've watched the walled garden of Facebook grow and grow around most of the public internet and casting a shadow across everything, blocking it from view and crowding out just about everything else.
It's been a little like watching the Echthroi from Madeleine L'Engle's A Wind in the Door snuff out the stars in slow motion and it's been fucking terrifying.
posted by loquacious at 11:16 AM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
Then maybe people who have privilege should be making extra effort to help those who need it.
I used the word "sacrifice" here for a reason: "You have to be ready to make a huge sacrifice about the convenience of using it and DELETE FACEBOOK."
And I mean that. I'm know I'm essentially asking for the impossible and it drives me a little bonkers.
I'm know that I'm essentially asking people to mobilize for war like it's WW2 and plant metaphorical cybernetic victory gardens and do more than simply stop using a social media website.
I understand that Facebook goes far above and beyond just staying in touch with friends and family and sharing photos. I understand that Facebook has, well, absorbed a great deal of access to things like employment, housing, mutual aid and all kinds of access at all levels of privilege.
On a local or national scale I would be probably described as being less privileged than the mean or average. I have also directly experienced disenfranchisement and reduced access by refusing to participate in Facebook all of these years, and I find this aspect of the problems with Facebook from people refusing to use it at all is under-represented because using Facebook is the default, and not using it is the outlier.
Even just on the social side of things there's so, so much I've missed out on from friends and family by not being on Facebook. I only get crumbs and snippets of that side of online social life, occasional emails or text messages and images. I also miss out on a ton of social events or social gatherings.
My choice to not use Facebook is not from a place of privilege. I'm not saying that deleting Facebook is going to be easy, whether individually or collectively.
I'm not saying I'm a martyr, or better than anyone because I have survived without Facebook. I'm not feeling or expressing or taking any joy in anything shitty or petty like "hah, I'm right! I told you so!"
I'm saying I've been scared and confused. I've even felt like I was being gaslit for expressing my thoughts about about the dangers of Facebook for so long. I've felt shut out from modern social life and even access to services.
From out here it feels like I've watched the walled garden of Facebook grow and grow around most of the public internet and casting a shadow across everything, blocking it from view and crowding out just about everything else.
It's been a little like watching the Echthroi from Madeleine L'Engle's A Wind in the Door snuff out the stars in slow motion and it's been fucking terrifying.
posted by loquacious at 11:16 AM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
I still don't see how individual action is better than state regulation, or collective action.
posted by sagc at 11:19 AM on October 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
posted by sagc at 11:19 AM on October 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
Maybe we can avoid copying/re-litigating past threads, and return to the current discussion, though?
posted by eviemath at 11:25 AM on October 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
posted by eviemath at 11:25 AM on October 27, 2021 [8 favorites]
I honestly think it's tough, because people always come into these threads with... strident, let's say? attitudes toward anyone who uses facebook.
posted by sagc at 11:26 AM on October 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
posted by sagc at 11:26 AM on October 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
When I was job hunting, I applied for a job at Facebook in content curation, based on two ideas:
1. Hey, it's money and it pays well
2. Someone has to try to change things or nothing's going to change
I wonder, how often does number two actually work? Can a good, dedicated person, or small group of people, join an organization that is behaving in ways that are evil and change it? I understand the impulse but I am increasingly of the opinion that it is not possible (and this applies to groups like the police as well as Facebook) and that the person in question will end up morally compromised and/or burnt out and miserable. Maybe if you're the person at the top or you get enough newer people who feel the way you do but I think there is a lot of, for want of a better term, institutional inertia and I think the challenge of turning an organization that is doing enormous harm into an organization that is not doing enormous harm is massive and grueling.
posted by an octopus IRL at 11:32 AM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
1. Hey, it's money and it pays well
2. Someone has to try to change things or nothing's going to change
I wonder, how often does number two actually work? Can a good, dedicated person, or small group of people, join an organization that is behaving in ways that are evil and change it? I understand the impulse but I am increasingly of the opinion that it is not possible (and this applies to groups like the police as well as Facebook) and that the person in question will end up morally compromised and/or burnt out and miserable. Maybe if you're the person at the top or you get enough newer people who feel the way you do but I think there is a lot of, for want of a better term, institutional inertia and I think the challenge of turning an organization that is doing enormous harm into an organization that is not doing enormous harm is massive and grueling.
posted by an octopus IRL at 11:32 AM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
My core thought was that someone should at least try.
I didn't get the job. They sent me a personality test and, based on the recent news, I think I passed the ethics section.
(In the sense that they didn't pass you on unless you failed.)
posted by mephron at 11:39 AM on October 27, 2021
I didn't get the job. They sent me a personality test and, based on the recent news, I think I passed the ethics section.
(In the sense that they didn't pass you on unless you failed.)
posted by mephron at 11:39 AM on October 27, 2021
It’s like wheat. Tasty but slow poison. I can’t get my friends off either one.
I think you might've found one of the few comparisons to make me think "Wait, so I should be introducing *more* Facebook into my life? Weird analogy, but I guess if you really insist..."
posted by CrystalDave at 11:41 AM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
I think you might've found one of the few comparisons to make me think "Wait, so I should be introducing *more* Facebook into my life? Weird analogy, but I guess if you really insist..."
posted by CrystalDave at 11:41 AM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
sagc: "I still don't see how individual action is better than state regulation, or collective action."
Isn't collective action essentially convincing a lot of people to take individual action? You don't start a movement by telling people, hey, it's cool, you keep doing what you're doing, we'll be over here trying to make it so you can't do it any more.
posted by team lowkey at 11:43 AM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
Isn't collective action essentially convincing a lot of people to take individual action? You don't start a movement by telling people, hey, it's cool, you keep doing what you're doing, we'll be over here trying to make it so you can't do it any more.
posted by team lowkey at 11:43 AM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
Sure, but you don't do it by attempting to convince individuals in a super facebook-hostile space already; you do it by organizing a boycott or protest, with some idea of how that mechanism is going to effect change. But yes, eviemath is right that this argument was played out in detail in the previous thread.
posted by sagc at 11:46 AM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by sagc at 11:46 AM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
I would have deleted Facebook long ago, but my insurrection club meets there. It’s also the only place where I can find “left-handed accountants born in October who own terriers and have two daughters are the coolest!” t-shirts.
posted by snofoam at 11:48 AM on October 27, 2021
posted by snofoam at 11:48 AM on October 27, 2021
Isn't collective action essentially convincing a lot of people to take individual action?
Not exactly. Human society is a complex system with emergent behaviour. Mathematically speaking, this means that there are threshold effects, and that the whole is in some respects more than the sum of its parts. So convincing a bunch of people to work together is a necessary step for collective action, but once you have a critical mass then you don’t necessarily need to actively convince people any more, rather the thing you want them to do will be seen more as the default. The outcome or power also doesn’t just scale linearly with number of people. And there are some things that a group can do together that individuals can’t do individually - where more specific coordination or organization is required so that people are acting in concert.
posted by eviemath at 11:52 AM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
Not exactly. Human society is a complex system with emergent behaviour. Mathematically speaking, this means that there are threshold effects, and that the whole is in some respects more than the sum of its parts. So convincing a bunch of people to work together is a necessary step for collective action, but once you have a critical mass then you don’t necessarily need to actively convince people any more, rather the thing you want them to do will be seen more as the default. The outcome or power also doesn’t just scale linearly with number of people. And there are some things that a group can do together that individuals can’t do individually - where more specific coordination or organization is required so that people are acting in concert.
posted by eviemath at 11:52 AM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
For more than a decade every one of us has enjoyed and used web sites like Facebook and others. It takes just one person to speak bad about a site and every fucking body act as an opportunity to through shit on it. They always get people with good intentions and also with bad intentions. Managing a site that from the midnight to the morning become with billions of members and billions of dollars is difficult and errors are common. I haven't ever provide to any of those sites with information that I prefer to keep away from them and it works. Everybody forget about the said of "Garbish (Garbage) in; Garbish out". You are supposed to take care of your own actions.
posted by CRESTA at 11:57 AM on October 27, 2021
posted by CRESTA at 11:57 AM on October 27, 2021
And once you have that organization, eg. in the form of social or political structures, then some subsets of individuals have more power than others. Eg. Members of Congress or upper management of giant multinational corporations versus everyday citizens. But the actions of Members of Congress or upper management of giant multinational corporations are affected by a variety of things, including but not limited to mass popular movements, boycotts, “public opinion” (itself an emergent phenomenon), and there are many things that large enough groups of lower-individual-power people can also accomplish directly, without Members of Congress or upper management of giant multinational corporations as intermediaries. Multiple levers to effect change, which respond to multiple different types of pressures.
posted by eviemath at 11:58 AM on October 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by eviemath at 11:58 AM on October 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
here's something I was thinking of posting to ASK.
What's a good strategy for disentangling from Facebook?
Are there any tools for it? How might one organize things in such a way that they don't lose touch with people they've come to like but who they only really know through Facebook, or certainly have reliable contact with via Facebook? And how might one accomplish all of this without it being a major time suck and headache?
posted by philip-random at 11:58 AM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
What's a good strategy for disentangling from Facebook?
Are there any tools for it? How might one organize things in such a way that they don't lose touch with people they've come to like but who they only really know through Facebook, or certainly have reliable contact with via Facebook? And how might one accomplish all of this without it being a major time suck and headache?
posted by philip-random at 11:58 AM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
For more than a decade every one of us has enjoyed and used web sites like Facebook and others
This is simply not true, I have never in my life enjoyed a website
posted by an octopus IRL at 11:59 AM on October 27, 2021 [13 favorites]
This is simply not true, I have never in my life enjoyed a website
posted by an octopus IRL at 11:59 AM on October 27, 2021 [13 favorites]
Seriously though, "managing a big website is difficult" does not absolve them of responsibility and Facebook has long ago lost any presumption of good faith.
posted by an octopus IRL at 12:01 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by an octopus IRL at 12:01 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
Is Facebook’s evilness inevitable? Would contemporary society drive any social media company to the same place? If not, and if having some kind of social media is inevitable, then why not obliterate Facebook and then let the next thing grow into it turns evil? I know it is not clear how this could be possible, but it is interesting to imagine.
Also, I am really still unclear on how such giant things can be built on advertising of such highly suspect value. How has the online advertising bubble popped for places like Metafilter, but still bringing more and more money to Facebook and Google?
posted by snofoam at 12:03 PM on October 27, 2021
Also, I am really still unclear on how such giant things can be built on advertising of such highly suspect value. How has the online advertising bubble popped for places like Metafilter, but still bringing more and more money to Facebook and Google?
posted by snofoam at 12:03 PM on October 27, 2021
Facebook is a fun site where people can connect with friends, why is everyone getting so down on it? Nobody’s perfect.
posted by Zork Muckerberg
posted by snofoam at 12:08 PM on October 27, 2021
posted by Zork Muckerberg
posted by snofoam at 12:08 PM on October 27, 2021
There is a fascinating paradox at the heart of FB. If it were a standard publicly-traded company, profit maximization and stock price would be the primary management standards. But Zuckerberg maintains a controlling interest in the company via a special class of stock, so if he were less of a sociopath he could manage the company with a greater degree of public spirit, without needing to care quite so much about revenue/stock price.
posted by PhineasGage at 12:09 PM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 12:09 PM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
Isn't collective action essentially convincing a lot of people to take individual action?
When successful, it's usually about convincing people to take part in a coordinated action.
posted by Dysk at 1:02 PM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
When successful, it's usually about convincing people to take part in a coordinated action.
posted by Dysk at 1:02 PM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
It could not be any clearer that Facebook is bad for the world. Any other stance is rationalizing.
I honestly do not see the difference between Facebook users and anti-vaxxers. Stubborn people who know what they're doing is selfish but simply don't care because, "You do you. I'm good!"
Note: I'm speaking about people in wealthy nations here. I've lived in undeveloped ones where FB is a person's only "affordable" option and I understand, though am infuriated, by their situation.
Someone has to try to change things or nothing's going to change
I have a friend who became a cop with attitude. Six years later she's a rightwing racist asshole who I choose to no longer be around.
posted by dobbs at 1:17 PM on October 27, 2021
I honestly do not see the difference between Facebook users and anti-vaxxers. Stubborn people who know what they're doing is selfish but simply don't care because, "You do you. I'm good!"
Note: I'm speaking about people in wealthy nations here. I've lived in undeveloped ones where FB is a person's only "affordable" option and I understand, though am infuriated, by their situation.
Someone has to try to change things or nothing's going to change
I have a friend who became a cop with attitude. Six years later she's a rightwing racist asshole who I choose to no longer be around.
posted by dobbs at 1:17 PM on October 27, 2021
MetaFilter: I have never in my life enjoyed a website.
posted by PhineasGage at 1:23 PM on October 27, 2021 [15 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 1:23 PM on October 27, 2021 [15 favorites]
I honestly do not see the difference between Facebook users and anti-vaxxers. Stubborn people who know what they're doing is selfish but simply don't care because, "You do you. I'm good!"
My biggest problem is that I literally *checks* yep, literally, live on the other side of the planet to my family. Without Facebook or a suitable replacement I have no connection back to what's going on in the lives of my family and friends. So yeah, as much as I want to throw it into the fucking trash can my options are "put up with this shit" or "disconnect from half my social network".
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:28 PM on October 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
My biggest problem is that I literally *checks* yep, literally, live on the other side of the planet to my family. Without Facebook or a suitable replacement I have no connection back to what's going on in the lives of my family and friends. So yeah, as much as I want to throw it into the fucking trash can my options are "put up with this shit" or "disconnect from half my social network".
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:28 PM on October 27, 2021 [10 favorites]
What's a good strategy for disentangling from Facebook?
I'm aware of at least a couple of people in my circles who are distancing from Facebook but are increasingly using NextDoor. Talk about out of the frying pan, into the fire.
posted by gimonca at 1:29 PM on October 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
I'm aware of at least a couple of people in my circles who are distancing from Facebook but are increasingly using NextDoor. Talk about out of the frying pan, into the fire.
posted by gimonca at 1:29 PM on October 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
Talk about out of the frying pan, into the fire.
It's the Equal to Facebook's Splenda.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:30 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
It's the Equal to Facebook's Splenda.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 1:30 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
dobbs, I think that's at best, an uncharitable comparison.
From my perspective, it's more like people coming into a thread about car accidents and saying "I don't know why anyone would drive a car. They're bad for the environment, culture, and they kill people. Anyone who drives a car is an amoral monster."
Not actually the most helpful to the issue at hand, even if accurate.
posted by sagc at 1:32 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
From my perspective, it's more like people coming into a thread about car accidents and saying "I don't know why anyone would drive a car. They're bad for the environment, culture, and they kill people. Anyone who drives a car is an amoral monster."
Not actually the most helpful to the issue at hand, even if accurate.
posted by sagc at 1:32 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
What's a good strategy for disentangling from Facebook?
I bet Google is wishing they hadn't pulled the plug on Google+ now.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 1:35 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
I bet Google is wishing they hadn't pulled the plug on Google+ now.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 1:35 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
What's a good strategy for disentangling from Facebook?
You’ve decided to quit Facebook. Here’s how to migrate your online life elsewhere.
Every time there’s a Facebook scandal, you may have thought about quitting the social network, and this time for real. But you run into the same problem every time: Where exactly should you go?
After a rough month of revelations about Facebook’s business practices, culminating with a whistleblower testifying in front of lawmakers about the social network’s harmful impact on children, many are once again trying to figure out how to extricate themselves from the company.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 1:48 PM on October 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
You’ve decided to quit Facebook. Here’s how to migrate your online life elsewhere.
Every time there’s a Facebook scandal, you may have thought about quitting the social network, and this time for real. But you run into the same problem every time: Where exactly should you go?
After a rough month of revelations about Facebook’s business practices, culminating with a whistleblower testifying in front of lawmakers about the social network’s harmful impact on children, many are once again trying to figure out how to extricate themselves from the company.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 1:48 PM on October 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
Oof, that's a depressing article - here's what they recommend for the only things I use facebook for, keeping up with events near me:
posted by sagc at 2:01 PM on October 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
This category is a great example of when the alternatives can have their own thorny ethical issues. Neighborhood groups can be rife with racial profiling, complaining, public shaming and surveillance. The spread of individual security cameras has even spawned its own social network, the Neighbors by Ring app, which is owned by Amazon. There’s Nextdoor, which relies on community moderators and has struggled with complaints about racism. On the darkest end of the spectrum is Citizen, which is a local crime app for viewing your neighborhood through the lens of the bad things that happen. Perhaps the safest place to re-create your neighborhood group is in person.Like, if I came in and said "Oh, I'm off facebook and on Ring", I'm not sure I'd get a pass for somehow having become morally better.
(Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.)
Ring and Nest helped normalize American surveillance and turned us into a nation of voyeurs.
posted by sagc at 2:01 PM on October 27, 2021 [3 favorites]
The most damning evidence yet that Facebook must be stopped.
posted by Lyme Drop at 2:12 PM on October 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by Lyme Drop at 2:12 PM on October 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
dobbs, I think that's at best, an uncharitable comparison.
Well, we'll have to agree to disagree. Based on my interactions, it's spot-on. I believe that in the future people will look back at anti-vaxxers and people who closed their eyes to the evils of Facebook similarly. No one will be looking at drivers that way.
posted by dobbs at 2:22 PM on October 27, 2021
Well, we'll have to agree to disagree. Based on my interactions, it's spot-on. I believe that in the future people will look back at anti-vaxxers and people who closed their eyes to the evils of Facebook similarly. No one will be looking at drivers that way.
posted by dobbs at 2:22 PM on October 27, 2021
lol at the idea that I'm "closing my eyes to the evils of facebook" by using it to see the concerts happening in my city 😐
posted by sagc at 2:24 PM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
posted by sagc at 2:24 PM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
The most damning evidence yet that Facebook must be stopped.
That... that's not real, right? That can't be real.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 2:24 PM on October 27, 2021
That... that's not real, right? That can't be real.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 2:24 PM on October 27, 2021
I believe that in the future people will look back at anti-vaxxers and people who closed their eyes to the evils of Facebook similarly. No one will be looking at drivers that way.
Surely the things *I* use, the future will be understanding about my reluctance to give up.
The things I *don't* use, however, are evils to be scourged without nuance or pity.
posted by CrystalDave at 2:39 PM on October 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
Surely the things *I* use, the future will be understanding about my reluctance to give up.
The things I *don't* use, however, are evils to be scourged without nuance or pity.
posted by CrystalDave at 2:39 PM on October 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
Like, if I came in and said "Oh, I'm off facebook and on Ring", I'm not sure I'd get a pass for somehow having become morally better.
Any technology has its problems and Ring has its share, but what you are proposing is what is better called a strawman argument, because no one has come here to propose that.
Even so, the scale and quality of problems caused by use of Facebook are objectively different from using Ring: targeting and manipulation of children and teenagers; widespread anti-vax and anti-mask disinformation campaigning; human trafficking; destabilizing and overthrowing democratically-elected governments and associated electronic surveillance, torture, and murder of dissidents.
A significant portion of the serious-minded and actionable response to Haugen's whistleblowing has come from governments. Additionally, people are trying to figure out what we can do individually and collectively now that we know what we know. You can't unknow profiteering from manipulating kids, you can't unknow human trafficking, you can't unknow support for fascism and dictatorships, you can't unknow the torture and murder that goes along with that.
You could choose to ignore all of it and be dismissive, but you cannot unknow these issues, going forwards.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 2:46 PM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
Any technology has its problems and Ring has its share, but what you are proposing is what is better called a strawman argument, because no one has come here to propose that.
Even so, the scale and quality of problems caused by use of Facebook are objectively different from using Ring: targeting and manipulation of children and teenagers; widespread anti-vax and anti-mask disinformation campaigning; human trafficking; destabilizing and overthrowing democratically-elected governments and associated electronic surveillance, torture, and murder of dissidents.
A significant portion of the serious-minded and actionable response to Haugen's whistleblowing has come from governments. Additionally, people are trying to figure out what we can do individually and collectively now that we know what we know. You can't unknow profiteering from manipulating kids, you can't unknow human trafficking, you can't unknow support for fascism and dictatorships, you can't unknow the torture and murder that goes along with that.
You could choose to ignore all of it and be dismissive, but you cannot unknow these issues, going forwards.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 2:46 PM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
I mean, I'm just trying to point out that dropping that article might not have been as helpful as you thought.
posted by sagc at 2:49 PM on October 27, 2021
posted by sagc at 2:49 PM on October 27, 2021
So for the people comparing Facebook users to amoral monsters: guess who’s on Facebook? Most of the world. Pretty much everyone except you! Good luck with making the world your enemy.
This does not mean I think Facebook is good. I’m just stating a fact. Similarly, the US spends a lot of its budget on unjust wars. Therefore anyone in the US who pays their taxes is an amoral monster. Etc.
posted by freecellwizard at 3:37 PM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
This does not mean I think Facebook is good. I’m just stating a fact. Similarly, the US spends a lot of its budget on unjust wars. Therefore anyone in the US who pays their taxes is an amoral monster. Etc.
posted by freecellwizard at 3:37 PM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
Anti Facebook tankies are as tiring as vanilla. You’re not wrong, but your certainty about the Most Important Thing (getting individual people to stop using Facebook) ends up taking up a ton of air and has us rehashing the same conversations over and over.
posted by wemayfreeze at 3:55 PM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
posted by wemayfreeze at 3:55 PM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
The most damning evidence yet that Facebook must be stopped.
Dammit, I had avoided knowing anything about this "Metaverse" until just now.
Regarding the fact that the Playmobil-verse people seem to have evaporated below the waist, I thought I should share a knee-slapper from Twitter:
@SteveHoffenberg
The plans must all costan arm and a leg two legs
posted by polecat at 4:39 PM on October 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
Dammit, I had avoided knowing anything about this "Metaverse" until just now.
Regarding the fact that the Playmobil-verse people seem to have evaporated below the waist, I thought I should share a knee-slapper from Twitter:
@SteveHoffenberg
The plans must all cost
posted by polecat at 4:39 PM on October 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
I would also like to point out that people quitting FB is an outcome or a goal, not a plan. Whenever something is proposed that goes something like "things would be much better if only people would do X" where "people" means something like "a significant fraction of the relevant population" and X is something people aren't currently doing, that's not a proposal for a course of action, it's merely a hope or a wish. Like, what plans or mechanisms are being proposed to get people to quit FB en masse? Is it just hashtags? Are there any co-ordinated boycotts? Right now, it seems to me the most effective thing reining in FB's userbase growth (at least in the US) is its inherent uncoolness with the youths of today. Maybe these Facebook Papers revelations will have some effect but I'm not sure I'd bet on it.
posted by mhum at 4:41 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by mhum at 4:41 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
I don't understand why we're having this conversation. As others have astutely pointed out, Facebook isn't the first company to exploit these dark aspects of human nature. The media in the 90's was the source of "If it bleeds, it leads" and were happy to drive what we now call "engagement" through hate and fear.
Nobody stopped watching cable television, and unlike Facebook, that's not free as in beer.
The thing is, we've seen this play out before, and telling people to "just stop using it" will do exactly fuck-all and the only thing that will actually change anything is actual fucking regulation directed at this industry.
I haven't had a Facebook in ten years but acting like just telling everyone to stop using it is as dumb as the crusade to get people to stop watching TV and read more in the 1980's. It never happened.
posted by deadaluspark at 4:45 PM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
Nobody stopped watching cable television, and unlike Facebook, that's not free as in beer.
The thing is, we've seen this play out before, and telling people to "just stop using it" will do exactly fuck-all and the only thing that will actually change anything is actual fucking regulation directed at this industry.
I haven't had a Facebook in ten years but acting like just telling everyone to stop using it is as dumb as the crusade to get people to stop watching TV and read more in the 1980's. It never happened.
posted by deadaluspark at 4:45 PM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
Stirring up fear and hatred to gather more users is pretty much exactly Fox News business model.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 4:45 PM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 4:45 PM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
You could choose to ignore all of it and be dismissive, but you cannot unknow these issues, going forwards.
You can't unknown it, but it's the sea we swim in. I can't go into most shops and buy a drink or a chocolate bar without being a customer of awful companies, with more directly awful effects of communities around the world. I can't get to those shops without oil companies getting involved, via the bus I'd take. I guess we're all amoral monsters.
The only meaningful approach that has any real history of working for this kind of issue is regulation. Yes, governments around the world are failing us all on this front, constantly, but it's still the best tool we have. We just need to apply it more.
(I am under no illusion that "just" doing more is going to be easy, but that is where you can usefully apply your energy, not lambasting people just getting by, living their lives. Communications platforms don't have to be evil. Let's make it illegal for them to be.)
posted by Dysk at 4:59 PM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
You can't unknown it, but it's the sea we swim in. I can't go into most shops and buy a drink or a chocolate bar without being a customer of awful companies, with more directly awful effects of communities around the world. I can't get to those shops without oil companies getting involved, via the bus I'd take. I guess we're all amoral monsters.
The only meaningful approach that has any real history of working for this kind of issue is regulation. Yes, governments around the world are failing us all on this front, constantly, but it's still the best tool we have. We just need to apply it more.
(I am under no illusion that "just" doing more is going to be easy, but that is where you can usefully apply your energy, not lambasting people just getting by, living their lives. Communications platforms don't have to be evil. Let's make it illegal for them to be.)
posted by Dysk at 4:59 PM on October 27, 2021 [6 favorites]
a lot of businesses in the global south use facebook as their main ‘website’. much of this discussion is very white and ‘western’ and unaware of how much of the world depends on the site, sadly
posted by Ahmad Khani at 6:23 PM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
posted by Ahmad Khani at 6:23 PM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
I honestly do not see the difference between Facebook users and anti-vaxxers.
What about between Facebook users and Hitler? I never eat Chik-Fil-A, but doing that is not in and of itself an act of hatred. And I am very liberal when it comes to cutting conservative or hateful people put of my life. I would welcome legislation that crushes Facebook or a better alternative that makes it obsolete, but the problem is not that all the users are terrible people who are responsible for whatever Facebook does.
posted by snofoam at 6:39 PM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
What about between Facebook users and Hitler? I never eat Chik-Fil-A, but doing that is not in and of itself an act of hatred. And I am very liberal when it comes to cutting conservative or hateful people put of my life. I would welcome legislation that crushes Facebook or a better alternative that makes it obsolete, but the problem is not that all the users are terrible people who are responsible for whatever Facebook does.
posted by snofoam at 6:39 PM on October 27, 2021 [2 favorites]
lol at the idea that I'm "closing my eyes to the evils of facebook" by using it to see the concerts happening in my city
It doesn't matter what you use it for -- it's using you. Anyone who uses Facebook/Instagram is lining Facebook's pockets, whether you click on ads or not. Time spent on the site gives them data, which they use to make money and behave more unethically.
The "But I just use it for X" argument is the equivalent of "Ads don't work on me because I'm aware of their powers and I ignore them." It's ludicrously naive.
a lot of businesses in the global south use facebook as their main ‘website’. much of this discussion is very white and ‘western’ and unaware of how much of the world depends on the site, sadly
As myself and others have said, the argument of "Just delete Facebook" is not directed at those people.
I lived in Vanuatu for a short time. Every single person I met there uses Facebook and Facebook Messenger. Not a single exception. I didn't suggest any of them stop using it -- it would be an impossibility, for the most part. But I didn't need to succumb because I'm privileged enough to be able to afford a proper cell plan and don't need to rely on "free" services like Facebook and Whatsapp.
But now I live in Toronto. If a business insists I "Just order using Instagram" then, no, fuck that, I'll order my food elsewhere. This is not a hardship for me.
the problem is not that all the users are terrible people
Not all anti-vaxxers are "terrible people" either. I never said FB users were terrible or evil or anything like that. I do think they're behaving selfishly and naively, though, as are anti-vaxxers.
posted by dobbs at 6:47 PM on October 27, 2021
It doesn't matter what you use it for -- it's using you. Anyone who uses Facebook/Instagram is lining Facebook's pockets, whether you click on ads or not. Time spent on the site gives them data, which they use to make money and behave more unethically.
The "But I just use it for X" argument is the equivalent of "Ads don't work on me because I'm aware of their powers and I ignore them." It's ludicrously naive.
a lot of businesses in the global south use facebook as their main ‘website’. much of this discussion is very white and ‘western’ and unaware of how much of the world depends on the site, sadly
As myself and others have said, the argument of "Just delete Facebook" is not directed at those people.
I lived in Vanuatu for a short time. Every single person I met there uses Facebook and Facebook Messenger. Not a single exception. I didn't suggest any of them stop using it -- it would be an impossibility, for the most part. But I didn't need to succumb because I'm privileged enough to be able to afford a proper cell plan and don't need to rely on "free" services like Facebook and Whatsapp.
But now I live in Toronto. If a business insists I "Just order using Instagram" then, no, fuck that, I'll order my food elsewhere. This is not a hardship for me.
the problem is not that all the users are terrible people
Not all anti-vaxxers are "terrible people" either. I never said FB users were terrible or evil or anything like that. I do think they're behaving selfishly and naively, though, as are anti-vaxxers.
posted by dobbs at 6:47 PM on October 27, 2021
To start I'm gonna drop an obviously needed "There is no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism" so arguments about being more ethical in what you consume are kind of a moot point to begin with.
It doesn't matter what you use it for -- it's using you. Anyone who uses Facebook/Instagram is lining Facebook's pockets, whether you click on ads or not. Time spent on the site gives them data, which they use to make money and behave more unethically.
Unless you want to disconnect from social media altogether and hit the darkweb... Guess what? Every site you use is scraped for data. Even MetaFilter. The idea that you can get away from data sets being built by not using Facebook is pure bunkum.
Let me ask you. Do you have a multitude of privacy gadgets in your browsers to ensure that no Facebook trackers are gathering information on you on nearly every site you visit and making a "shadow profile" of who you are, even if you never make a Facebook account? Do you use a Pi-Hole to block all relevant advertising, Javascript to disable all scripting, and never post anything personal to ensure it doesn't get sucked into a giant data harvesters data set? Have you rooted your phone to remove the Facebook app that came bundled with your phone that you can't remove and that harvests data even if you never opened the app?
You might be, but I seriously doubt it, and it's a tall order for most people to have to do all this stuff that categorically makes the web harder to use. Acting all holier than thou about it here means jack shit when I'm sure as fuck data sets are being built on you anyway, including from your posts here.
If it's in cleartext and available on the open web, someone (more likely many someones) is scraping it for data. Period.
posted by deadaluspark at 7:04 PM on October 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
It doesn't matter what you use it for -- it's using you. Anyone who uses Facebook/Instagram is lining Facebook's pockets, whether you click on ads or not. Time spent on the site gives them data, which they use to make money and behave more unethically.
Unless you want to disconnect from social media altogether and hit the darkweb... Guess what? Every site you use is scraped for data. Even MetaFilter. The idea that you can get away from data sets being built by not using Facebook is pure bunkum.
Let me ask you. Do you have a multitude of privacy gadgets in your browsers to ensure that no Facebook trackers are gathering information on you on nearly every site you visit and making a "shadow profile" of who you are, even if you never make a Facebook account? Do you use a Pi-Hole to block all relevant advertising, Javascript to disable all scripting, and never post anything personal to ensure it doesn't get sucked into a giant data harvesters data set? Have you rooted your phone to remove the Facebook app that came bundled with your phone that you can't remove and that harvests data even if you never opened the app?
You might be, but I seriously doubt it, and it's a tall order for most people to have to do all this stuff that categorically makes the web harder to use. Acting all holier than thou about it here means jack shit when I'm sure as fuck data sets are being built on you anyway, including from your posts here.
If it's in cleartext and available on the open web, someone (more likely many someones) is scraping it for data. Period.
posted by deadaluspark at 7:04 PM on October 27, 2021 [7 favorites]
The idea that you can get away from data sets being built by not using Facebook is pure bunkum.
I didn't suggest you could or should avoid data sets. I'm suggesting one do their best not to participate in populating data sets by known bad actors -- and Facebook is undeniably a bad actor. It's like doing your best not to shop at WalMart or Amazon or companies that you know treat their employees like shit. Does that mean that every object you purchase has a clean supply chain or that every store that isn't one of those is the greatest place to work? Of course not, but if you have the knowledge that something is evil and the ability to avoid it, why not do what you can?
For instance:
Have you rooted your phone to remove the Facebook app that came bundled with your phone that you can't remove
No. I simply researched which phones shipped this way and didn't buy them.
posted by dobbs at 7:26 PM on October 27, 2021
I didn't suggest you could or should avoid data sets. I'm suggesting one do their best not to participate in populating data sets by known bad actors -- and Facebook is undeniably a bad actor. It's like doing your best not to shop at WalMart or Amazon or companies that you know treat their employees like shit. Does that mean that every object you purchase has a clean supply chain or that every store that isn't one of those is the greatest place to work? Of course not, but if you have the knowledge that something is evil and the ability to avoid it, why not do what you can?
For instance:
Have you rooted your phone to remove the Facebook app that came bundled with your phone that you can't remove
No. I simply researched which phones shipped this way and didn't buy them.
posted by dobbs at 7:26 PM on October 27, 2021
There are many things we know that have negative impacts on the world. To me, Facebook users are more like people who smoke or eat meat or drive a car. They are in some way sustaining a problematic industry, but many things do this.
Being an anti-vaxxer, which to me implies something more active than simply being unvaccinated, seems like a different thing. More like protesting a same sex marriage than buying yarn at Michael’s.
posted by snofoam at 7:33 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
Being an anti-vaxxer, which to me implies something more active than simply being unvaccinated, seems like a different thing. More like protesting a same sex marriage than buying yarn at Michael’s.
posted by snofoam at 7:33 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
Not all anti-vaxxers are "terrible people" either. I never said FB users were terrible or evil or anything like that. I do think they're behaving selfishly and naively, though, as are anti-vaxxers.
Equating FB users with anti-vaxxers is an extreeeeeme stretch.
posted by Lyme Drop at 7:35 PM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
Equating FB users with anti-vaxxers is an extreeeeeme stretch.
posted by Lyme Drop at 7:35 PM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
Does that mean that every object you purchase has a clean supply chain or that every store that isn't one of those is the greatest place to work?
To be honest, though, you’re the one conflating imperfect consumption with actively malicious behavior.
posted by snofoam at 7:38 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
To be honest, though, you’re the one conflating imperfect consumption with actively malicious behavior.
posted by snofoam at 7:38 PM on October 27, 2021 [4 favorites]
Let me ask you. Do you have a multitude of privacy gadgets in your browsers to ensure that no Facebook trackers are gathering information on you on nearly every site you visit and making a "shadow profile" of who you are, even if you never make a Facebook account? Do you use a Pi-Hole to block all relevant advertising, Javascript to disable all scripting, and never post anything personal to ensure it doesn't get sucked into a giant data harvesters data set? Have you rooted your phone to remove the Facebook app that came bundled with your phone that you can't remove and that harvests data even if you never opened the app?
I have literally done all of these things! I still do!
And I use Facebook.
posted by Dysk at 7:43 PM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
I have literally done all of these things! I still do!
And I use Facebook.
posted by Dysk at 7:43 PM on October 27, 2021 [5 favorites]
(Okay, slight hyperbole, I do in fact post some personal things on various sites, most notably here. I make maybe a handful of Facebook posts a year, promoting gigs I'm playing.)
posted by Dysk at 7:46 PM on October 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by Dysk at 7:46 PM on October 27, 2021 [1 favorite]
From the Atlantic, on how to fix FB by making it more like... Metafilter?
Imagine if access and reach were limited too: mechanically rather than juridically, by default? What if, for example, you could post to Facebook only once a day, or week, or month? Or only to a certain number of people? Or what if, after an hour or a day, the post expired, Snapchat style? Or, after a certain number of views, or when it reached a certain geographic distance from its origins, it self-destructed? That wouldn’t stop bad actors from being bad, but it would reduce their ability to exude that badness into the public sphere.posted by spamandkimchi at 11:31 PM on October 27, 2021
If you do continue using facebook, look at installing FB Purity. I believe it only works on desktop browsers, but it really helps.
It allows you to hide anything and everything (I see no stories, no games, no post backgrounds, no ads, etc.), set up a word filter list (I have a couple keywords related to a phobia that I block), and force "most recent" on the feed at all times, in addition to many other customization options. It really makes things better, but consequently (and happily!), it also makes facebook far less engaging. For me, it also makes clear how little my friends list actually posts on facebook now.
Periodically a facebook update breaks some of FB Purity's functionality, but the developer(s?) are quick to find workarounds.
You can't link to or mention FB Purity on facebook, by the way, so hard to spread the word there.
posted by msbrauer at 6:06 AM on October 28, 2021 [1 favorite]
It allows you to hide anything and everything (I see no stories, no games, no post backgrounds, no ads, etc.), set up a word filter list (I have a couple keywords related to a phobia that I block), and force "most recent" on the feed at all times, in addition to many other customization options. It really makes things better, but consequently (and happily!), it also makes facebook far less engaging. For me, it also makes clear how little my friends list actually posts on facebook now.
Periodically a facebook update breaks some of FB Purity's functionality, but the developer(s?) are quick to find workarounds.
You can't link to or mention FB Purity on facebook, by the way, so hard to spread the word there.
posted by msbrauer at 6:06 AM on October 28, 2021 [1 favorite]
Facebook told the White House to focus on the ‘facts’ about vaccine misinformation. Internal documents show it wasn’t sharing key data.
Facebook researchers had deep knowledge of how coronavirus and vaccine misinformation moved through the company’s apps, running multiple studies and producing large internal reports on what kinds of users were most likely to share falsehoods about the deadly virus, according to documents disclosed by Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen.
But even as academics, lawmakers and the White House urged Facebook for months to be more transparent about the misinformation and its effects on the behavior of its users, the company refused to share much of this information publicly, resulting in a public showdown with the Biden administration...
“For months, I’ve repeatedly requested information from Facebook about covid misinformation, including questions about which users post it, how the platform amplifies it, how Facebook decides what to remove, and much more,” Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.) said in a Tuesday email to The Post. Representing a district that includes Silicon Valley, she sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has oversight over the tech giants.
“I asked these questions because policymakers need to understand how covid misinformation spreads and how we can mitigate its harmful effects on vaccine hesitancy and public health. It was the whistleblower documents that shed light on these issues, instead of Facebook releasing them a long time ago," Eshoo said...
When Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg testified at a House hearing on disinformation in March, Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) pressed him to commit to removing the so-called disinformation dozen. Zuckerberg replied and he and his team would need to “look at the exact examples” to see if those users were breaking Facebook’s rules. Doyle said Wednesday that his office never heard back. “That’s no surprise given Facebook’s lengthy record of dismissing transparency, avoiding accountability, and not owning up to its own mistakes,” he said in a statement to The Post. “I wish I could expect better of them.”
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 7:54 AM on October 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
Facebook researchers had deep knowledge of how coronavirus and vaccine misinformation moved through the company’s apps, running multiple studies and producing large internal reports on what kinds of users were most likely to share falsehoods about the deadly virus, according to documents disclosed by Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen.
But even as academics, lawmakers and the White House urged Facebook for months to be more transparent about the misinformation and its effects on the behavior of its users, the company refused to share much of this information publicly, resulting in a public showdown with the Biden administration...
“For months, I’ve repeatedly requested information from Facebook about covid misinformation, including questions about which users post it, how the platform amplifies it, how Facebook decides what to remove, and much more,” Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.) said in a Tuesday email to The Post. Representing a district that includes Silicon Valley, she sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has oversight over the tech giants.
“I asked these questions because policymakers need to understand how covid misinformation spreads and how we can mitigate its harmful effects on vaccine hesitancy and public health. It was the whistleblower documents that shed light on these issues, instead of Facebook releasing them a long time ago," Eshoo said...
When Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg testified at a House hearing on disinformation in March, Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) pressed him to commit to removing the so-called disinformation dozen. Zuckerberg replied and he and his team would need to “look at the exact examples” to see if those users were breaking Facebook’s rules. Doyle said Wednesday that his office never heard back. “That’s no surprise given Facebook’s lengthy record of dismissing transparency, avoiding accountability, and not owning up to its own mistakes,” he said in a statement to The Post. “I wish I could expect better of them.”
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 7:54 AM on October 28, 2021 [5 favorites]
From my perspective, it's more like people coming into a thread about car accidents and saying "I don't know why anyone would drive a car..."
Back when Critical Mass rides were more of a thing and we had threads about it, you could find the worst kind of cyclist holding this view. It was similarly shitty and unhelpful.
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 8:13 AM on October 28, 2021 [2 favorites]
Back when Critical Mass rides were more of a thing and we had threads about it, you could find the worst kind of cyclist holding this view. It was similarly shitty and unhelpful.
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 8:13 AM on October 28, 2021 [2 favorites]
I recently discovered that two of my local public library systems are offering the anti-vax screed (The Truth About COVID-19: Exposing the Great Reset, Lockdowns, Vaccine Passports, and the New Normal, which I won't link to) from Joseph Mercola, "The Most Influential Spreader of Coronavirus Misinformation Online." If even public librarians feel the need to make anti-science nonsense like this available, we're doomed.
posted by PhineasGage at 8:21 AM on October 28, 2021 [4 favorites]
posted by PhineasGage at 8:21 AM on October 28, 2021 [4 favorites]
The most frequently cited means of discovering the Oath Keepers is Facebook (Mother Jones)
posted by Lyme Drop at 8:21 AM on October 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
posted by Lyme Drop at 8:21 AM on October 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
It’s time to arrest the entire Facebook leadership team for high treason.
posted by interogative mood at 10:53 AM on October 28, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by interogative mood at 10:53 AM on October 28, 2021 [2 favorites]
Facebook's new name is Meta. So everything's ok now.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 11:23 AM on October 28, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 11:23 AM on October 28, 2021 [2 favorites]
So, I guess MetaFilter pivots to being a curated feed of Facebook content?
posted by snofoam at 12:57 PM on October 28, 2021
posted by snofoam at 12:57 PM on October 28, 2021
For more than a decade every one of us has enjoyed and used web sites like Facebook and others.
I have never had a Facebook account, having spotted them as unconscionable right out of the starting gate. For fuck's sake, they were inducing the rubes to upload their private address books and then using the harvested addresses to joe-job spam the rest of us with invitations to do likewise. FUCK YOU, Zuckerberg, and the hearse you rode on in.
Let me ask you. Do you have a multitude of privacy gadgets in your browsers to ensure that no Facebook trackers are gathering information on you on nearly every site you visit and making a "shadow profile" of who you are, even if you never make a Facebook account?
Yes.
Do you use a Pi-Hole to block all relevant advertising
I have been blocking advertising at my gateway since before the Pi-Hole was a thing.
Javascript to disable all scripting
All my browsers run NoScript.
and never post anything personal to ensure it doesn't get sucked into a giant data harvesters data set
About the only giant data harvester I interact with regularly is YouTube. I remain logged out of it almost all the time, and I've never noticed it suggesting stuff that reflects any kind of influence from things I've written online.
Have you rooted your phone to remove the Facebook app that came bundled with your phone that you can't remove and that harvests data even if you never opened the app?
My astonishingly cheap and capable Chinese commodity phone (an Umidigi A7S) came with a very pleasingly plain-vanilla Android installation that included no bundled Facebook properties and receives regular security updates. I expect that its replacement will eventually be a Fairphone, on which I intend to run whatever non-Android free software OS looks the most mature by then.
Zuckerberg's shtoyle is blockable, and amplifying the defeatist propaganda line that it isn't helps nobody.
posted by flabdablet at 3:02 PM on October 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
I have never had a Facebook account, having spotted them as unconscionable right out of the starting gate. For fuck's sake, they were inducing the rubes to upload their private address books and then using the harvested addresses to joe-job spam the rest of us with invitations to do likewise. FUCK YOU, Zuckerberg, and the hearse you rode on in.
Let me ask you. Do you have a multitude of privacy gadgets in your browsers to ensure that no Facebook trackers are gathering information on you on nearly every site you visit and making a "shadow profile" of who you are, even if you never make a Facebook account?
Yes.
Do you use a Pi-Hole to block all relevant advertising
I have been blocking advertising at my gateway since before the Pi-Hole was a thing.
Javascript to disable all scripting
All my browsers run NoScript.
and never post anything personal to ensure it doesn't get sucked into a giant data harvesters data set
About the only giant data harvester I interact with regularly is YouTube. I remain logged out of it almost all the time, and I've never noticed it suggesting stuff that reflects any kind of influence from things I've written online.
Have you rooted your phone to remove the Facebook app that came bundled with your phone that you can't remove and that harvests data even if you never opened the app?
My astonishingly cheap and capable Chinese commodity phone (an Umidigi A7S) came with a very pleasingly plain-vanilla Android installation that included no bundled Facebook properties and receives regular security updates. I expect that its replacement will eventually be a Fairphone, on which I intend to run whatever non-Android free software OS looks the most mature by then.
Zuckerberg's shtoyle is blockable, and amplifying the defeatist propaganda line that it isn't helps nobody.
posted by flabdablet at 3:02 PM on October 28, 2021 [3 favorites]
Zuckerberg's shtoyle is blockable, and amplifying the defeatist propaganda line that it isn't helps nobody.
The problem isn't that you can't block Facebook (though doing so requires a level of technical savvy and capability that most users do not have), it's that pushing blocking as the answer is once again shifting the locus of responsibility from Facebook to individual users. It is not "defeatist propaganda" to say that instead of arguing that users should be running all sorts of programs and components they may not fully understand to be protected, we should be treating a societal problem at the societal level with communal solutions such as regulation.
People don't deserve to be abused just because they aren't tech savvy - and that's what the individual position ultimately advocates for.
posted by NoxAeternum at 4:40 AM on October 29, 2021 [17 favorites]
The problem isn't that you can't block Facebook (though doing so requires a level of technical savvy and capability that most users do not have), it's that pushing blocking as the answer is once again shifting the locus of responsibility from Facebook to individual users. It is not "defeatist propaganda" to say that instead of arguing that users should be running all sorts of programs and components they may not fully understand to be protected, we should be treating a societal problem at the societal level with communal solutions such as regulation.
People don't deserve to be abused just because they aren't tech savvy - and that's what the individual position ultimately advocates for.
posted by NoxAeternum at 4:40 AM on October 29, 2021 [17 favorites]
Also, let's be real:
The education, knowledge and capability of knowing which devices and software to trust is a fucking privilege folks, and maybe this is a great opportunity to check yours.
I don't have a Facebook and I do all the privacy-focused shit here, but god damn, I also know I'm educated and intelligent and a lot of folks just don't have the fucking time or knowledge to research all this tech shit.
Maybe ask all the Trumpers who thought they were getting a "privacy focused phone" that spied on them like crazy because they're gullible idiots.
"Yeah well"
Yeah well those idiots deserve the same protections from this bullshit that we do, and partially because they are more dangerous when they're not protected from this shit.
posted by deadaluspark at 7:10 AM on October 29, 2021 [8 favorites]
The education, knowledge and capability of knowing which devices and software to trust is a fucking privilege folks, and maybe this is a great opportunity to check yours.
I don't have a Facebook and I do all the privacy-focused shit here, but god damn, I also know I'm educated and intelligent and a lot of folks just don't have the fucking time or knowledge to research all this tech shit.
Maybe ask all the Trumpers who thought they were getting a "privacy focused phone" that spied on them like crazy because they're gullible idiots.
"Yeah well"
Yeah well those idiots deserve the same protections from this bullshit that we do, and partially because they are more dangerous when they're not protected from this shit.
posted by deadaluspark at 7:10 AM on October 29, 2021 [8 favorites]
a lot of folks just don't have the fucking time or knowledge to research all this tech shit
And Zuckerberg's sulphurous genius is revealed in the way Facebook's initial userbase building process selected as heavily as it did for a big solid core of exactly such people.
Folks who never had any clue about why netiquette around email address privacy was what it was made easy prey, so the slimy little fuck just preyed on them without mercy.
posted by flabdablet at 8:17 AM on October 29, 2021
And Zuckerberg's sulphurous genius is revealed in the way Facebook's initial userbase building process selected as heavily as it did for a big solid core of exactly such people.
Folks who never had any clue about why netiquette around email address privacy was what it was made easy prey, so the slimy little fuck just preyed on them without mercy.
posted by flabdablet at 8:17 AM on October 29, 2021
And Zuckerberg's sulphurous genius is revealed in the way Facebook's initial userbase building process selected as heavily as it did for a big solid core of exactly such people.
Huh? I mean, at risk of being first up against the wall when the Anti-FB revolution comes, I was one of Facebook's initial users—they don't do monotonic user IDs, at least not anywhere that's exposed, but if they did I'd probably have a UID somewhere in the 5 digits, I think. The rollout started with Harvard, then Stanford/Columbia/Yale, then a bunch of other schools in the Boston area, the rest of the Ivy League, and went on from there. Eventually they opened it up to highschool students with .edu addresses, then finally the general public.
The initial rollout was either a stroke of insane genius or impossibly good luck, depending on who you ask (I have always argued that it was the latter).
But it was a pretty tech-savvy userbase. Though it's worth remembering that OG Facebook—that's "TheFacebook", because they couldn't afford to buy facebook.com initially—was a pretty different service from what exists today.
First off, it was siloed. Every university had what appeared to be a separate instance of FB, with its own subdomain. Harvard students had "harvard.thefacebook.com" and Yaleies had "yale.thefacebook.com" and so on. You couldn't "friend" anyone or share content outside your school's particular instance, and only people with a verified email address from the school's .edu domain could create an account. This was in marked contrast to MySpace, its only real competitor at the time. The closed nature of it was part of the appeal: you could, and people did, post invites to parties and stuff and be reasonably confident that 600 local highschool kids weren't going to show up.
Second, it had some compelling features for people who were leaving college and wanted to stay in touch. At one point, you could export the contact information for your entire friends list as a VCF file, and import it into your mail program or address book or whatever.* They also had a neat little visualization of your personal social graph, which they ditched early on. And it provided a way of sharing photos that was significantly easier than sending them out as a bunch of email attachments and pissing off everyone on dialup.
The two key changes, IMO, were: one, when they linked everything together into one huge Facebook instance rather than the siloed, per-campus model; two, when they created the algorithmically-generated "Feed" instead of a straightforward, chronological timeline of stuff your friends had posted/shared. In retrospect, both of those things should have been a warning sign, but there really wasn't anything to compare it to when they made both changes at around the same time in 2006.
* I just searched through my email archives for "thefacebook.com" and found a series of emails I sent back and forth to a FB dev named "Victor" (who used Pine as their mail program!), regarding their abrupt removal of the vCard export feature in June 2005. This really ground my gears, apparently.
posted by Kadin2048 at 9:39 AM on October 29, 2021 [6 favorites]
Huh? I mean, at risk of being first up against the wall when the Anti-FB revolution comes, I was one of Facebook's initial users—they don't do monotonic user IDs, at least not anywhere that's exposed, but if they did I'd probably have a UID somewhere in the 5 digits, I think. The rollout started with Harvard, then Stanford/Columbia/Yale, then a bunch of other schools in the Boston area, the rest of the Ivy League, and went on from there. Eventually they opened it up to highschool students with .edu addresses, then finally the general public.
The initial rollout was either a stroke of insane genius or impossibly good luck, depending on who you ask (I have always argued that it was the latter).
But it was a pretty tech-savvy userbase. Though it's worth remembering that OG Facebook—that's "TheFacebook", because they couldn't afford to buy facebook.com initially—was a pretty different service from what exists today.
First off, it was siloed. Every university had what appeared to be a separate instance of FB, with its own subdomain. Harvard students had "harvard.thefacebook.com" and Yaleies had "yale.thefacebook.com" and so on. You couldn't "friend" anyone or share content outside your school's particular instance, and only people with a verified email address from the school's .edu domain could create an account. This was in marked contrast to MySpace, its only real competitor at the time. The closed nature of it was part of the appeal: you could, and people did, post invites to parties and stuff and be reasonably confident that 600 local highschool kids weren't going to show up.
Second, it had some compelling features for people who were leaving college and wanted to stay in touch. At one point, you could export the contact information for your entire friends list as a VCF file, and import it into your mail program or address book or whatever.* They also had a neat little visualization of your personal social graph, which they ditched early on. And it provided a way of sharing photos that was significantly easier than sending them out as a bunch of email attachments and pissing off everyone on dialup.
The two key changes, IMO, were: one, when they linked everything together into one huge Facebook instance rather than the siloed, per-campus model; two, when they created the algorithmically-generated "Feed" instead of a straightforward, chronological timeline of stuff your friends had posted/shared. In retrospect, both of those things should have been a warning sign, but there really wasn't anything to compare it to when they made both changes at around the same time in 2006.
* I just searched through my email archives for "thefacebook.com" and found a series of emails I sent back and forth to a FB dev named "Victor" (who used Pine as their mail program!), regarding their abrupt removal of the vCard export feature in June 2005. This really ground my gears, apparently.
posted by Kadin2048 at 9:39 AM on October 29, 2021 [6 favorites]
Huh?
I'm talking about the process whereby a new prospect is invited to upload their private email address book, and Facebook immediately spams all of the contacts of anybody who does with joe-job invitations to do likewise. This process clearly selected heavily for new users who had no grasp of what an outrageously rude breach of trust this was on the part of all participants.
It's 2021 now, and it seems really difficult for people who have become accustomed to the new norms created by social media to remember that there used to exist an expectation that private address books should be kept private. But I remember, and so does the Internet. I was employed as a school IT technician at the time and when staff started asking me how they could stop this shit from getting into their inboxes I had trouble believing just how much of it I was seeing.
posted by flabdablet at 12:55 AM on October 30, 2021 [1 favorite]
I'm talking about the process whereby a new prospect is invited to upload their private email address book, and Facebook immediately spams all of the contacts of anybody who does with joe-job invitations to do likewise. This process clearly selected heavily for new users who had no grasp of what an outrageously rude breach of trust this was on the part of all participants.
It's 2021 now, and it seems really difficult for people who have become accustomed to the new norms created by social media to remember that there used to exist an expectation that private address books should be kept private. But I remember, and so does the Internet. I was employed as a school IT technician at the time and when staff started asking me how they could stop this shit from getting into their inboxes I had trouble believing just how much of it I was seeing.
posted by flabdablet at 12:55 AM on October 30, 2021 [1 favorite]
Facebook Plans to Shut Down Facial Recognition System
Says they're going to delete a billion face IDs, but it doesn't sound like it's gone forever.
posted by rhizome at 11:59 AM on November 2, 2021 [2 favorites]
Says they're going to delete a billion face IDs, but it doesn't sound like it's gone forever.
posted by rhizome at 11:59 AM on November 2, 2021 [2 favorites]
« Older Laura Kampf buys some storage containers. | Fragile Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by spamandkimchi at 6:12 PM on October 26, 2021 [10 favorites]