Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   ChatJERRYPT (jerry@infosec.exchange)'s status on Wednesday, 08-Jan-2025 09:59:34 JST ChatJERRYPT

   There’s a lot of uproar about Meta announcing that is no longer fact checking. Honest question: was there any evidence that they were actually doing this before, or is that performance BS to make sure Meta remains a lap cat to the US government?

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@friedcheese.us)'s status on Wednesday, 08-Jan-2025 09:59:33 JST feld

     in reply to
     @jerry and fact checking is only worthwhile if you can trust whoever is implementing it.
     
     Does anyone really trust Elon to do fact checking?
     
     Why would you ever trust Zuck to do fact checking?
     
     The entire idea of "fact checking" on social media platforms is because of Trump's "fake news" nonsense during his first campaign and millions of people thought Twitter was their little darling that would do the right thing
   • Embed this notice
     ChatJERRYPT (jerry@infosec.exchange)'s status on Wednesday, 08-Jan-2025 10:05:17 JST ChatJERRYPT

     in reply to

     My apologies if I’m having a bad reaction, because I’ve seen the horse shit that my elderly parents are fed via Facebook and I see zero indication they have any fact checking whatsoever.

     feld likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     ChatJERRYPT (jerry@infosec.exchange)'s status on Wednesday, 08-Jan-2025 10:07:48 JST ChatJERRYPT

     in reply to

     • Samantha Xavia

     @sam I can agree on that. But I am seeing people here railing on the fact checking angle, not the “we are going to let racist, sexist, anti-trans comments slide”

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@friedcheese.us)'s status on Wednesday, 08-Jan-2025 10:07:48 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Samantha Xavia
     @jerry @sam I think the future is going to have to be open platforms like the Fediverse and tooling to allow users to train what is essentially a Bayesian filter or some local LLM classification model on various topics they want to never see
     
     Trying to eliminate this behavior top down is very hard to do and requires so much labor to keep on top of it 24/7 especially on an open network where jerks and bots can pop up at any time from new domains
   • Embed this notice
     Samantha Xavia (sam@bikersgo.social)'s status on Wednesday, 08-Jan-2025 10:07:49 JST Samantha Xavia

     in reply to

     @jerry@infosec.exchange I don't find the fact checking a problem... I however find them advocating for the openness of people being able to say whatever they want about gender & immigrants. There platforms are slowly turning into another version of twitter and i'm not here for that.

   • Embed this notice
     scriptjunkie (sj@social.scriptjunkie.us)'s status on Wednesday, 08-Jan-2025 10:43:41 JST scriptjunkie

     in reply to

     @jerry before I left a number of years ago, I saw all kinds of context added and general moderation/censorship, but it was awful. It was either super automated or run by idiots. You'd be sarcastically mocking an idea and you'd get hit as if you were the one spreading it. I think 95% of their fact checks missed the point.

     Somebody would post a scientific study contrasting different kinds of masks and their efficacy and FB would do things like plaster over it with a braindead fact check generally asserting masks are good. Then they censored a bunch of true things, but overall it essentially ended up picking the most annoying undergrad students to spam their misunderstandings over regex matched posts globally.

     I won't miss it.