Facebook labels declaration of independence as 'hate speech'
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
Do we know that this was the action of an "algorithmic censor"? I mean, one of the automated censors? My impression was that Facebook still has many human censors [0] in its employ, many of them outsourced in non-U.S. countries. It's possible that a human user flagged this Declaration of Independence post, and a human censor approved the flagging/censoring of it.
Yes, I know that "algorithm", broadly defined, could include a process in which a human user flags something for a human censor, but that's not how "algorithmic censors" is typically used in this context.
[0] http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-facebook...
FB has been under intense scrutiny for providing a platform for hate speech, so why should we be surprised that they use automated means to decrease the lead time between posting and removal?
That phrase is hate speech, it just happens to be contained within one of the founding documents of the US. While it is a worthwhile goal for the algorithm to understand the context of it - I don't think we're quite there yet, and I would rather have a few false positives than the avalanche of shit that would exist without it.
As to whether a human removed it, I suspect that from the perspective of the person doing it, it's better to err on the side of caution than lose your job; especially a non-US citizen.
Can you tell me what crime was committed here? As noted in the Vindicator's own article:
> While unhappy with Facebook’s action, the editor reminds readers that Facebook is a business corporation, not the government, and as such it is allowed to restrict use of its services as long as those restrictions do not violate any laws. Plus, The Vindicator is using Facebook for free, so the newspaper has little grounds for complaint other than the silliness of it.
> The problem The Vindicator faces is that it has become dependent, perhaps too dependent, on Facebook to communicate with local residents and to promote the newspaper. Some Vindicator stories posted on thevindicator.com attract thousands of page views, but usually only after links to them are shared on Facebook. Plus, many bits of information are shared by the newspaper through Facebook alone.
And review this announcement that they are building a tool to appeal decisions: https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2018/04/comprehensive-community...
What more do you want? Feel free to mention specifics instead of just downvoting me because I disagree with you.
A debate could be made over whether FB invests enough in its human censor system, perhaps, but I’m not getting into that here. BTW I didn’t and can’t downvote you — HN disallows authors from downvoting direct replies.
In fairness, I think most people realize that a significant number of problems are actually solved by blockchain instead.
not as catchy a title I guess.
Wow.