Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's kind of funny watching far left liberals here get bent out of shape because Zuckerberg has decided to embrace free speech.

Free speech used to be valued by liberals.

Free speech is a two-way street. You can say whatever you want, but people are free to challenge what you've said and call it out for bullshit. You don't want "free speech", you want consequence-free speech.

And the problem with FB is more than allowing the speech. It’s the algorithm. They know it took about 7 days for a “Christian woman in SC” user to be prompted to join Q Anon groups and other insanity. They willfully radicalized millions of people all over the world. They are not innocent bystanders. They didn’t care what happened, as long as it meant users spent more time on their website.

This comment needs to be pinned. People don’t understand the power of algorithms. Scary!

+1

I had to create a FB account to connect with a group I joined and, by default, FB pushes a constant stream of conspiracy theories and rando AI content.

It’s scary that they are doing this to millions of people.

What kind of group? Not defending FB at all, but this content is definitely not the “default.” I’ve had an account for years and never gotten that kind of stuff. I get all sorts of ads & crap, but it’s related to my Google searches & the pages I visit on FB (so, basically no political or conspiracy theory content at all).

It’s different if you’ve had an account for years because then FB “knows” you. There was an article around the time of the 2016 election that I wish I could find now, where a guy started a brand new FB account like he was just signing up, he said he was “conservative,” but just regular conservative, and followed some conservative politicians and pages, and he was quickly suggested a bunch of extremely far right and conspiracy material including Q-Anon stuff, which was not yet banned on FB as of 2016.

There are also a ton of bot pages posting AI generated images, and bot accounts reposting popular reels and other forms of short form video, some even pretending to be the original poster themself. Again, you won’t see it as much if you have an established account, but if you’re new and have few “friends” or established “interests,” that’s what FB is going to push toward you. I use it for the groups now and that’s about it. Many of my friends have stopped posting altogether.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol i didn’t have “continually agree with Laura Loomer” on my New Year’s resolutions list:

They have free will. But, I think a lot of people believed that Russia interfered with the election and that these steps were necessary. And then it evolved into censorship and it became undeniable that it was strictly partisan. I dont think that FB made the right choices but I don't think that they intended to be part of the oppression. Now they are doing the right thing, and a lot of places (including this one) won't.

FB has tons of information that they were causing lots of harm all over the world. They had teams dedicated to researching it and coming up with solutions. Zuck mostly ignored them because he didn’t want anything to interfere with engagement. He literally ignored human slave trade on his site and allowed the spread of disinformation that led to collapsed governments. If he doesn’t want to take any responsibility for this, then social
media sites need to get sued for the damage they cause. He wants all of the money and none of the responsibility.

Anonymous wrote:Why are all billionaires so weird and awkward? He looks like a fake person.

Because they all have Aspergers

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's kind of funny watching far left liberals here get bent out of shape because Zuckerberg has decided to embrace free speech.

Free speech used to be valued by liberals.

Free speech is a two-way street. You can say whatever you want, but people are free to challenge what you've said and call it out for bullshit. You don't want "free speech", you want consequence-free speech.

And the problem with FB is more than allowing the speech. It’s the algorithm. They know it took about 7 days for a “Christian woman in SC” user to be prompted to join Q Anon groups and other insanity. They willfully radicalized millions of people all over the world. They are not innocent bystanders. They didn’t care what happened, as long as it meant users spent more time on their website.

This comment needs to be pinned. People don’t understand the power of algorithms. Scary!

+1

I had to create a FB account to connect with a group I joined and, by default, FB pushes a constant stream of conspiracy theories and rando AI content.

It’s scary that they are doing this to millions of people.

What kind of group? Not defending FB at all, but this content is definitely not the “default.” I’ve had an account for years and never gotten that kind of stuff. I get all sorts of ads & crap, but it’s related to my Google searches & the pages I visit on FB (so, basically no political or conspiracy theory content at all).

The same here. I get tons of crap related to my hobby searches.

Anonymous wrote:Lol i didn’t have “continually agree with Laura Loomer” on my New Year’s resolutions list:

They have free will. But, I think a lot of people believed that Russia interfered with the election and that these steps were necessary. And then it evolved into censorship and it became undeniable that it was strictly partisan. I dont think that FB made the right choices but I don't think that they intended to be part of the oppression. Now they are doing the right thing, and a lot of places (including this one) won't.

So glad the Biden administration is going away.
And, people STILL claim they weren't censoring speech.......

Now Democrats want to stop people from saying negative things about how they are handling the response to these mismanaged fires.

Anonymous wrote:Lol i didn’t have “continually agree with Laura Loomer” on my New Year’s resolutions list:

Lol i didn’t have “continually agree with Laura Loomer” on my New Year’s resolutions list:

I'm glad that Zuckerberg is going on record publicly avoid the government attempting to censor memes by coercing a company. The government has absolutely no authority to get involved in, of all things, meme censorship. If you're wondering why Americans are poorer, sicker, and more vulnerable to foreign threats than before, this is why. They took their eyes off the ball to focus on nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol at the crying liberals on this board who no longer count on Zuckerberg to squash speech.

Misinformation isn’t speech, a$$wipe.

Yes it is. It absolutely is, because who decides what is misinformation?

I’m old enough to remember when women claimed that the Covid vaccine was messing with their menstruation and it was censored and labeled misinformation.

Turned out to be true!

Cite your sources

DP

My uterus is MY source. After my 2nd Moderna shot in 2021, I skipped two periods, then had short duration periods every 14-16 days, for several months.

That was some scary sh*t.

LOL "scary sht". I can see why no one took you seriously.

Let’s see if you believe in science. Linked is a study by NIH that shows the Covid vaccine caused menstrual issues.

Menstrual abnormalities after COVID-19 vaccines: A systematic review

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9683843/#:~:text=Conclusion,menorrhagia%2C%20metrorrhagia%2C%20and%20polymenorrhea.

OMG!!! YOU HAD SEVERAL IRREGULAR PERIODS!!! SOOOOOOOO SCARY!!!

GTFO.

Proving the point perfectly. Women are speaking up about the symptoms and getting smeared accordingly (only for a few years later, the medical establishment to say “well actually yes, there are impacts on the menstrual cycle after all that we didn’t know about or disclose in the vaccine risk factor paperwork you signed”).

+1 I was done having kids, but if I were trying to conceive, especially if I was having trouble conceiving, the months my period was erratic after the vaccine would have been a very big deal to me.

A big deal to you doesn’t mean it’s a big deal in the grand scheme. Your doctor would have reassured you that things would go back to normal within a few months. Women trying to conceive get a little crazy about it (I remember this when going through it myself) and sometimes lose perspective. The vaccine was not and is not a threat to women’s fertility. If you are so easily manipulated that you now have distrust in the medical community over this, you have bigger problems.

Is it really so hard to say that tech companies shouldn’t be censoring true information?

It isn’t up to facebook to decide whether something is a “big deal” or not. I will decide for myself whether something is important to me.

Hunter’s laptop is a perfect example. It revealed a candidate’s son committed numerous crimes just before an election. Whether that is important or not is up to individuals to decide, but Facebook censored it.

Facebook should not have been censoring true information, period.

All the laptop proved was that he had a drug problem and lied on his 4473.

The right wing LIED ITS ASS OFF about the laptop claiming it held evidence of vast corruption and millions of dollars flowing to Joe Biden from China and elsewhere, along with LIES about child porn and everything else. None of those things turned out to be true about the laptop.

Stop being so self-righteous about the laptop. You spread a TON of lies about it.

If it was really NBD why lie? Why did 50 FBI officials deny it?

The cover-up is the issue.

If "the cover-up is the issue," then I have to assume that you are equally bothered by Trump's cover up of his dalliance with a pornstar a month before a presidential election in which he was running by getting his attorney to pay hush money to the porn star to buy her silence. Or is that different ethically?

Is it different? Well, let’s see.
- A private citizen pays off a porn star on one hand or
- The US FBI outright lying to the American people on the other.

I’d go with the federal government lying to the American public as far more egregious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's kind of funny watching far left liberals here get bent out of shape because Zuckerberg has decided to embrace free speech.

Free speech used to be valued by liberals.

Free speech is a two-way street. You can say whatever you want, but people are free to challenge what you've said and call it out for bullshit. You don't want "free speech", you want consequence-free speech.

And the problem with FB is more than allowing the speech. It’s the algorithm. They know it took about 7 days for a “Christian woman in SC” user to be prompted to join Q Anon groups and other insanity. They willfully radicalized millions of people all over the world. They are not innocent bystanders. They didn’t care what happened, as long as it meant users spent more time on their website.

This comment needs to be pinned. People don’t understand the power of algorithms. Scary!

+1

I had to create a FB account to connect with a group I joined and, by default, FB pushes a constant stream of conspiracy theories and rando AI content.

It’s scary that they are doing this to millions of people.

What kind of group? Not defending FB at all, but this content is definitely not the “default.” I’ve had an account for years and never gotten that kind of stuff. I get all sorts of ads & crap, but it’s related to my Google searches & the pages I visit on FB (so, basically no political or conspiracy theory content at all).

DP but it’s based on your algorithm.

Watch The Social Dilemma and read Broken Code.

Anonymous wrote:Zuckerberg sold his soul. Shameful legacy.

He and Musk could have changed the world for the better but chose their ego and bank balances instead.

He claimed Facebook wasn't censoring speech. Then he said Facebook would stop censoring speech.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's kind of funny watching far left liberals here get bent out of shape because Zuckerberg has decided to embrace free speech.

Free speech used to be valued by liberals.

Free speech is a two-way street. You can say whatever you want, but people are free to challenge what you've said and call it out for bullshit. You don't want "free speech", you want consequence-free speech.

And the problem with FB is more than allowing the speech. It’s the algorithm. They know it took about 7 days for a “Christian woman in SC” user to be prompted to join Q Anon groups and other insanity. They willfully radicalized millions of people all over the world. They are not innocent bystanders. They didn’t care what happened, as long as it meant users spent more time on their website.

This comment needs to be pinned. People don’t understand the power of algorithms. Scary!

+1

I had to create a FB account to connect with a group I joined and, by default, FB pushes a constant stream of conspiracy theories and rando AI content.

It’s scary that they are doing this to millions of people.

What kind of group? Not defending FB at all, but this content is definitely not the “default.” I’ve had an account for years and never gotten that kind of stuff. I get all sorts of ads & crap, but it’s related to my Google searches & the pages I visit on FB (so, basically no political or conspiracy theory content at all).

Zuckerberg sold his soul. Shameful legacy.

He and Musk could have changed the world for the better but chose their ego and bank balances instead.