Rohingya sue Facebook for £150bn over Myanmar genocide(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
Rohingya sue Facebook for £150bn over Myanmar genocide
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/dec/06/rohingya-sue-facebook-myanmar-genocide-us-uk-legal-action-social-media-violence
20 comments
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29462176
The problem is that anger is addictive.
Even if humans didn't understand this fact about human nature, the engagement maximizing algorithms absolutely homed in on it. It's also pretty obvious today that the average tech-bro sneering at the humanities a decade back didn't understand this phenomenon or thought it was unimportant.
This short-sightedness from Big Tech is why there is such a societal backlash towards tech today, which is sad because much good has also come out of tech.
Even if humans didn't understand this fact about human nature, the engagement maximizing algorithms absolutely homed in on it. It's also pretty obvious today that the average tech-bro sneering at the humanities a decade back didn't understand this phenomenon or thought it was unimportant.
This short-sightedness from Big Tech is why there is such a societal backlash towards tech today, which is sad because much good has also come out of tech.
Instead of IDK suing the Myanmar government? This makes no sense
Sovereign immunity means they cannot sue the Myanmar government.
I mean, I think the bigger issue is probably how rule of law is totally shattered in Myanmar, and you're not going to get some other government to give you relief when the proper venue is in the jurisdiction where the crimes occurred.
Just to be clear, you're throwing your hat in on the side of those who aided the genocide here? Okay.
Just to be clear, no. Suing a platform makes no sense.
I wonder if there'll be another book written.
Along the lines of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust
Along the lines of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust
And they should get every penny.
I was living in Bangladesh while this was happening and ended up volunteering at one of the refugee camps. The people there were very aware that the mobs were being organized on Facebook.
Later while working in Bangkok I had a colleague from Myanmar who’s entire family was murdered as they tried to flee across the border to Thailand.
People have been talking about this for years and Facebook absolutely needs to be held accountable along with the pieces of shit running that poor country.
I was living in Bangladesh while this was happening and ended up volunteering at one of the refugee camps. The people there were very aware that the mobs were being organized on Facebook.
Later while working in Bangkok I had a colleague from Myanmar who’s entire family was murdered as they tried to flee across the border to Thailand.
People have been talking about this for years and Facebook absolutely needs to be held accountable along with the pieces of shit running that poor country.
What if they were using Signal?
Signal doesn’t curate feeds and act as a radicalization engine in the name of “engagement”.
Facebook is a blight on society, even in the United States and UK you can feel it’s impact.
Facebook is a blight on society, even in the United States and UK you can feel it’s impact.
How does some random webshit showing stuff possibly relevant to a user constitute being a radicalization engine? Is this something they could have known at design time? I'm not being rude, I want to know the reasoning.
In this case, Meta was most definitely complicit for other reasons.
- they started operating in a country but had no Myanmar-language human moderation, in a place where FB quickly became synonymous THE internet. - the AI-powered content moderation failed hard on identifying hate speech partially because everything was written in Zawgyi, not Unicode.
It was way after the FB had a lot of eggs on their face that they issued public statements: https://about.fb.com/news/2018/11/myanmar-hria/
They should have been much more proactive, but it seems like it was growth at all costs and ignore the rest.
- they started operating in a country but had no Myanmar-language human moderation, in a place where FB quickly became synonymous THE internet. - the AI-powered content moderation failed hard on identifying hate speech partially because everything was written in Zawgyi, not Unicode.
It was way after the FB had a lot of eggs on their face that they issued public statements: https://about.fb.com/news/2018/11/myanmar-hria/
They should have been much more proactive, but it seems like it was growth at all costs and ignore the rest.
facebook also doesn't have any content moderators in navajo or maya. should they block indigenous people from using their native languages on facebook to avoid harming them?
Interesting question.... but it is a very different case than voluntary starting to operate in a country with voluntary no investment in an ok moderation in the main language spoken there
> website
n-gate reader spotted :D
n-gate reader spotted :D