manjushri

>But when "refraining from censorship" ends with advertisers (your main source of income) pulling out, your options become "censor videos" or "shutdown the service".

False dichotomy, there are other business models that don't require selling out to the whims of advertisers.

>Specifically, Facebook is not managed by a "political unit". It's managed by its owners, who have authority over it because it is their property and they have property rights. Governments do not own their citizens. They only have authority because citizens agree, whether voluntarily or through intimidation, to respect that authority.

You're comparing apples (FB code) to oranges (citizens). A fair comparison would be users to citizens, or platform code to national territory.

Facebook does not own it's users just like a government doesn't own it citizens. A nation owns the land within it's boundaries just like FB owns the code on it's platform.

>And no, FIFA does not call itself a government. It calls itself a "governing body" in the text you just quoted. That is not the same thing

Again, a government is literally defined as governing body, even thougg you don't like it. Do you think there is a government that doesn't have a governing body?

>We both know I meant a group of people who get together after work to play for fun, and that the people "in charge" of that are obviously not a government. Claiming that that's false because it's not 100% true for FIFA is a pretty egregious straw man.

Claiming that we cannot call Facebook a government because a local football club is not typically called a government is itself an egregious strawman; apples to oranges again. FIFA is a far more comparable to an international entity like Facebook, isn't it?

>By that definition, every conceivable grouping of human beings that has any sort of leadership has a government, but that definition is so broad as to be useless.

Well, that is in accordance with the dictionary definition.

The bigger and more powerful the grouping becomes, the more practical the definition becomes. Which is why it could be a useful designation for an entity with psychological control over 2,000,000,000+ people, but not so much for a football league with ~100 people (though technically it still can be called a governing body).

>Government: the governing body of a nation, state, or community.

Is Facebook a community? If so it would seem it fits the plain dictionary definition.

WRT #3, the problem seems to be moreso consciously executed covert and overt political censorship/demonetization of undesireable speech rather than the problem of unconscious biases of developers. It's as simple as refraining from censorship

1. Hire more support

2. Provide clearly defined guidelines as they relate to the algo and be equitable with enforcement

3. Be politically neutral

This will not guarantee safety from violence, but it could increase it.

Seems like hunting hackers is a lot like hunting witches.

What is considered as evidence/proof is extremely superficial and can easily be faked.

The convenient enemy of the day is the one who gets blamed, whether or not they actually had anything to do with it.

Indeed. When you hold a child up as a political shield don't be surprised when it gets attacked.

>shares nothing with the China being discussed right now.

Seems like apples to oranges, assuming the implied comparison is with western post-industrial age nations, which began industrializing centuries ago, as compared to decades ago with China.

Haven't US special forces been in Syria for years now?

If information is power, then that is like asking if having more power is more profitable than having less power.