Facebook Hatred

Free

10K under the hat
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
10,092
Location
Underground in America
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
Facebook’s "undesirable" appearance policy keeps blocking the wrong people

In theory, the policy is meant to block predatory ads that target people who are overweight or have skin conditions, pushing unusual and often medically dangerous miracle cures. “Ads referring to someone’s body or appearance are personal in nature and we don’t want users to feel singled out,” Facebook explained.

But in practice, the policy isn’t nuanced enough to recognize ads like Gillies’, which are looking to celebrate those same conditions. Gillies responded to Facebook’s policy on her blog, writing, “Apparently my skin is put in the same ‘undesirable’ bracket as ‘eating live animals’... so that’s nice to know.”
 

Free

10K under the hat
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
10,092
Location
Underground in America
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
A few weeks ago, Facebook made it clear that posts shared by politicians are exempt from Facebook's community standards and also from fact-checking. The company did, however, indicate one area where posts made by politicians' accounts could be subject to scrutiny: in paid advertising. Faced with a stark real-world test, though, Facebook appears once again to be erring on the side of letting misinformation circulate far and wide if a politician promotes it.

The ad in question involves—you guessed it—President Donald Trump and his campaign for re-election. The Trump campaign in the past week has been airing ads on Facebook making false accusations about former Vice President Joe Biden, a Democratic candidate for the 2020 presidential nomination. The ads' claims about Biden's activities in Ukraine and elsewhere have been repeatedly debunked as baseless conspiracy theories, not only by media outlets but also by Republican politicians.

Cable network CNN deemed the ads in question too misleading to broadcast and refused to air them. Facebook, however, considers the matter out of its hands.
 

Free

10K under the hat
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
10,092
Location
Underground in America
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
Playing by the rules...

 
  • 1Thanks
  • 1Agree
Reactions: Brenda Archer and Govi

Free

10K under the hat
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
10,092
Location
Underground in America
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565

Eunoli

Well-known member
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
753
SL Rez
2002
Facebook is as much a public utility as any other at this point. I'd say the FCC needs to police it - but not until (if) we return to a normal government.
 

Free

10K under the hat
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
10,092
Location
Underground in America
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
A lengthy piece from Steven Levy in Wired today revealed parts of a 2006 journal from Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. You can read the Wired story here, and also our take on the most notable part of it, which is that Zuckerberg once considered something wild called “dark profiles.” But what struck me most was the fact that what we saw today in Wired may be the only glimpse we ever get at Zuckerberg’s intimate journal record — because he destroyed the rest of it.

“The notebooks have now mostly disappeared, destroyed by Zuckerberg himself,” Levy reports. “He says he did it for privacy reasons.”

It’s difficult to capture the magnitude of this irony.
Please, try anyway.
 
  • 2Agree
Reactions: Brenda Archer and Govi

Free

10K under the hat
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
10,092
Location
Underground in America
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
Hatred renewed.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said the company may adjust the salaries of employees moving out of Silicon Valley as it looks to create more remote roles, CNBC reported.

The salary adjustments would apply to potentially remote workers who are looking at living in areas with cheaper housing costs in comparison to Silicon Valley, which has one of the most expensive cost-of-living areas in the US.

"We'll adjust salary to your location at that point," Zuckerberg said during a livestream, according to CNBC. "There'll be severe ramifications for people who are not honest about this."
 

Aribeth Zelin

Faeryfox
Joined
Sep 23, 2018
Messages
1,301
SL Rez
2004
Joined SLU
03-11-2011
SLU Posts
9410

GoblinCampFollower

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
522
SL Rez
2007
To be fair, my spouse's pay is based in part to where we live, because our cost of living is lower than Atlanta or Houston. But lowering a salary is BS.
Yeah, as much as I HATE to defend facebook, this is a pretty common corporate policy anywhere in the USA, and not just facebook being evil. Tech workers who live in Silicon Valley get paid a lot of extra money for living in such an expensive area... if their rent goes down by a factor of 3 by moving to a city like mine, they can deal with a minor cost of living paycut. Most companies would cut their pay, but not by so much that it isn't worthwhile for them to move. They will live.
 

Roxie Marten

A member in good standing of the usual suspects
Joined
Mar 21, 2020
Messages
87
Location
USA
SL Rez
2004
Joined SLU
2008
This seems like a no brainer Higher the cost of living the more they pay to lure employees to work there.
For me if i could work from a cabin on the North Side of Lake Superior and only have to drive my car for food runs and socializing it would be worth the trade off.
The one hope I have is this plague shows employers you don't need have people on site to do their jobs. Something I have been preaching for years.
 
  • 1Agree
  • 1Like
Reactions: Beebo Brink and Khamon

Free

10K under the hat
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
10,092
Location
Underground in America
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
Well, I wasn't aware there were people here who seem OK with the idea that a company should be allowed to cut (or raise) employee salaries every time they move.
 
  • 1Agree
Reactions: Lexxi

bubblesort

Active member
Joined
Nov 16, 2018
Messages
280
Well, I wasn't aware there were people here who seem OK with the idea that a company should be allowed to cut (or raise) employee salaries every time they move.
Yeah, I'm surprised people seem cool with it. You should be paid based on your value to the company, not based on how little they can get away with paying you, because of cost of living. If you can telecommute, and your work is worth 6 figures in San Jose, it should be worth 6 figures coming from Alabama, or Bulgaria. On top of that, this kind of thing stops money from leaving these big tech centers, which means the folks in rural Alabama can all learn to code, like peole keep telling them to do whenever a factory shuts down, but they will still always be poor if they don't leave Alabama.

Companies can certainly request that you take a pay cut, but I think employees would be in the right to laugh in their faces and quit before accepting a cut like that, if the value of their work remains unchanged.
 

Beebo Brink

Climate Apocalypse Alarmist
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,439
SL Rez
2006
Well, I wasn't aware there were people here who seem OK with the idea that a company should be allowed to cut (or raise) employee salaries every time they move.
I doubt my company would cut the pay of an employee who moved, but geographic location is part of the calculation for the size of future raises. And yes, I'm definitely okay with that, for the same reason that it's structured that way: to create an even playing field in compensation. Even with this adjustment, however, I'm guessing that those of us who live in areas with lower cost of living are still making out better.
 

Sid

Lurking until the next post
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
3,181
Location
Limburg, NL
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
Yes
Companies should stimulate that people live near their work, if only for environmental reasons.
The less we commute, the better for the air quality of our planet. There should be a bonus if you live within 5-10 miles from your work IMHO.
 
  • 2lolwut?
Reactions: Lexxi and Beebo Brink

Beebo Brink

Climate Apocalypse Alarmist
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,439
SL Rez
2006
Companies should stimulate that people live near their work, if only for environmental reasons.
The less we commute, the better for the air quality of our planet. There should be a bonus if you live within 5-10 miles from your work IMHO.
Yeah. You REALLY don't understand the geography of our country.
 

Sid

Lurking until the next post
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
3,181
Location
Limburg, NL
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
Yes
I think that can be done in a continent sized state as well as in a post stamp sized one like the Netherlands.
But if it can't because America, so be it.