[geuszb]

> What exactly is it about the platform that makes it so "evil"?

Off the top of my head I'd personally nominate

Ads on WhatsApp Password breaches affecting both fb and ig Forced homogenization of the product offering via Stories Sleaziness around graph growth An upcoming boondoggle of an integration between Fb Ig and WhatsApp identity systems supposedly to align them on strong privacy via end to end encryption And personally I'd add the pursuit of end to end encryption at scale, which sounds like it'll lead to a disaster of moderation. (Ie don't count me in as the supporter of e2ee in the first place.)

> Do we really think we can stem "fake news" by expecting Facebook to bear the responsibility for everything that is communicated on their platform(s)?

I am not sure what the alternative you propose is. Dig your head deeper into sand?

> are we truly confident that hamstringing Facebook with a "break-up" is really going to lead to a better future? Do I really want my kids to be using TikTok/WeChat/Telegram or some other foreign controlled platform over which my government has much less oversight

I am not sure which is your government but it would probably have some power as long as we're talking about commercial operations, which tend to have some substantial presence in the jurisdictions where they're operating at scale. Or, even just blocking...

[throwaway84_TO]

> I am not sure what the alternative you propose is. Dig your head deeper into sand?

I was trying to edit my comment earlier to purposely extend on this point, but was unable to.

Would nobody agree that perhaps this problem stems from a perhaps larger underlying issue? Perhaps better education?

[jvagner]

I don't know about breaking up Facebook, but I'd be happy if Instagram were spun back out (though, the founders are gone).

I'm someone who deleted their Facebook account.

In short, the reach and impact they have, given their proclivities, are not a net positive. When they make mistakes, or when they pursue questionable business practices, it has global impact.

That kind of power should be held by more accountable organizations, and with Zuck controlling more than 50% of the voting rights of the stock in FB, there's no chance.

At this point, they're tripping into a future, commensurate with the ignorance (or unconcern) of their user base, that I can't support.

If you're asking, "What do they do that's so bad?"... well, it's well documented.

[geuszb]

Education is no doubt one of the problems underlying credulity but it is not the only one. I have seen very well-educated people repeatedly fall for misinformation on social networks that played to their preconceptions.

[wongarsu]

e2ee is just a modern way to enforce secrecy of correspondence. The contents of letters is protected from prying eyes for now 300 years in Germany and France, and to my understanding also in the US for the last 140 years. If we suddenly have an urgent fake news problem I would suspect it's caused by some new development, not a centuries old policy.

[geuszb]

> Protected from prying eyes

Yes but only by law, which allows exceptions, notably law enforcement, national security, etc.

And I wasn't saying this causes fake news, but it does pose a moderation challenge when done at scale