[aierou]

How about we start with the claim from the recent leaks that they cause depression or body image issues? The leaked document in question [1] should be considered for further research, but it is hardly evidence of this claim.

There is also a popular claim that Facebook contributed to genocide. Here's an article [2]. Facebook hired an investigator that concluded that their involvement was without their knowledge. Tragic and reckless, sure. Intentional? I doubt it. I think it's an issue of scale and navigating complex regulatory and social structures.

Shadow profiles are another hot topic. The big issue is that, if you agreed to let Facebook read your contacts, it linked your friends phone numbers to distinct 'profiles' in the background. Presumably these could also be tied to their advertising profiles.

Cambridge Analytica was a company that abused a bug in API access (allegedly unbeknownst to Facebook - this exploit was available to all 3rd party apps) to collect information not only about willing participants, but their friends as well.

As for VR, there are numerous claims and hesitancy about privacy abuse through tracking and sensing technologies that are essential to VR development. I appreciate some hesitancy, but it is a bit sensationalized.

Beyond all of this, there are lots of claims of monopoly abuse. There is actually an FTC lawsuit that could lead to a landmark antritust case, but that is yet to be seen. I don't really think they have a monopoly as there are numerous competitors.

I apologize as I don't have links for everything, but that's an overview of my thoughts. I think Facebook is simply navigating the regulatory and social landscape in a way that any novel company or platform would be required to navigate. I think we often forget that this technology is new and will experience growing pains, even if at such massive scale. I think a lot of the blame for the fraying of U.S. democracy, the decline in mental health, and other social issues are incorrectly attributed to things that have brought change in the past few decades. More realistically, I think the U.S. (where most of the claims are relevant) is simply declining after several hundred years of abusive reign as the world's superpower.

[1]: https://about.fb.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Instagram-Te...

[2]: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/06/technology/myanmar-facebo...

[zepto]

> Facebook hired an investigator that concluded that their involvement was without their knowledge

It seems like you simply take Facebook at their word.

> More realistically, I think the U.S. (where most of the claims are relevant) is simply declining after several hundred years of abusive reign as the world's superpower.

You do realize that you have provided no actual explanation for the decline.

Can you explain how your account, with a meaningless username, was created in 2014, only to become active around 9 months ago?

[aierou]

Just as with Facebook it seems I am guilty until proven innocent. If you want to believe that they intentionally enabled genocide in a foreign country with politics that neither of us could likely begin to understand, then fine. I have been more than clear, and yet you ask for more. How can I offer explanation to the decline of a regime? Is it not obvious that mental health has been in decline for decades? Or that economic inequality is ever-growing? The average lifespan is in decline. Houselessness is on the rise. You balk at genocide? Our government regularly commits genocide on the scale of the holocaust [1] [2] [3], _with intent_.

Who should be held accountable for all of this? Facebook? What a joke. If they are truly guilty, regulators have all the power in the world to hold them accountable.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_19...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_indigenous_peoples...

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_invasion_of_Pana...

[zepto]

> How can I offer explanation to the decline of a regime? Is it not obvious that mental health has been in decline for decades? Or that economic inequality is ever-growing? The average lifespan is in decline. Houselessness is on the rise.

Yes, and Facebook is contributing to the acceleration of those things.

Is that not something you have considered?

[aierou]

No. These problems would certainly exist even if Facebook never did. Like I said, Facebook could be dismantled by regulators today. It won't do anything.

Do you think Facebook or other social media are the main contributors to the acceleration of those things? Why?

[zepto]

Ok, so you deny that Facebook contributes to any problems. Understood.

Can you explain why your account was created in 2014 but was only activated 9 months ago to begin defending Facebook?

[lhorie]

I've no horse in the game, but it sounds like you have a pet hatred towards Facebook, to the extent that you don't seem to realize that there's a difference between "facebook was used as a tool in an undesirable way by people with ill intent" (similar to how Parler was used by a specific segment of the voter base around the last US presidential election) vs the much more farfetched "facebook employees deliberately rigged the system somehow to promote violence in myanman and anyone that could be remotely perceived to be siding with FB must be shilling for it" conspiracy theory. It's an entirely reasonable position to shake one's head at the media's portrayal of a political instability through a interwebz-colored lens, but also dislike what did happen in the FB platform as a result of the simple fact that people involved in the conflict happen to use the internet.

The point your parent poster is making is that sensationalism and the easily outraged tend to ignore the nuance between unintended butterfly effect consequences that are hard to prevent vs deliberate malice by the company itself for its own profit.

It's a good idea to reflect a bit on hatred to see if it's really warranted. It's very easy to think "oh look at all these negative things I heard, facebook should shut down". What's hard is to realize that what you read online and your mental categorization of things doesn't always neatly mirror reality accurately. Nobody thinks we should ban chocolate on the grounds that violent people eat it and the rest of us would still have food even if chocolate was gone; we only get molded to think this way about things like Facebook because of media narratives.