[orly01]

I agree with you, no way a human reviewed it.

But this implies that people at facebook believe so much in their AI that there is no way at all to appeal what it does to a human eventually. Not even for doing learning reinforcement they have human people to review eventually some post that a person keep saying the AI is flagging incorrectly.

Either they trust too much in the AI or they are incompetent.

[dragonwriter]

> But this implies that people at facebook believe so much in their AI that there is no way at all to appeal what it does to a human eventually

No, it means that management has decided that the cost of assuring human review isn't worth the benefit. That doesn't mean they trust the AI particularly, it could just mean that they don’t see avoid false positives on detecting unwanted content as worth much cost to avoid.

[orly01]

Yep, that's why I said either that, or they are incompetent.

Not caring at all about false positives, which by the way are very common, enters the category of incompetence for me.

[dragonwriter]

Someone having different goals than you would like then to have is a very different thing than incompetence.

[AnthonyMouse]

If you employ someone to do a job and your goal is to have them do the job effectively and their goal is to get paid without doing the work, arguing about whether this is incompetence or something else is irrelevant and they need to be fired regardless.

[dragonwriter]

Yes, but your complaint is that the job people at facebook are paid to do isn't the one you want them to be paid to do, not that they aren't doing what they are actually paid to do effectively.

Misalignment of Meta's interests with yours, not incompetence.

[AnthonyMouse]

It's not Facebook's employees who need to be fired, it's Facebook.