Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 111 to 115 of 115

Thread: Twitter Finally Adds a Fact Checking Warning Label to Trump Tweets

  1. Top | #111
    Veteran Member Deepak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    2,155
    Archived
    861
    Total Posts
    3,016
    Rep Power
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Deepak View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    I don't want Facebook to fact check claims for me. I've explained why. I've also explained why the very people you so condescendingly think need it most would be the least likely to trust it.
    Well good news. Facebook isn't fact checking claims for you. The free service that Facebook is offering you can be utilized to consume Donald Trumps claims without any barrier.

    Facebook happens to also provide ersatz fact checking, much like they offer Pages, Groups, and Facebook Login, all of which you can choose to use or ignore as you see fit.

    What you seem to want is to tell Facebook how they should be building their product and the features they include specifically so other people cannot use that functionality.

    How would you have this be enforced? A law, an executive order, a lawsuit, or just wishful thinking?
    No. I'm not telling Facebook what to do, nor would I support any law to force it to 'fact check' the content it transmits.Facebook doesn't even want to do it.
    Sure you are. The post in question that started the entire exchange:

    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Koyaanisqatsi View Post

    What a sniveling-little-rat-bastard full-of-shit-fuck-face-coward. To admit to a need for fact checking would be to admit his "platform" is still being used for nefarious purposes. It's not like it's a public service he's providing for the good of all mankind.
    So, you want and trust Zuckerberg, the fuck-face-coward, to vet content for you?

    Why do you regard yourself as incapable of judgment?
    You're arguing against whether fact checking in-the-hypothetical should be implemented by Facebook, not whether Zuckerberg wants to implement it. Or did you just waste as much time and as many posts as you did to state what anyone could have read in the original link?

    Your argument can't be about what you claim because you don't pay for the service and you can simply ignore what you don't use. Your argument only works if you want to be the one directing what Facebook expends resources on.

  2. Top | #112
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    5,015
    Archived
    10,974
    Total Posts
    15,989
    Rep Power
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Deepak View Post

    You're arguing against whether fact checking in-the-hypothetical should be implemented by Facebook, not whether Zuckerberg wants to implement it. Or did you just waste as much time and as many posts as you did to state what anyone could have read in the original link?
    I don't think Facebook should implement 'fact checking', with or without Zuckerberg. I don't understand how you find this hard to understand. I am not demanding anything of Facebook. I'm giving an opinion. As it happens, Facebook's chief agrees with me. Given that Facebook's CEO is Zuckerberg, I think if it were forced to implement some sort of 'fact checking', what it implements will be the worst version of what it could be, being that it would be implemented under a CEO who doesn't actually support it.

    But even if Zuckerberg changed his mind, or a new CEO replaced him who wanted to do it, I would still say it's a bad idea, it will not achieve what Koyaanisqatsi thinks it will achieve, it will have unintended consequences, and it will be a waste of resources.

    That doesn't mean I would somehow force them not to do it. I'm not the State and I don't have the power of the State.

    Your argument can't be about what you claim because you don't pay for the service and you can simply ignore what you don't use. Your argument only works if you want to be the one directing what Facebook expends resources on.
    If Facebook implements it and you can't turn it off and it's annoying and stupid enough, I might discontinue using Facebook. If it's not that annoying or something I can learn to live with, I won't.

    It's Koyaanisqatsi who wants to direct what Facebook expends its resources on, not me.

  3. Top | #113
    Veteran Member Deepak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    2,155
    Archived
    861
    Total Posts
    3,016
    Rep Power
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    ...I think if it were forced to implement some sort of 'fact checking'...
    This is your strawman. You can have whatever opinion you have, and other people can have the opinion they have.

    They hypothetical is if Facebook, like Twitter had recently done, fact checked posts ("So, you want and trust Zuckerberg, the fuck-face-coward, to vet content for you?")

  4. Top | #114
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    5,015
    Archived
    10,974
    Total Posts
    15,989
    Rep Power
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Deepak View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    ...I think if it were forced to implement some sort of 'fact checking'...
    This is your strawman. You can have whatever opinion you have, and other people can have the opinion they have.

    They hypothetical is if Facebook, like Twitter had recently done, fact checked posts ("So, you want and trust Zuckerberg, the fuck-face-coward, to vet content for you?")
    It was your own strawman that I wanted to control what Facebook does.

    In the current situation, it is Koyaanisqatsi who wants Facebook to change what it does, not me.

  5. Top | #115
    Content Thief Elixir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Mountains
    Posts
    13,479
    Archived
    707
    Total Posts
    14,186
    Rep Power
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    In the current situation, it is Koyaanisqatsi who wants Facebook to change what it does, not me.
    Yeah I'm sure you're fine with Mutherzucker censoring only those posts that hit Trump where it hurts, while claiming that they don't think they should censor anything.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •