Since Wednesday, several popular Facebook groups have switched their private settings to "secret" as a result of banning a popular meme group page with nearly 500,000 members. The group Crossovers Nobody asked (CNAF) seems to have been targeted by a collective known as , who falsely reported CNAF for its hate speech.
The Indonesian Review Board's news quickly spread to Facebook, prompting many of the major groups on the platform to change their privacy settings to "secrecy" as a precautionary measure. Secret Private Settings for Facebook Please include the community of all but its current members.
"Rumors that similar pages of the same kind caused the change have sparked a lot of enthusiasm," said a director of a similar political group with more than 400,000 members in a statement to Mashable. "(There was) afraid that (the group) could be an upcoming target."
"Prevention is better than cure," said another Facebook group in response to why they had changed its privacy settings.
Facebook informs its users via a notification when a group in which they find is changing its privacy settings. This caused confusion among many users when they were in their accounts and they were greeted by a blizzard of notifications regarding settings.
Shortly after the group withdrawal attempt, Facebook users would have discovered the identity of the Indonesian Commission's reporting officer. This led to an explanation and excuses on the part of the individual.
"The reason for this mischief was to remove or destroy anything that was negative in Facebook, such as SARA (religious jokes), a hoax and others who break the rules of Facebook," the apologies said. on an Indonesian Facebook page. "Also … (I found) hate speech or religious jokes."
"I am deeply sorry for what has happened to everyone and for our wrongdoing, and as IReC leader I will stop IReC's operations and take responsibility for everything that has happened" he continued.
Earlier this month, Facebook its website and mobile apps to strongly promote its Facebook Groups feature. The company has been heavily for his confidence in the news and for his various over the years
As early as Thursday afternoon, the group that the IReC had deleted, Crossovers Nobody asked, has been restored on Facebook.
"I've since changed (the settings) because it would appear that the fright is based on the content of our page," said the administrator of the policy group.
UPDATED: May 17, 2019, 9:56 am AEST A Facebook spokesperson confirmed to certain groups that the offending content was targeted: "We deleted several groups from Facebook after detecting content that violates our rules, and since then we have discovered that this content is being sent to legitimate groups and non-violent, strives to restore all affected groups and prevent this from happening again. "
(tagsToTranslate) facebook (t) memes (t) groups-facebook (t) meme-culture (t) tech (t) social media companies (t) web-culture</pre></pre>
The social network is tweaking its news feed algorithm to try to show more messages from your closest friends. To do this, however, the company takes a new approach: ask users to tell them directly who their best friends are.
Facebook has always tried to predict who your closest friends are by looking at signals like the ones you interact with most often. But with change, society will explicitly start asking people who are their best friends to incorporate this information into their rankings.
"We started interviewing people on Facebook to ask them to list their closest friends," wrote Facebook. A declaration. "We're looking at patterns that come out of the results, some of which include being tagged on the same pictures, reacting and commenting on the same messages and connecting to the same places – and then we use those templates to inform our algorithm. "
The company said the change was meant to improve the relevance and that did not mean you would see more friend content. "
But the update says a lot about how Facebook is thinking about News Feed's future. Last month, the company showed to rethink the application and the website This puts less emphasis on News Feed to display more content from groups and stories. And Mark Zuckerberg has repeatedly stated that he believed that Facebook users were increasingly geared towards sharing private and ephemeral content.
This is a problem for News Feed, which was built around the idea of mass sharing. And even if the news feed is not going to disappear anytime soon, the fact that "close friends" have more content could help them to feel more relevant.
(techToTags) tech (t) facebook (t) news (t) social networks</pre></pre>
By Shannon Connellan and Johnny Location
Announced on Tuesday, the company will implement a "one-time strike" policy that will prohibit anyone who violates the standards of the social network community from using Facebook Live.
Users who violate the most serious rules of the network will be prohibited from using Live for a certain period of time, starting from their first offense. An example of an offense is a user who "shares a link to a statement of a terrorist group without context".
Guy Rosen, Vice President of Integrity of Facebook, said in the blog that the company's goal was to "minimize the risk of abuse on Live while allowing users to use Live live every day ".
Rosen said these restrictions will be extended to other areas of the platform over the next few weeks, starting with the restriction barring users from placing ads.
Previously, Facebook had simply removed content that violated its community standards. If this person continued posting raping content, they would be stuck on the platform for a while. Some have been totally banned.
The restrictions apply to according to an updated definition in , which has seen the ban of many controversial personalities, including Alex Jones, the leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, Milo Yiannopoulos and others.
In addition to these new live broadcast restrictions, Facebook has also declared investing in research to prevent incidents such as the rapid spread of the video shooter in Christchurch, which has been modified to avoid detection and allow remail.
The company will invest in a $ 7.5 million partnership with three universities: the University of Maryland, Cornell University and the University of California, Berkeley.
The money will go in search for better detection of images, video and audio handled, which could also help handle problems such as deepfakes.
(tagsToTranslate) facebook (t) livestreaming (t) facebook-live (t) tech (t) cybersecurity (t) social media companies</pre></pre>
This is not a privacy activist or a politician. It was written by Chris Hughes, who co-founded Facebook in the early 2000s with his roommate at Harvard, Mark Zuckerberg.
In a very long op-ed of Posted Thursday, Hughes officially joined the growing calls to the social network breaking. Although Hughes no longer works for the company for a decade, the former Facebook spokesperson may well be the most powerful voice to argue his point of view.
Chris Hughes is right. Today's big tech companies have too much power over our economy, our society, and our democracy. They destroyed the competition, used our private information for profit, hurt small businesses and smothered innovation. It's time to #BreakUpBigTech. https://t.co/rZMftEwlkN
– Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) May 9, 2019
The co-founder of Facebook has presented a compelling case for dissolving the company: his friend, former roommate and Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, simply has too much power.
"Mark's influence is staggering, far beyond anyone else in the private sector or government, controlling three critical communication platforms – Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp – used by billions of people every day. Facebook's board of directors works more as an advisory board than as a supervisor, because Mark controls about 60% of the voting shares.Mark alone can decide how to configure Facebook's algorithms to determine what the people see in their news feeds, what privacy settings they can use and even what messages are delivered.I've set the rules to distinguish violent and incendiary speeches from the offensive, and it can choose to no longer compete by acquiring, blocking or copying it. "
Hughes says that Zuckerberg's quest for "dominance" at the time MySpace was the industry leader has led us to a point where it's impossible for a company to compete.
When a social media app is gaining ground, like or , Facebook acquires them. If a business starts to take off due to a series of specific features, such as Snapchat with its stories, Facebook simply . On a whim, Zuckerberg can decide to a startup that leverages Facebook to grow as it did for .
"As a result of all this, potential competitors can not raise the funds needed to access Facebook," says Hughes. "Investors realize that if a business succeeds, Facebook will copy its innovations, close it or acquire it for a relatively modest amount."
"Despite extensive economic expansion, growing interest in new high-tech companies, a surge in venture capital and a growing public disgust for Facebook, no major social media company has been created since the beginning of the 1990s. autumn 2011, "he added.
"Mark Zuckerberg can not repair Facebook, but our government can," he said, calling Facebook's CEO's power "unprecedented and non-American," saying he should be held responsible . "The US government must do two things: break Facebook's monopoly and regulate society to make it more accountable to the American people."
"Mark Zuckerberg can not repair Facebook, but our government can do it."
Hughes said the company should be split into three separate entities: Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp.
He also blasted the FTC with Facebook following the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Facebook is to privacy surveillance measures as well as pay a fine of up to $ 5 billion. Hughes argued that Zuckerberg preferred these slaps to the wrist because it distracted people and maintained a dreaded antitrust case.
Hughes would not only dissociate Facebook, but also a new regulation for large technology companies. He called for a European GDPR-compliant law that would give Americans control over their data on all platforms. The co-founder of Facebook also pointed to the need for a new federal agency responsible for monitoring, protecting user privacy and creating guidelines for social media.
Calls to dismantle some of the country's largest technology companies have grown in recent years. Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democratic presidential candidate until 2020, notably called for the cancellation of Facebook mergers earlier this year, while the giants of technology. Years ago, Lina Khan, a law student at Yale, how anticompetitive behavior is viewed in break Amazon.
Hughes thinks a strong response to Facebook would send a message to other tech giants and reverse the decline in antitrust enforcement in the United States.
"If civil servants do not define these policies, companies will do it," warned Hughes.
(tagsToTranslate) facebook (t) instagram (t) privacy (t) mark-zuckerberg (t) whatsapp (t) regulation (t) antitrust (t) tech (t) social media companies (t) big-tech companies</pre></pre>
Facebook is not happy Facebook, in fact, is frankly upset.
You see, the company's executives woke up this morning with the most unpleasant news. More specifically, the co-founder of the company, Chris Hughes, published a thoughtful room in the New York Times call for the United States regulators break the business for antitrust reasons. Well, Facebook did not like that at all.
Sir Nicholas William Peter Clegg, former British Deputy Prime Minister and current Head of Global Affairs on Facebook / from all sides jester, issued a petulant statement in response. Essentially, I told everyone who would like to listen, that Facebook knows what is best.
"Facebook accepts that with success comes responsibility," he writes in A declaration published by CNN's Hadas Gold. "But you do not impose accountability by calling for the dissolution of a successful American company."
Of course, Clegg does not understand that breaking a monster such as Facebook exactly how does one impose the responsibility
"The responsibility of technology companies can only be achieved through the laborious introduction of new rules for the Internet," he continued. "That's exactly what Mark Zuckerberg has asked for, as he is meeting with government leaders this week to advance this work."
We'd better listen to Nick, or he could just take the ball and go home. It's the ball of Facebook, after all, as the company likes to remind everyone.
(tagsToTranslate) facebook (t) brand-zuckerberg (t) anti-trust regulation (t) chris-hughes (t) technology (t) social media companies (t) leading technology companies