This is a classic example of the problems that tech companies/hackers inevitably face as they scale - an increasing obligation to develop algorithms to keep the bad guys out, and the good guys happy. Unfortunately the occasional yet inevitable false positive may trigger and a good guygets flagged. So we do the right thing, apologise to the wronged and try to move on / improve our 'bad guy filter'. What urks me is that as a free & (semi) public service, a demand for retribution is then assumed - In a pseudo-litigious way, implying some kind of damage/compensation model needs to be applied. Even if in a faux-self serving way. "Fix your free service, oh and to really say sorry, prove it by spending your revenue serving my self interests.. because I have (yet another), (vested) good cause that you should be promoting.
This is one of those checklist items when dealing with user content. Looking around, there are a few types of pictures that companies really need to look into and determine the intent. Facebook and Google can apologize and go on, but a lot of little companies cannot deal with the outcome if they really mess something like this up.
Good lord, who cares? Why would anyone try to use some cheesy company like Facebook to share pictures, when there are so many other ways to do it? I can not summon any sympathy for people who decide to give a company so much power over their lives, for no good reason, and then act surprised when it exercises that power. This lady asked for this abuse simply by using Facebook, and no way is this news.
This is the most uppity, narrow-minded, thoughtless post I have ever seen on HN. I can't downvote it, but for the first time I wish I could.
This is how regular, non-tech, non-hipster people communicate! Do you think she should host her own linux-server, run a web-service, write some code and create her own site? Should she should upload the pics somewhere else and send links out via facebook that no one will click? No.
She posted the pics where her social graph is most likely to consume and interact with them.
I hope that when you gain downvoting powers that you can resist abusing them by downvoting posts you disagree with.
When she signed up for Facebook she agreed to terms of service that allow Facebook to do exactly what they did. Even though Facebook has a reputation for abusing their users in myriad ways, she decided to rely on them. No, I can not manage to feel sympathy. Sorry if this comes across as "thoughtless", but I've actually put a lot of thought into this - partly because some of these Facebook users are my friends and family, some of whom I've warned, and all of whom should know better.
6 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 27.4 ms ] threadThat could also be true for the opposite, there could be pictures of something at first glance seem normal but may be some form of hate.
This is how regular, non-tech, non-hipster people communicate! Do you think she should host her own linux-server, run a web-service, write some code and create her own site? Should she should upload the pics somewhere else and send links out via facebook that no one will click? No.
She posted the pics where her social graph is most likely to consume and interact with them.
When she signed up for Facebook she agreed to terms of service that allow Facebook to do exactly what they did. Even though Facebook has a reputation for abusing their users in myriad ways, she decided to rely on them. No, I can not manage to feel sympathy. Sorry if this comes across as "thoughtless", but I've actually put a lot of thought into this - partly because some of these Facebook users are my friends and family, some of whom I've warned, and all of whom should know better.