?????????? ?????
???·?????Kamal Ahmed?
BBC??????
??•?????Mark Zuckerberg??????????????????????
???BBC?????????Facebook???????????????????????”????”??????”??”?
???????????????????? “??”??”???????”????
???????????????”?????????”?????????”??????”?
“?????????Facebook????????????????”???
“??????????????????????????????”
“???????????????”
????
??BBC??:”????????????????????????????????????????????”
??????????????????5500???????????Facebook??????????
?????????????·?? “????”????????”????”?????????”????????????”?
“?????????????????????????????????????????”???
“?????????????????????????????????????????????????????”
“????????????????????????????????????????”
“???????????????????????????????????????”
“?????????????????????????????”
“?????????????????????????????????????????????????——????????——?????”
“???????????????????????????????????????????????????”??????
??????
???????????????????”????”?”????”???????????
????????????????????????????????
“????????????”??????????”?????????????????????”
“?????????????????????????????????????????”
“????????????????????????????”
“??????????????????——????????????????????????????????”
?????:”?????????????????——?????????????????????????????????????????????——?????????????????????????????????????”
????
?????????????????
“?????????????????????????????????????????????”
??????????????????????????2020?????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????
?????????????
“??????????????”???”????????????”
???Facebook????????????????”????”???——???????????????PopeFrancis????????——???????????????
???????Facebook?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Facebook??????
????????????Renate Künast???????????????????????????????
????????????????”????????????????????????????????Facebook????????????”?
???????????”????”???????
????
“?????????????”??????????5500???????”????????Facebook????????????????????”
“??????????????????????????????????”
“?????????????????????????????????????”
?????????”????????????????????????????????????”
“????????????????????????????????????????????????”
??”?????????”????”??”?
??????????——?????????????????——????????
“?????????????????????????????????????”??????
“????????????????????????????????????????????????”
“???????????????????????????????????”
“??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????”
????
???????????????????????·????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????¬??????????????????????????????????
“??????????????????????????????????????”???????????????Facebook?99%??????????????·??PriscillaChan????????????????360?????450?????
“???????????????”????”??????????????”?
“????????????????????????????????????——??????????????????????????”?
“?????????????????”?
Mark Zuckerberg wants Facebook to have more power in ourlives, and we should resist
BY JAN DAWSON FEB24, 2017, 1:00PM EST
From Record
Lastweek, Mark Zuckerberg posted on Facebook a combination of a personal andcompany manifesto.He also spoke to a number of reporters regarding it. The manifesto is long, andit covers a ton of ground, some of it about the state of the world, but much ofit, at least indirectly and directly, about Facebook and its role in such aworld. The manifesto is notable for its concession that Facebook has enormouspower and has, in some ways, contributed to some big problems plaguing theworld. But, more worryingly, it seems to think the solution is more Facebook.
I talked toMark Zuckerberg about his manifesto on the future of Facebook (and the rest ofus)
Therehas been rising concern about Facebook’s power over many facets of our livesfor years now, and the concern is especially strong when it comes to news andmedia consumption, where Facebook is becoming an ever more important channel.Because Facebook’s algorithms determine which things users could be shown,Facebook bears a primary responsibility for making decisions about the mediaworld its users live in.
Facebook’sincentives are to show people the things they’re most likely to enjoy, engagewith and share with their friends. But the assumption is that this meansshowing them things that fit with their existing views, rather than challengingthem. It means it often ends up creating so-called “filter bubbles” in whichpeople are only ever exposed to media that confirms their existing views, andonly rarely to contradictory views.
Zuckerberg’smanifesto acknowledges all of this, but proposes solutions that are focused onFacebook itself, rather than on weaning people off their reliance on Facebook.That’s understandable — his job is to get people to use Facebook more ratherthan less but, of course, this approach merely reinforces Facebook’s power andpotentially even increases it as it takes a more active role in showing peoplea range of content. This is a theme that flows throughout the post, talkingabout all the things Facebook can do to take an even bigger and stronger rolein the lives of its users.
Nowhereis this more striking than when he starts talking about participation in thedemocratic process:
Thesecond is establishing a new process for citizens worldwide to participate incollective decision-making. Our world is more connected than ever, and we faceglobal problems that span national boundaries. As the largest global community,Facebook can explore examples of how community governance might work at scale.
That,to me, sounds like Zuckerberg envisions a world in which Facebook itselfbecomes the medium through which communities (i.e., cities, states, countries)would govern themselves. Given existing concerns about Facebook’s power toshape media consumption, the idea that it would take a direct role ingovernance (rather than merely allowing people to vote or connect with theirelected representatives as it has done in the past) should be terrifying.
It’sarguable that even Facebook’s “Get Out the Vote” efforts have potential todistort the democratic process, given that usage skews younger than the overallpopulation. But at least it doesn’t give Facebook a direct role in thedemocratic process itself. If I were a local government, I’d be extremely waryof allowing Facebook a deeper role in any of these processes — I think it’stime for both individuals and organizations to push back against Facebook’s enormouspower rather than embracing an expansion of it.
Butthis concern should go beyond just the democratic process and institutions — weshould all be thinking about how much power we want Facebook to have over ourlives. A line that was removed from the manifesto between when a draft was sentout to reporters and when the final version was published on Facebook hints atsome other dangers. That line concerned the use of AI to detect terrorism:
Thelong term promise of AI is that in addition to identifying risks more quicklyand accurately than would have already happened, it may also identify risksthat nobody would have flagged at all — including terrorists planning attacksusing private channels, people bullying someone too afraid to report itthemselves, and other issues both local and global. It will take many years todevelop these systems.
On theface of it, this seems great — Facebook would be helping to identify those whowould hurt others while they’re still in the planning stages. But it refers toterrorists using private channels, which implies Facebook looking into thecontents of private messages shared between users on Facebook’s variousplatforms. This is yet another area where Facebook’s power is alreadyconsiderable — not only does it control much of our media consumption, but italso hosts and carries much of our communication via four huge platforms:Facebook itself, Messenger, WhatsApp and Instagram.
Facebook’sinstincts here are understandable, but also worrying. It finally recognizes itspower and the ways in which that power has caused problems in the world, butits instinct is to wield that power even more, rather than back off. Given thatFacebook seems unlikely to police itself, it’s up to its users and otherorganizations to start to exert pressure for it to do so.