There's two very different issues related to Facebook - or Google/Youtube for that matter.
1 - Censorship and monitoring
2 - Use of the technology to provide favored/disfavored algorithms and content results based on ideology.
It either has to be 'free and open', meaning without bias or prejudice to content or the opposite end of the spectrum of highly regulated and permissible use of the technology. Which then opens up the can of worms on 'who' decides what is permissible and what ideology is being pushed to the user - the government? the company?
What i saw a LOT of in AOC's line of questioning and the rest of the witch hunters was condemnation and finger-pointing - instead of seeking solutions and establishing guidelines on the various pitfalls of this brave new world.
Comments
If it hit too close to home, that's not really my problem.
How and why has someone within the FB organization not told him to let the lawyers handle this.
1 - Censorship and monitoring
2 - Use of the technology to provide favored/disfavored algorithms and content results based on ideology.
It either has to be 'free and open', meaning without bias or prejudice to content or the opposite end of the spectrum of highly regulated and permissible use of the technology. Which then opens up the can of worms on 'who' decides what is permissible and what ideology is being pushed to the user - the government? the company?
What i saw a LOT of in AOC's line of questioning and the rest of the witch hunters was condemnation and finger-pointing - instead of seeking solutions and establishing guidelines on the various pitfalls of this brave new world.