• 24 Posts
  • 906 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2025

help-circle




  • tl;dr this new policy is dumb and bad. References to specific things like Antifa make no logical sense as a grounds for censorship, because there were already reasonable rules in place to handle actual problems.

    In some cases, the content that Meta considers a threat signal is commonsensical. If, for instance, a user mentions bringing a weapon to an event, the company flags it as a threat signal. But in other cases, Meta’s process for identifying threat signals is more vague. Under the new rules, Meta might trigger a threat signal when a user posts a “visual depiction of a weapon,” a “reference to arson, theft, or vandalism,” or “military language,” if accompanied by the word “antifa.”

    If “antifa” is mentioned in the context of “references to historical or recent incidents of violence” — a category so sprawling that it includes “historic wars” and “battles” — that post will also be penalized. Should Meta apply this rule as written, the company could, for instance, restrict posts comparing the antifascist nature of World War II to the contemporary antifa movement.

    It’s difficult to believe any intellectual discussion would happen on Facebook, but this rule further cements the suppression of it.















  • Guy got in trouble because of the dumbest possible telephone game (among other things)

    For example, although court documents claim Sanchez searched, “is the 900 mAh battery from a (Game Boy) capable of being used in a trigger device," Sellers said that was actually a search from [his bail] supervisor, who was cross-referencing real searches from Sanchez to see if they could be used to make explosives.

    [Bail supervisor] Coyle then took a screenshot of his own search history and sent it to the district attorney, leading to a violation of Sanchez’s probation and his rearrest, Sellers said.