- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- technology@beehaw.org
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s a big irony to me that they were making users show their driver’s license to ensure they were real people, and then the platform itself makes fake people.
Right, and what’s even as bizarre to me (as an engineer) is that they’re bots posing as people.
That’s arguably the most deceptive and malicious way to use a bot on a site meant for real people.
But they’ll quickly block any helpful bots anyone else tries to integrate on the platform.
“Our bad bots good, your good bots bad”. What a crazy world we live in.
“Our bad bots good, your good bots bad”.
Textbook big brother stuff. We’re in 1984 but the corpos are the ones providing the daily hate
Delete your Meta accts/apps instead
Can’t, already did ~10 years ago.
As media scrutiny ticked up Friday, Meta began taking down Liv and other bots’ posts, many of which dated back at least a year, citing a “bug.”
Funny how that works. I don’t think the main talking point is the issue that they couldn’t be blocked on Instagram. That is a non-answer to the question of why the decision to unleash these creepy, fake users into the wild was made in the first place. Full fledged features aren’t suddenly mistakes just because they’re getting backlash now. It seems like they’re not sorry and they’re going to keep trying.
In particular, there was “Liv,” the Meta AI account that has a bio describing itself as a “Proud Black queer momma of 2 & truth-teller,” and told Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah that Liv had no Black creators — the bot said it was built by “10 white men, 1 white woman, and 1 Asian male,” according to a screenshot posted on Bluesky
I think the
Proud Black queer momma of 2 & truth-tellerbit explains perfectly why they released the bots onto the wild. They are there to spread misinformation and guide conversations through the use of that misinformation hoping that you don’t notice and even sympathise with their manipulation machine.This has been going on for quite some time, and will just continue in the background. I always had suspicions about all the positive comments on advertisements. This just confirms that they’re faking engagement numbers.
Wait, you’re telling me that people respond on ads? That’s fucken crazy.
I cant confirm on this as I deleted my Facebook account 8 years ago, plus run ad-blockers. If I was in marketing and Meta told me there were positive reactions to our ad campaigns running on their site, I would take their metrics with a large pinch of salt.
Dumb fucks.
i find it incredible that despite having access to basically unlimited information about its users, facebook makes stupid decisions that seem almost designed to piss off its users. and then you have situations like this, where facebook was told ahead of time that this decision would make a lot of people angry, and then facebook went and did it anyway only to walk it back a few days later and say it was a mistake. why?
To see if the backlash is really that bad, to see if there are specific issues people object to, to see if there are certain demographics more strongly opposed, to desensitise people for when they try it next time (“ugh, again?” instead of the full outrage), to give people the illusion of control (look, online complaints work!)…
There are a lot of possible reasons, but I doubt it’s an entirely ignorant decision coming from a company known to be good at manipulating it’s users.
I was wondering what would happen if you asked it to send you money.
I like that. “This is the Madison sheriff’s department. Your grandson Chris has been arrested and needs bail. We’ll accept payment in the form of a gift card.”
