TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why Facebook’s angry emoji should interest the US SEC

11 点作者 notmuffin超过 3 年前

2 条评论

Gunax超过 3 年前
Barring the fact that I still cannot figure out what <i>evil thing</i> the facbook did other than vague descriptions of <i>definitely evil stuff, trust us</i>:<p>Allegedly facebook lied because it did not make its research about its algorithms public. But I could make the same argument about any proprietary system. YouTube&#x27;s recommendation algorithm is not public. Google&#x27;s pagerank is not public. What effects do those have?<p>And what findings would a public care about? Well, any given investor could find just about anything unethical. Sure, I think most people agree that if I see racist content on Facebook and as a result of that someone decides to join the KKK, it probably harmed society. But this can be extended indefinitely. Perhaps facebook&#x27;s recipe recommendations encourage people to eat more meat, so vegans would find it unethical. Perhaps facebook&#x27;s recommendations encourage people to drive more, so climate activists are upset. You sort of open up Pandora&#x27;s box if you start considering these things. Would facebook even want to do research if it had the potential to reveal something negative?<p>This is another case of &#x27;everything is securities fraud&#x27;. Why should the SEC get involved? That seems like a terrible expansion of SEC&#x27;s powers to start judging IPOs based on the ethics of the organization. You start with a simple premise (the investors have a right to know) but end up making a very broad and IMO over-bearing conclusion.<p>And regarding the IPO and it&#x27;s share classes--if you&#x27;re purchasing facebook, know that you are not purchasing control. If you do not like it, do not invest.
donkarma超过 3 年前
Terrible title to just talk about controversy driving clicks