Did we just watch the new 9/11 (FB and IG down)

[viper37]

Facebook and Instagram went down for a few hours.  Mark Zuckerberg lost 7,4 billion $ and FB stock dropped a little.

It seems like it's kinda treated like this was some huge terrorist attack in the news, in terms of importance.  First page of local newspapers here (internet version, mega article at the top), first news on the 22h newscast with a loooong segment on why it happened, how it happened, the background information, who might have done it, etc, etc.
Gee, are we that dependant on some stupid technology from one company?

[Jacob]

Personally I think the impact is less than 9/11. No one is dead, as far as I know, and Zuckerberg losing a few billion dollars isn't really a big deal.

Depends on why it happened and what comes next, I suppose.

[viper37]

Personally I think the impact is less than 9/11. No one is dead, as far as I know, and Zuckerberg losing a few billion dollars isn't really a big deal.

Depends on why it happened and what comes next, I suppose.

Of course it's not important.  That was sarcasm.

It's just the way it's treated by news, I'd swear some major terrorist attack just happened.

[HisMajestyBOB]

The absolutely worst thing that can happen in the world is if the wealthiest lose some money.

[Syt]

I'm not a fan of Facebook, but when a communications platform used by billions with fairly big cultural significance (for better or worse) that is currently making the news for its questionable business practices while a general discussion starts to form around the roles and responsibilities of tech giants - yeah, I think it's worth reporting on.

Just because we here don't use it much or at all doesn't mean there's millions out there for whom Facebook is, basically, the internet. Think back a couple of years, when tons of people were angry and confused "where Facebook hade gone" because a blog article was briefly the #1 search result for "Facebook" on Google.

[Sheilbh]

Personally I think the impact is less than 9/11. No one is dead, as far as I know, and Zuckerberg losing a few billion dollars isn't really a big deal.

Depends on why it happened and what comes next, I suppose.

My guess is this:


And that it probably describes a lot of the modern internet

It's one of the reasons I tend to avoid going too into IoT things. I always remember someone I shared an office with losing heating in their house because of connectivity issue and the upside just doesn't seem to outweigh the risk of of my heating depending on my (frankly dodgy) internet provider.

I'm not a fan of Facebook, but when a communications platform used by billions with fairly big cultural significance (for better or worse) that is currently making the news for its questionable business practices while a general discussion starts to form around the roles and responsibilities of tech giants - yeah, I think it's worth reporting on.

Just because we here don't use it much or at all doesn't mean there's millions out there for whom Facebook is, basically, the internet. Think back a couple of years, when tons of people were angry and confused "where Facebook hade gone" because a blog article was briefly the #1 search result for "Facebook" on Google.

Yeah totally agree it's a big, real story.

[Grey Fox]

Server maintenance's a bitch when you have to erase logs.

[Darth Wagtaros]

People got their outrage porn on Twitter or Fox News. Though now there are a whole batch of conspiracies surrounding it. 

[Tamas]

My problem with the zealous crusade for Facebook censorship is that I suspect the negative aspects are minor compared to positive ones. The spread of the Floyd murder footage and thus the protests of last summer. Opposition in opressive regimes often organising on social media etc.

And if we want Facebook to strictly censor "hate speech" we may very well regret it if a fascist regime manages to change what the legal category of hate speech is.

[DGuller]

And if we want Facebook to strictly censor "hate speech" we may very well regret it if a fascist regime manages to change what the legal category of hate speech is.

I think a fascist regime may enact censorship even if there were none before, and it seems like Facebook is a good tool for getting a fascist regime in the first place.  I get the general argument in support of unfettered free speech, but I think it has to be tempered against an argument that one can't have tolerance for intolerance, as otherwise intolerance will get in power and quash tolerance for all things.  Unfortunately the variables in the equation changed since the advent of social media, and in the age of echo chambers a belief that truth will always win out in a marketplace of ideas seems naïve.

[The Brain]

I am not convinced that we need to destroy the village to save it.

[DGuller]

I am not convinced that we need to destroy the village to save it.

Me neither, but I'm becoming increasingly convinced that we need to destroy social media to save our democracy.

[Sheilbh]

My problem with the zealous crusade for Facebook censorship is that I suspect the negative aspects are minor compared to positive ones. The spread of the Floyd murder footage and thus the protests of last summer. Opposition in opressive regimes often organising on social media etc.

And if we want Facebook to strictly censor "hate speech" we may very well regret it if a fascist regime manages to change what the legal category of hate speech is.

Let's not forget that Zuckerberg asked Xi Jinping to name his daughter and did a thing about how inspirational and interesting he found a book on Xi Jinping Thought.

The reason Facebook isn't strictly censoring for a totalitarian regime is because they won't let them operate there.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

And if we want Facebook to strictly censor "hate speech" we may very well regret it if a fascist regime manages to change what the legal category of hate speech is.

I'd worry more about the (extreme) left, they're pretty busy making everything into hatespeech and thoughtcrime.

[DGuller]

And if we want Facebook to strictly censor "hate speech" we may very well regret it if a fascist regime manages to change what the legal category of hate speech is.

I'd worry more about the (extreme) left, they're pretty busy making everything into hatespeech and thoughtcrime.

I'd worry about both, and in a way I think they're feeding each other.