Tim Cook Implies That Facebook's Business Model of Maximizing Engagement Leads to Polarization and Violence

Scepticalscribe · Jan 29, 2021

yaxomoxay said:
And Afghanistan was not the target.

The target were the Taliban (which held power on almost all Afghanistan; and they were brutal on Afghans, especially women and children), and Al Qaida members that were in Afghanistan, protected by the Taliban. The Afghan war was - I repeat - different than the other wars specifically because of 1) 9/11 2) the power structure in Afghanistan (a mix of state and tribal actors). The taliban still control lots, if not most, of the power and regions in Afghanistan although it seems that they chilled out a bit from an international terrorism point of view.

The Taliban were beyond brutal, to women, children, and Afghans from the other ethnic groups (Tajiks, Uzbeks, and - above all - Hazaras) who weren't Pashtun. From what I could see, they were fanatical Pashtun nationalists - conflating this (and a ferocious interpretation of Islam) with Afghan identity.

However, while I was delighted to see them overthrown, they weren't responsible for the events of September 2001, other than (foolishly bound by their own extravagant traditions of hospitality) by granting AQ sanctuary.

The Taliban were never international terrorists (now, granted, I'll readily concede that they were domestic terrorists); they lacked the vision, resources, and motivation.

Of course, AQ was very different.

michaelsviews · Jan 29, 2021

Anything and everything that works against Facebook is GREAT.

redcaptrickster · Jan 29, 2021

IG88 said:
Parler doesn't own their own server farms either.

Nope, a far right extremist owns their server farms now. They are well on their way to be back up and running. Sean Hannity, Rand Paul, and Mark Levin already have posted.

The "woke" crowd can't stop poking the bear, and the rest of us suffer for it.

yaxomoxay · Jan 29, 2021

Scepticalscribe said:
The Taliban were beyond brutal, to women, children, and Afghans from the other ethnic groups (Tajiks, Uzbeks, and - above all - Hazaras) who weren't Pashtun. From what I could see, they were fanatical Pashtun nationalists - conflating this (and a ferocious interpretation of Islam) with Afghan identity.

However, while I was delighted to see them overthrown, they weren't responsible for the events of September 2001, other than (foolishly bound by their own extravagant traditions of hospitality) by granting AQ sanctuary.

The Taliban were never international terrorists (now, granted, I'll readily concede that they were domestic terrorists); they lacked the vision, resources, and motivation.

Of course, AQ was very different.

And I - of course - don't disagree with anything you say. But you certainly realize that their granting sanctuary to those responsible for 9/11 couldn't be overlooked. The US was attacked, Article V was invoked and voted, NATO reacted. Anything that stands in the way is to be considered against NATO, that's how it works. I am still of the position that listing the 9/11-Afghan War next to Iraq (both of them), Vietnam, Korea etc. which were more "tactical" wars to position the US on the global chessboard and/or to allegedly protect allies is an erroneous evaluation.

At any rate, good discussion. Now your post made me recall that tragic event of the Buddhas of Bamiyan. Do you remember? What a tragic event for anyone who loves history and human thought.

redcaptrickster · Jan 29, 2021

Rafagon said:
Note: Due to the lengthy or excessively wordy nature of this article, I scrolled past the majority of it without reading it.

You didn't miss anything.

Scepticalscribe · Jan 29, 2021

yaxomoxay said:
And I - of course - don't disagree with anything you say. But you certainly realize that their granting sanctuary to those responsible for 9/11 couldn't be overlooked. The US was attacked, Article V was invoked and voted, NATO reacted. Anything that stands in the way is to be considered against NATO, that's how it works. I am still of the position that listing the 9/11-Afghan War next to Iraq (both of them), Vietnam, Korea etc. which were more "tactical" wars to position the US on the global chessboard and/or to allegedly protect allies is an erroneous evaluation.

At any rate, good discussion. Now your post made me recall that tragic event of the Buddhas of Bamiyan. Do you remember? What a tragic event for anyone who loves history and human thought.

Yes, of course I do.

The destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan was an absolute outrage, an exhibition of nihilistic and utterly wanton cultural vandalism.

Actually, I have met - and spoken with - Afghans, including one who had worked, as a young man, with what was then the state tourist authority in the 1960s and 1970s, who were appalled by this act, and who stressed that this was nothing to do with religion, "nobody worshipped them, but they were a part of our culture."

Lancetx · Jan 29, 2021

Then put your money where your mouth is Tim. If you're going to ban one social media app from your App Store, then you need to ban them all. There's far worse stuff on Twitter, FB and Reddit than there ever was on Parler. His selective outrage is more than just a bit hypocritical.

MacBH928 · Jan 29, 2021

I am starting to think Tim Cook have personal beef with Zuckerberg. He continually bashes this specific company. Amazon, Google, and many others including countries like China are just as much abusing privacy but he really has it for FB and does not seem to mention the others.

AdonisSMU · Jan 29, 2021

Apple Knowledge Navigator said:
He’s got a point. But I think the problem extends beyond Facebook and is inherent with the internet in the first place.

Simply; there is no police or law. It’s uncontrollable, like a virus without a cure.

The internet has undeniable merits, but I think many would agree that they were more content with life before social media had an influence on the way we lived.

I just think people went off the deepend as it relates to social media.

lordofthereef · Jan 30, 2021

The biggest issue I have seen on social media develop rapidly is echo chambers. Not only are you able to find a person that thinks like you (thusly reinforcing your own beliefs no matter how... different they are), you are also told that you have the right to your opinion, even if that opinion goes directly against what we generally know to be a fact. Couple that with the ability to stoke these echo chambers with information intentionally meant to mislead, and you get this sort of powder keg.

I have just completely shut all of my social media off in the last two months and have found that I am generally less stressed in my day to day and even more engaged with my local environment. Sure, I don't get to see what someone ate for breakfast whom I haven't talked to directly in almost two decades, but that's a small price to pay to be able to just turn the noise off. Of course I still have access to 100% of the articles people love to share and carry on a multi day multi thread argument over. Just... without the noise. BLISS.

lordofthereef · Jan 30, 2021

MacBH928 said:
I am starting to think Tim Cook have personal beef with Zuckerberg. He continually bashes this specific company. Amazon, Google, and many others including countries like China are just as much abusing privacy but he really has it for FB and does not seem to mention the others.

This specific piece isn't really about privacy though. It's more about human interaction on a platform. Maybe he has beef. I don't really know. Google doesn't really have one of these platforms, unless you count youtube.

AdonisSMU · Jan 30, 2021

lordofthereef said:
The biggest issue I have seen on social media develop rapidly is echo chambers. Not only are you able to find a person that thinks like you (thusly reinforcing your own beliefs no matter how... different they are), you are also told that you have the right to your opinion, even if that opinion goes directly against what we generally know to be a fact. Couple that with the ability to stoke these echo chambers with information intentionally meant to mislead, and you get this sort of powder keg.

I have just completely shut all of my social media off in the last two months and have found that I am generally less stressed in my day to day and even more engaged with my local environment. Sure, I don't get to see what someone ate for breakfast whom I haven't talked to directly in almost two decades, but that's a small price to pay to be able to just turn the noise off. Of course I still have access to 100% of the articles people love to share and carry on a multi day multi thread argument over. Just... without the noise. BLISS.

Agreed. I would argue that even this forum is social media. It just does not have the same level of doom as other forms of social media devised around politics.

Tech198 · Jan 30, 2021

Tim miss-understands that while they do good at privacy, social networks do not do the same "level" as what Tim likes to see.

Social networks cannot have the same privacy level due to their business.. That's like suggesting all companies should be like Apple with privacy... That *may* change in future, but don't get a hopes up.

Its a big ask, even if Tim is starting off small with Facebook first.

MacBH928 · Jan 30, 2021

lordofthereef said:
This specific piece isn't really about privacy though. It's more about human interaction on a platform. Maybe he has beef. I don't really know. Google doesn't really have one of these platforms, unless you count youtube.

I understand but they all involved in making you stick to the screen including Apple which I believe they must be doing it via their news, music, itunes, podcasts, or some app. Twitter does it, instagram, YouTube, Amazon Prime video...they all maximise engagement

hatchettjack · Feb 24, 2021

Lancetx said:
Then put your money where your mouth is Tim. If you're going to ban one social media app from your App Store, then you need to ban them all. There's far worse stuff on Twitter, FB and Reddit than there ever was on Parler. His selective outrage is more than just a bit hypocritical.

I concur

08380728 · Feb 26, 2021

“Tim Cook Implies That Facebook's Business Model of Maximizing Engagement Leads to Polarization and Violence”

LOL, is that like Apple employees donating to Biden’s election campaign, so he can manipulate the vote, become president of the ********* nation in earth, the take military action against countries outside is own borders. Kinda the same as supporting the Military Complex Unit of the USA, keeps them happy when they can sell bombs to other countries eh eh eh...

Apple employees were major donators to Biden election campaign | AppleInsider

The presidential campaign of Joe Biden received considerable donations from employees of tech companies, campaign finance records reveal, with Apple employees reportedly the fourth-largest source of funding.

appleinsider.com

Trump on
8th September 2020

President Donald Trump launched an unprecedented public attack against the leadership of the US military on Monday, accusing them of waging wars to boost the profits of defence manufacturing companies.

"I'm not saying the military's in love with me -- the soldiers are, the top people in the Pentagon probably aren't because they want to do nothing but fight wars so that all of those wonderful companies that make the bombs and make the planes and make everything else stay happy,"

So lefty muppets vote for the other guy who now starts bombing Syria lol

Was that part of his executive orders too ... eh eh eh

One killed, several wounded after Joe Biden orders airstrike against Iranian-backed militia in Syria

United States President Joe Biden directs the US military to conduct airstrikes in eastern Syria against facilities belonging to what the US says were Iran-backed militia.

www.abc.net.au

ericwn · Feb 26, 2021

drayon said:
“Tim Cook Implies That Facebook's Business Model of Maximizing Engagement Leads to Polarization and Violence”

LOL, is that like Apple employees donating to Biden’s election campaign, so he can manipulate the vote, become president of the ********* nation in earth, the take military action against countries outside is own borders. Kinda the same as supporting the Military Complex Unit of the USA, keeps them happy when they can sell bombs to other countries eh eh eh...

Apple employees were major donators to Biden election campaign | AppleInsider

The presidential campaign of Joe Biden received considerable donations from employees of tech companies, campaign finance records reveal, with Apple employees reportedly the fourth-largest source of funding.

appleinsider.com

Trump on
8th September 2020

President Donald Trump launched an unprecedented public attack against the leadership of the US military on Monday, accusing them of waging wars to boost the profits of defence manufacturing companies.

"I'm not saying the military's in love with me -- the soldiers are, the top people in the Pentagon probably aren't because they want to do nothing but fight wars so that all of those wonderful companies that make the bombs and make the planes and make everything else stay happy,"

So lefty muppets vote for the other guy who now starts bombing Syria lol

Was that part of his executive orders too ... eh eh eh

One killed, several wounded after Joe Biden orders airstrike against Iranian-backed militia in Syria

United States President Joe Biden directs the US military to conduct airstrikes in eastern Syria against facilities belonging to what the US says were Iran-backed militia.

www.abc.net.au

Oh so if violence is committed on any other way that’s now somehow Apples problem because you can’t find a relevant Facebook post?

Rather nothing of your post has any relevance to the topic. Thanks for the chuckle.

08380728 · Feb 26, 2021

ericwn said:
Oh so if violence is committed on any other way that’s now somehow Apples problem because you can’t find a relevant Facebook post?

Rather nothing of your post has any relevance to the topic. Thanks for the chuckle.

Ahah nah, that’s Tim Cooks suggestion pointing the finger at FB. If maximum engagement leads to polarisation and violence on any other platform or location Tim also thinks that’s Facebooks problem, or will he take responsibility if it happens on his platform, does the USA govt take the same responsibility? The have maximum engagement and that definitely leads to polarisation and violence in his own country...yet he votes for the same guy that allows it...lol

08380728 · Feb 26, 2021

Anyway it’s a bit far fetched FB creates engagement between family and friends and also for small businesses, that’s FB business model. Zuck can’t be responsible for everything what happens on his platform that wasn’t his intention.

Rob_2811 · Feb 26, 2021

drayon said:
Ahah nah, that’s Tim Cooks suggestion pointing the finger at FB. If maximum engagement leads to polarisation and violence on any other platform or location Tim also thinks that’s Facebooks problem, or will he take responsibility if it happens on his platform, does the USA govt take the same responsibility? The have maximum engagement and that definitely leads to polarisation and violence in his own country...yet he votes for the same guy that allows it...lol

It's what Tim Cook does best, Politics.

Pointing the finger elswhere to deflect attention from the regulatory scrutiny on Apple. "regulate them not us"

Any word from Tim on the polarisation of putting ethnic minorities in 'reducation camps' like his chums in China?

Thought not ..

ericwn · Feb 26, 2021

drayon said:
Ahah nah, that’s Tim Cooks suggestion pointing the finger at FB. If maximum engagement leads to polarisation and violence on any other platform or location Tim also thinks that’s Facebooks problem, or will he take responsibility if it happens on his platform, does the USA govt take the same responsibility? The have maximum engagement and that definitely leads to polarisation and violence in his own country...yet he votes for the same guy that allows it...lol

Your assumption on who votes what is nothing but a guess. So it needs to be on Facebook before you agree with the US running strikes anywhere. Got you.

ericwn · Feb 26, 2021

Rob_2811 said:
It's what Tim Cook does best, Politics.

Pointing the finger elswhere to deflect attention from the regulatory scrutiny on Apple. "regulate them not us"

Any word from Tim on the polarisation of putting ethnic minorities in 'reducation camps' like his chums in China?

Thought not ..

Yeah if he doesn’t read the daily Amnesty International briefing he is not credible.

Rob_2811 · Feb 26, 2021

ericwn said:
Yeah if he doesn’t read the daily Amnesty International briefing he is not credible.

Yes you have to have read it to know what's going on.

Apple is absolutely aware of what goes on in China

ericwn · Feb 26, 2021

Rob_2811 said:
Yes you have to have read it to know what's going on.

Apple is absolutely aware of what goes on in China

Yup one has to read through the three month old click bait indeed to find out that

“However, the form did not say whether Apple was for or against the bill or whether it wanted to modify it in any way.”

It’s obviously as the article clearly points out an idiotic third party lobbying company claiming to act on apple behalf.

Now back to the topic of Facebook being an echo chamber for extremists of sorts who seed their low level ideas to like minded friends of violence.

Rob_2811 · Feb 26, 2021

ericwn said:
Yup one has to read through the three month old click bait indeed to find out that

“However, the form did not say whether Apple was for or against the bill or whether it wanted to modify it in any way.”

It’s obviously as the article clearly points out an idiotic third party lobbying company claiming to act on apple behalf.

Now back to the topic of Facebook being an echo chamber for extremists of sorts who seed their low level ideas to like minded friends of violence.

Goodness me.

You would have to be in fantasy land to think that Apple/Cook don't know exactly what is going on in China. Cook was asked about it during a congressional hearing last year.

Not the first time Apple have been implicated in the use of forced labour either.