Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Thursday March 08 2018, @04:53AM   Printer-friendly
from the what-we-meant-to-say-was-... dept.

Facebook asks users: should we allow men to ask children for sexual images?

Facebook has admitted it was a "mistake" to ask users whether paedophiles requesting sexual pictures from children should be allowed on its website.

On Sunday, the social network ran a survey for some users asking how they thought the company should handle grooming behaviour. "There are a wide range of topics and behaviours that appear on Facebook," one question began. "In thinking about an ideal world where you could set Facebook's policies, how would you handle the following: a private message in which an adult man asks a 14-year-old girl for sexual pictures."

The options available to respondents ranged from "this content should not be allowed on Facebook, and no one should be able to see it" to "this content should be allowed on Facebook, and I would not mind seeing it".

A second question asked who should decide the rules around whether or not the adult man should be allowed to ask for such pictures on Facebook. Options available included "Facebook users decide the rules by voting and tell Facebook" and "Facebook decides the rules on its own".

Also at The Verge, TechCrunch, The Mercury News, CNBC, and Engadget.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 08 2018, @06:26AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 08 2018, @06:26AM (#649361)

    I think something like that is very clever and cost effective.

    Up to now, I thought recruiting the Geek Squad and Best Buy to snoop through any computer anyone gullible enough to let corporate entities ( beholden to corporation profit bottom line, and handshakes with highly placed men, not their customer! ) took the cake.

    I used to personally take care of some of my neighbor's machines.... you know, driver issues, occasionally running MalwareBytes, going through their machine with Security Task Manager to see if anything looked amiss, maybe even running Wireshark on their machine if it looked like they were spewing packets. Maybe running System Restore for quickie screwups like accidentally running a malicious Javascript - or if worse comes to worse, restoring a complete disk image from CloneZilla.

    But alas, about four months ago, the last one went WIN10, and I can no longer help them. They are on their own, now. I've told them as much, but even the offer of "free" tech support does not stand up to the psychological pressure of "being with the times", no matter what the cost.

    I've got this new doorbell! Christmas! New Computer! Gotta upgrade! Won't need you anymore, but thanks!

      I get a really strong feeling that all this telemetry is also of similar doings... as anyone agreeing to the Microsoft EULA has already surrendered any privacy they have. There are so many packets sailing out of idle WIN10 machines I can't track 'em all... I have no idea what's in 'em... I feel about like a storekeeper seeing people dragging huge strollers into and out of my business, strollers configured so I can't verify what's in them, and legally I can't force them to verify they aren't shoplifting. And I wonder why my inventory keeps showing up in other people's databases. I just guess that's one of the costs to be adoptive of new technology.

    Nobody can trust their computers anymore.

    Remember old Ronald Reagan? ... "Trust... but Verify!", and with the inability to verify, I can not trust.

    These guys are even managing their retirement and stock brokerages online... I await the day when they call, all moaning over somebody who sold all their stocks right before the big hike, or had them buy stocks right before a plummet, without their involvement, while everyone hides behind "hold harmless" clauses.... or their kid gets nailed big time because she could not prove she bought a song through approved channels, and Spokeo even knows who he is buying his adult diapers from, and he's losing his hair, takes viagra, constipated, and his wife has a yeast infection and toenail fungus.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +4  
       Insightful=2, Funny=2, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 08 2018, @04:25PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 08 2018, @04:25PM (#649528)

    as anyone agreeing to the Microsoft EULA has already surrendered any privacy they have.

    EULAs aren't valid, especially if you don't read them and it's reasonable that you don't read them. If you don't need to reverse engineer the software to edit them you can always say you needed to edit the contract to be a real meeting of the minds and if they want to review it and agree you'll give them a place where they can send their monthly checks per the contract
    (I am not a lawyer! This is not advice)