From Can the Oversight Board force Facebook to follow its own rules?
When the Board holds you accountable, cut them off.
the Oversight Boardâ€™s decision to hand things back to Facebook speaks to issues that run much deeper than just Trump. One of the most notable issues raised by the Oversight Board in its 12,000-word decision is that Facebook isnâ€™t particularly good at consistently enforcing its own policies, especially when it comes to politicians and other influential figures.
Facebook has already indicated that itâ€™s unwilling to fully cooperate. In its decision, the board says that the company failed to answer several crucial questions, including several that speak to the very issues it raises in its policy recommendations.
From Basecamp tries to shutdown discussion.
This account is based on interviews with six Basecamp employees who were present at the meeting, along with a partial transcript created by employees. Collectively, they describe a company whose attempt to tamp down on difficult conversations blew up in its face as employees rejected the notion that discussions of power and justice should remain off limits in the workplace. And they suggest that efforts to eliminate disruptions in the workplace by regulating internal speech may cause even more turmoil for a company in the long run.
â€œMy honest sense of why everybody is leaving because they’re tired of Jason and David’s behavior â€” the suppression of voices, of any dissent,â€ one employee told me. â€œThey really donâ€™t care what employees have to say. If they don’t think it’s an issue, it’s not an issue. If they don’t experience it, then it’s not real. And this was the final straw for a lot of employees.â€
From The inside story of how we reached the Facebook-Trump verdict
A view inside the oversight board:
The key word is â€œindefinitelyâ€ â€“ if only because Facebookâ€™s own policies do not appear to permit it. The oversight board (OSB) judgment doesnâ€™t mince its words: â€œIn applying a vague, standardless penalty and then referring this case to the board to resolve, Facebook seeks to avoid its responsibilities. The board declines Facebookâ€™s request and insists that Facebook apply and justify a defined penalty.â€ Ball squarely back in Facebookâ€™s court.
What Facebook has to do now â€“ in our judgment, which the company is bound to implement â€“ is to re-examine the arbitrary penalty it imposed on 7 January. It should take account of the gravity of the violation and the prospect of future harm.
From After Vaccination, the Inertia Is Real – The Atlantic
Guidance in the new algebra of risk and apprehension. Test anxiety.
The goal is to weigh the risk youâ€™re considering against the risk youâ€™re willing to take onâ€”essentially figuring out if the potential boost to your well-being is worth it. That threshold will vary from person to person, and we should make room for that diversity, Taber said. Some people will want to dip their toes into the water more slowly, as Carter put it, and thatâ€™s okay.
Inevitably, peopleâ€™s social expectations will misalign, and weâ€™ll all need to exercise some patience, with ourselves and others, and clearly communicate our ground rules. â€œSay what you need and what you feel comfortable with,â€ Carter said. The activities we can safely do after vaccination should not necessarily be seen as the behaviors we should engage in; they are options, not obligations.
That sort of transparency isnâ€™t intuitive for everyone, certainly not me. I have spent months roiling in a data-rich stew of fear and silence. Iâ€™m also worried about my own limitations. There is, first off, my lingering COVID-19 concern: I canâ€™t help but worry that, even after Iâ€™m fully vaccinated, Iâ€™ll make a misstepâ€”that Iâ€™ll somehow catch the virus and pass it on to someone else. Iâ€™m also worried that, amid all this chaos and isolation, Iâ€™ve simply forgotten how to be a social human. Charisma isnâ€™t like riding a bike. And Iâ€™m not eager to show off just how far Iâ€™ve regressedâ€”how much the pandemic has eroded my ability to engage.
The way to quash that fear is, of course, to flex the mingling muscles that have atrophied, and to remind myself that, as misanthropic as I can be, I do enjoy exercising them from time to time. Instead of yielding to my inertia, Iâ€™m reminding myself of the things I miss: hugging my friends. Smelling fresh-baked restaurant bread. Heading to an office that isnâ€™t 30 feet away from my bed. Iâ€™m going to start slow, probably with a haircut or an outdoor picnic, then work my way up to the 18,000 weddings Iâ€™ve been invited to this fall. Iâ€™ll share my vaccination status with the people I want to interact with, and hope they offer me the same courtesy in return. Iâ€™ll learn how to say â€œThank you, but Iâ€™m not ready for thatâ€ without the guilt eating me up.
From Taylor Swift Remade â€˜Fearlessâ€™. Borges weighs in.
[Taylor Swift Remade â€˜Fearlessâ€™ as â€˜Taylorâ€™s Version.â€™ Letâ€™s Discuss.}(https://ift.tt/39Y5Hcq)
Keeping a promise from when her master recordings were sold, Swift has faithfully rerecorded her 2008 album. Our critics and reporters explore its sound, and purpose.
An interesting read from a Benjamin-aura-NFT-Borges angle. Iâ€™m surprised none of the reviewers at the NYT brought in a mid-20th century author who address re-production. But Borges weighs into the discussion with â€œPierre Menard, Author of the Quixoteâ€
Menard’s fragmentary Quixote (which is line-for-line identical to the original) to be much richer in allusion than Miguel de Cervantes’ “original” work because Menard’s must be considered in light of world events since 1602. Wikipedia
And so the reviewers demonstrate with their consideration of Swiftâ€™s re-make. Er, â€œreclamation.â€
From Feature bloat: Psychology boffins find people tend to add elements to solve a problem rather than take things away
This is why subscription software is a Bad Idea: The tendency is to add improvements rather than refactor improvements. Applies in composition, too: Students tended to try to solve problems by adding text rather than cutting.
From Don’t Buy the Conservative Rebellion Against Corporations
Adam Serwer at The Atlantic calls out the Rightâ€™s argument on socially-conscientious corporate moves.
Woke is a nebulous term stolen from Black American English, repurposed by conservatives as an epithet to express opposition to forms of egalitarianism they find ridiculous or distastefulâ€”in this case, the idea that constituents of the rival party should have an unfettered right to vote. Wedded to the term capital, it functions as an expression of the hollowness of conservative populism, which is opposed not to the concentration of corporate power so much as to the use of that power for purposes of which conservatives disapprove. Their aim is not to diminish corporate power, but to use it to their advantage. They seek to ensure that large firms use their influence to maintain the dominance of conservative cultural mores and Republican political power.
Serwer uses McConnellâ€™s language back on him: hijack from the left is woke. Hijack from the right OK.
â€œParts of the private sector keep dabbling in behaving like a woke parallel government,â€ Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell declared from the Senate floor. â€œCorporations will invite serious consequences if they become a vehicle for far-left mobs to hijack our country from outside the constitutional order.â€ As the Associated Press notes, McConnell is â€œamong the most outspoken champions of the role of big money in elections, promoting the free-flow of undisclosed dollars to campaigns as a form of Constitution-protected free speech.â€ Apparently, corporations are allowed to behave as parallel governments only when they are vehicles for right-wing billionaires to hijack the country from outside the constitutional order.
The woke problem on the right is that corporations who have garnered tax breaks were bought – and ought to stay bought.
Republicans have no interest in curtailing corporate power in this fashionâ€”not when they believe that power could be used to reimpose a diminished cultural hegemony. These so-called populist Republicans do not wish to throw the one ring into Mount Doom; they simply want to wield it on their own behalf.
But it comes down to this:
Republicans have no ideas of their own to speak of, beyond issuing colorful threats to employ state coercion against firms that fail to do their bidding.
From GOP group tells online donors: Give every month or ‘we will have to tell Trump you’re a DEFECTOR’ – CNNPolitics
Rhetoric on the sign up pages.
This move works by classifying those who hesitate as failures and traitors. Itâ€™s pretty much extortion – a protection racket: Ya got a nice office here, donâ€™t ya.
The campaign arm of House Republicans is using an aggressive tactic to push online donors toward committing to monthly contributions, telling them that opting out of having the same amount automatically charged to their credit card or withdrawn from their bank each month is an act of disloyalty toward former President Donald Trump.
Cozy. Quiet. Itâ€™d be a shame if something were to â€¦ happen. Right?
But Republicans — including Trump’s 2020 campaign — have gone to new lengths to tap into Trump’s popularity and strong-arm supporters into regular, automatic contributions.
Under that was a box committing donors to another April 7 donation, telling them that their “Trump Patriot Status” was “MISSING!”
“As a TOP grassroots supporter, we were surprised to see you ABANDONED him. This is your LAST CHANCE to update your status to ACTIVE!” the pre-checked box said.
Nice of you to give. The Boss, heâ€™ll be happy. See ya next month. Be lucky.
From The Sudden Conservative Outrage Over Vaccine Passports – The Atlantic
An insight from Dave Frum on the right playing games with politics. the new conservative rhetoric as theatre.
But the point is not to win the fight, or even really to fight the fight. The point is to announce the fight, and to keep raging about it, even if you do not in fact fight it very hard. DeSantis surely does not agree with those Republicans who dismiss COVID-19 as a hoax, the COVID-19 vaccines as a menace, and vaccine certificates as the mark of the anti-Christ. He has repeatedly said that he will take the vaccine when itâ€™s his turn. But he must reckon with a party in which anti-vaccination has joined pro-gun as an indispensable cultural markerâ€”and as a potential veto bloc for anyone aspiring to a future Republican presidential nomination.
To appease those cultural blocs, Republican politicians must be willing to sacrifice everything, including what used to be the partyâ€™s foundational principles. To protect the gun, or to avoid contradicting the delusions of anti-vaccine paranoiacs, property rights must give way, freedom to operate a business must yield. The QAnon-curious Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene expressed the new mentality when she took to Facebook to denounce vaccine passports as â€œcorporate communism.â€ It sounded crazy. But if you understand that she interprets communism to mean â€œany interference in the right of people like me to do whatever we want, regardless of the rights of othersâ€â€”then, yeah, the property rights of corporations will indeed look to her like a force of communism.
From Conservative Cancel Culture at Boise State
A morality tale
The Boise State debacle should be a lesson to college administrators everywhere. Colleges must be careful not to instantly believe any smear about so-called â€œwokeâ€ folks that gets tossed around. Colleges must investigate first, and only jump to punishment when there is strong evidence and penalty is justified. Colleges must improve their procedures and policies to protect due process. Colleges must have true shared governance and utilize faculty committees to investigate any allegations of misconduct in teaching. Colleges must resist political interference with clear principles rather than sacrificing scapegoats to powerful legislators. Colleges must have transparency and open debate rather than imposing gag orders on everyone. And when someone screws up royally, as Boise State administrators did so badly in this case, colleges must have systems of accountability where questions are fully answered and misconduct has consequences.