this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2023
199 points (90.6% liked)

Technology

59607 readers
3610 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] alphacyberranger@lemmy.world 40 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This is the same as "HR cares about the company, not the employees"

[–] JustinHanagan@kbin.social 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Exactly. FTA:

"Trust and safety” departments are kinda like “Human Resources” departments. They exist to help the company avoid expensive lawsuits and expensive PR blunders. These departments, I assume, are comprised of good-hearted people who care deeply about their work and the well being of others. But they are fighting a battle that the companies do not actually want to end.

[–] boatswain@infosec.pub 1 points 11 months ago

FYI "comprised of" is not a thing; you mean "composed of". The correct way to use "comprise," if you're interested, is like "the United States comprises fifty states". Technically you should mention DC and the various US territories etc as well, since comprise should indicate all of the parts.

[–] multicolorKnight@lemmy.world 38 points 11 months ago

Everything in a corporation exists to benefit the corporation.

[–] crystalmerchant@lemmy.world 27 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

Trust and Safety? Is this the new buzzword for HR, a la People Empowerment?

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 19 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No, it's more like "policy enforcement".

Ostensibly it means "if our policy forbids Nazis, then you can trust us that there won't be Nazis engaging with your content on our site."

But really, the policy doesn't forbid Nazis.

[–] JustinHanagan@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago

Exactly, well said.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 6 points 11 months ago

At my previous company the department went through various names over the years, ending up as "People Experience" when we parted ways.

I think Trust and Safety would probably be for an analogous department focused on the users, not the employees.

[–] WheelcharArtist@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

That would be people & culture

[–] Munkisquisher 5 points 11 months ago

I've seen them use Tallent and Culture unironically. Yes and also shorten it to T&C

[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's hard to think the author's concern is too genuine given that they're publishing on Substack

[–] JustinHanagan@kbin.social 16 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

When I switched to Substack it was just a Mailchimp alternative (I don't think Mailchimp moderates what they send out either). They were a service, not a platform. But since then Substack has added a lot of social elements. And now that I've been made aware of their stance, I'm planning my exit ASAP.

[–] b3an@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Why users are always the ones screwed?

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

A "user" is anyone who walks through the public park and picks up a gadget that someone else left there.

They poke at it for a while, not knowing who built it or who dropped it in the park. It does some cool stuff.

Sometimes they can wiggle it and it makes colors that their friends enjoy. Maybe someone built this thing just to be a fun toy to play with?

They put it in their pants pocket and walk on.

Once in a while, the thing they picked up in the park just spontaneously catches fire and burns their pants off, leaving them naked in the middle of the town square and really embarrassed.

But usually, a "user" can mess around with technology crap and not get burned.

Until, y'know, they do.

And then it's supposed to be their fault.


Hey, thing-builders: If the thing you built hurts people, you should fix that. "They picked it up, it's okay if it burns their pants off" is not a good excuse.

[–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

While I agree with your premise, people also need to be aware that some random thing they started fiddling with can be problematic, and should maybe do some basic research on what they're fiddling with. We absolutely need to hold creators responsible for their creations, but this also shouldn't absolve people of using their brains and thinking critically.

[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Then it should at least come with a warning label, and perhaps, with the ability to block children from picking it up or playing with it.

Those who create dangerous things have a duty to warn others of their potential dangers before leaving them haphazardly about.

[–] Sorgan71@lemmy.world -3 points 11 months ago

I think its morally acceptable to make products designed to hurt the user and other people.

[–] Uranium3006@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

"Useds" is a more appropriate term

[–] snail_hatan@lemmy.ml 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Down voted because substack enables nazis.

[–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago

Good lad/die, fuck substack