Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

As described in a post by Zuckerberg, before the Paris attack it was only activated for natural disasters. Paris was the first time it was activated for human disasters and they will be doing it more in the future.



Respectfully, that doesn't answer the question. What is the current policy for determining use?


Probably "If the people in charge of running it decide it is worthy"


The real reason, which they probably can't say, is how much media attention it gets in the USA.


Why was this down-voted? Doesn't it have a high chance of stimulating meaningful discussion?


I'm entertaining the notion that this is a way to justify some new privacy-invading feature. I'd love to be wrong, and I'm open to a statement from a FB employee, if such a thing were possible.


Or perhaps it motivates the idea that if you do not use facebook you can never be completely "safe".


"Never let a good crisis go to waste."


I think the post had a bit of a frantic working backwards and managing PR tinge to it. A cyclone/tsunami also takes place over an extended period of time, and is very similar to a human disaster.

In any case, it is a really nice feature and the fact that they will start using it for more disasters is undoubtedly a good thing.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: