Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 360 posts

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#51

Post by ocdtrekkie »

drawkbox wrote: post #11

Your ISP tracking your every move is scarier than all of them after the ISP privacy bill passed. At least Facebook and Google give you something for it and you can route around them if you desire. No routing around ISPs unless you use a VPN but even then they are blocking those. Broadband/cable/telcos capture everything you do and can now sell that information and do[1]. That bill was the pre-cursor to removing net n…

Very few ISPs can track you no matter where you physically go, as your mobile, home, and work ISPs are likely all different. And ISPs are regional, none carry the level of threat of Facebook or Google.

Of course, when states tried to reintroduce privacy protections... That covered ISPs and tech companies alike... Big tech stepped in and opposed. They weren't interested in protecting users, they just didn't want the competition.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#52

Post by jonathanyc »

thriftwy wrote: post #24

You can also dump it and not miss a beat. Much harder to do with Google. Facebook is thoroughly non-essential.

Tell that to people with Android phones. Google Play Services is an opaque blob that cannot be uninstalled and is necessary for nearly all Android apps. And it is constantly uploading your location minute-by-minute to Google for use in things like their "Popular Times" card on search results and who knows what else.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#53

Post by sykh »

ivanhoe wrote: post #23
sykh wrote: post #8

What is scary is the unregulated way in which massive amounts of data can be used to sway public opinion so easily. What is even scarier than this is the way in which those in power can use massive amounts of data to sway public opinion without oversight. The very notion of a republican form of government may end up needing to be reanalyzed. Forget concentrating on Google or Facebook. There is a larger concern. If mu…

Tools used to exercise political influences are getting more sophisticated and powerful, but the gameplay was always the same. Before it was Radio London, then radio Free Europe, and in countries where it was possible local TVs and radios financed directly or indirectly from US or Russia to promote their views. Now it's social medias. Superpowers were always doing this to others and the only new thing here is that th…

Yes. The swaying of public opinion is thousands of years old. But now it's far easier, much cheaper, and can be done at a much greater scale. This is especially so when only a few companies are really able to do this. In the U.S there has a been a consolidation of media control. Too few players have the control and so what is happening now is more dangerous.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#54

Post by TaylorAlexander »

taurath wrote: post #22
delbel wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was trying to come up with a solution. Something like retroactively classify companies that are taking money or are involved in this type of stuff register as a Political Action Committee. Because this is regulated by the FEC. Make Google, CNN, Facebook, Fox, whatever, disclose they are working for hire to politicize your experience. Then, make it so that every 5 years a company can appeal this retro-active PAC sta…

I’ve always thought that a way to get this passed would be to tell the public that you’d be effecting whichever the other sides media is. For conservatives that’d be restricting cnn, msnbc, etc and for liberals that’d be Fox News brietbart etc. People hate the other side more than they love their side I find.

But those news agencies would be committing suicide if they supported this, so none of them would promote that message.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#55

Post by dijit »

wutbrodo wrote: post #35
dijit wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like this is at least slightly disingenuous. Sure, your friends keep you hooked on FB but there are other methods of communication.. Even if they're FB owned (like whatsapp). But google owns the most dominant browser right now, they're spidered into most websites using their analytics engine. They handle more email than the next 5 providers combined, and they have the most dominant mobile OS on the market.

Does any part of that address his point though? Almost every single one of those things you mentioned is part of some federated system, which means you can be the only person in the world not using it and not have your usage affected too heavily. Your friends can include you in text groups no matter what carrier and phone OS you use, they can include your email even if your mail server is located under your couch, yo…

"everything here is federated" is not rebutting my point at all.

Sure, you can host your own website without GA, but then you're in a circle of 1.

Unless you don't email people with googlemail accounts, don't use GA websites, avoid android and anybody who uses it and disallow chrome browsers from accessing your content, then you're still kinda in googles reach.

Which is far more invasive than facebook, facebook at least requires you to actually be an active participant in a system that at its core is about telling people about yourself.

Google wants this data and is willing to "pay" for it with free services.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#56

Post by ocdtrekkie »

product50 wrote: post #21

If FB goes down for one day it is a minor inconvenience. If Google goes down for one day, I am literally at a standstill. No Maps, no Search, no GMail, no YouTube, no Photos! I don't know how I will get through the day without these services :( As such, with Google, I am more than ok them using my data to target me ads since it does feel a mutually beneficial relationship.

When you realize how dependent you are on one company, why not work to reduce that? Their policies could change at any time. Or you could get banned. It's worth the effort to diversify your resources and ensure you have a backup plan.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#57

Post by ocdtrekkie »

dudul wrote: post #34

The main difference from my point of view, as a Google and a non-Facebook user, is that Google actually provides useful services. From GMail, to Maps, Drive, etc. Facebook (as I see it at least) provides zero value. It creates toxic echo-chambers and countless studies have proven again and again that it makes people miserable.

Facebook provides a ton of a value to lots of people. In many cases its their entire social circle and how they communicate with them. Just because it doesn't create value for you or I doesn't mean it creates value.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#58

Post by koolba »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #51
drawkbox wrote: post #11

Your ISP tracking your every move is scarier than all of them after the ISP privacy bill passed. At least Facebook and Google give you something for it and you can route around them if you desire. No routing around ISPs unless you use a VPN but even then they are blocking those. Broadband/cable/telcos capture everything you do and can now sell that information and do[1]. That bill was the pre-cursor to removing net n…

Very few ISPs can track you no matter where you physically go, as your mobile, home, and work ISPs are likely all different. And ISPs are regional, none carry the level of threat of Facebook or Google. Of course, when states tried to reintroduce privacy protections... That covered ISPs and tech companies alike... Big tech stepped in and opposed. They weren't interested in protecting users, they just didn't want the c…

> Very few ISPs can track you no matter where you physically go, as your mobile, home, and work ISPs are likely all different.

There's a lot of consolidation happening in that space. Verizon offers FiOS and phone service. Comcast is getting into the mobile game. That aside, any device by itself is enough to get a picture of the user using only tracing IP addresses (i.e. DNS lookups and outbound requests). They don't need to stitch together your mobile and home connections. It's enough to have two profiles on you when you're using each one.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#59

Post by lucb1e »

thriftwy wrote: post #24

You can also dump it and not miss a beat. Much harder to do with Google. Facebook is thoroughly non-essential.

On the contrary, how do you drop:

- Android (iOS is the only alternative, and that's much worse in terms of openness)

- Maps (OSM, Apple and others don't have the same amount of business information)

- Search (I have DDG as default, but find myself returning at least once a week to google search because none of the other search engines will give good results)

- Images (Bing and DDG are even more terrible at images than they are at search)

- Gmail (I bet >50% of the email in the Netherlands goes to google, so many businesses and even schools outsource it there, not to mention most friends...)

- Embedded analytics, maps, ads, fonts, youtube, and perhaps +1 buttons. (You can block ads, and analytics isn't too hard, but if you block all of Google you'll end up with a lot of broken websites, and you'll have to unblock it every time you want to use any of the other mentioned services)

- Docs (anything else that works with real-time editing and is free to use?)

- Youtube (I rest my case)

On Facebook, all I would do is chat with people, which can be done using a hundred other applications as well. Groups for local info might be useful, but I find that easy enough to forfeit.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#60

Post by giancarlostoro »

kylek wrote: post #47
adam12 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for reminding me about this. I'm seriously thinking about getting a VPN subscription again.

Be very weary- seems many (most? all?) are not the most trustworthy. Look into rolling your own setup.

Behind an untrustworthy ISP to boot? Might want to consider a hosting company that has servers around the world at that point... One in the USA for initial contact and one in the other side of the world for browsing maybe? Or what everyone else will see as your IP.
Post reply on HN