Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

Post by ILikeConemowk » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 3:58 PM UTC

Malarkey73 wrote: post #276

aylmao wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> those ads are from real companies or organisations - they aren't fake bots or astroturf groups algorithmically designed to tell me what I want to hear. How do you know this? As far as we know Google was also used to spread misinformation by Russian entities in the elections [1]. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Google invented targeted advertising. Hell, this is the company that boasted about A/B testing shades of blue…

I'm in the UK not US so I'm n to totally sure what sort of fake news US electors get. However during Brexit and UK elections I get political ads and memes via FB. Google don't push that stuff at me. Google if it (rarely) pushes politics at me pushes links from political parties or identifiable campaign groups. So if it is lies or fake then I and others can hold them to account. FB often seems to be pushing fake stori…

Post by Sylos » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 4:11 PM UTC

paulie_a wrote: post #66

One of the few times a headline ends with a question mark the obvious answer is in fact: "yes" Google is evil. Facebook is worse.

Post by visarga » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 4:15 PM UTC

Twirrim wrote: post #119

fantispug wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On https sites there's not a lot ISPs can track without breaking encryption. With shared IPs they may not even know the domain for certain (although as IPv6 takes off it will be easier to map IP to domain).

They can make a fair guess at which websites you're accessing. A lot of websites that are related to your particular interests aren't behind shared IP addresses these days. Consider this: * Build a list of domains you're interested in. There's fun community build blocking lists that can help you, if you need it. * Periodically resolve every domain. Odds are if you're an ISP your servers already have the records cache…

Post by moreorless » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 4:22 PM UTC

drawkbox wrote: post #185

moreorless wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yet Facebook and Google at least built products you wanted that you willingly gave up privacy to use and at least got something for it I never agreed to FB collecting data on me. I have no account with them. I do not use their services. Yet here we are.

You can easily block Facebook and Google via host loopback or blocking their scripts. I have never seen so many pro ISP tracking/privacy people on HN.

Post by fauigerzigerk » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 5:01 PM UTC

izacus wrote: post #282

millstone wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are giving Google way too much credit here. Google collects your location by default. I know so because I bought an Android phone just this month. Here is the setup screen, shown with default settings. [1] Google encourages developers to use the Play Services SDK for location services. This means that it is impossible to provide your location to just one app (say, Lyft) without also providing it to Google. [2] Yo…

> Google encourages developers to use the Play Services SDK for location services. This means that it is impossible to provide your location to just one app (say, Lyft) without also providing it to Google. [2] This is a straight up lie. Yes, Google encourages fused location because it provides better experience (it bootstraps location via cell towers / bluetooth / wifi which requires data from Google servers). Howeve…