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

Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook hearing was a sham

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 263 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook hearing was a sham

#41

Post by oysmal »

cm2012 wrote: post #22
ngcazz wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The value of people's data is precisely _why_ GDPR is important. I should be able to take it away from you after I granted you temporary access to it.

Your data on FB is worth precisely one thing to them: the ability to target you with ads on FB. When you don't use FB, it's useless to them.

Except if that data is shared with third-parties for profit. Then the data may be useful to them even if you are not logged on. Since they also track you from any other page that uses their API / share buttons, this "worth" does not necessarily decrease regardless of usage. You also cannot easily (or at all) revoke these third-parties' access to your data.

Add to that the risk of them not providing good enough security regarding access to the data (such as with the Cambridge Analytica case), and giving them access to so much of your data becomes an additional problem to consider, since you have no control over that data sharing whatsoever.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook hearing was a sham

#42

Post by Dowwie »

I have had enough of the latest anti-Facebook vitriole. A lot of people want to see someone, preferably Zuck, drawn and quartered, but I don't. He has accepted responsibility for mistakes and has agreed to do more to protect its users. I believe him. I also believe he has earned a chance to redeem himself, considering the value that Facebook has created for society at little to no cost to its users.

Most of the Hacker News community has benefitted by Facebook, as users or through myriad successful open source projects. To take with both hands and to bite is unethical. It is wrong.

Facebook and Zuck aren't the only people who need to change.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook hearing was a sham

#43

Post by yodsanklai »

kaitnieks wrote: post #38

Maybe I'm too cynical about politics, but it appears to me that the point of these hearings is not to solve or investigate anything, it's to generate soundbites that voters or potential future voters would like. It's not even that important what the reply is, as long as the politician asks the hard question and demonstrates his concern, and if it makes the news & press, that's victory for them.

What I find particularly annoying in this kind of hearing is the condescending tone of the politicians. They are eager to put the blame on someone else when they are ultimately the ones who vote the laws.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook hearing was a sham

#44

Post by golergka »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #35
spacehome wrote: post #5

I was struck that on the surface it looked quite adversarial. Senators were trying to ask fairly pointed questions (despite any technical ignorance). But underneath the surface, the two parties here have fairly well aligned goals -- less freedom on the Internet. The senators want to show that they're doing something, and Facebook welcomes regulation in order to suffocate would-be competitors with it. I'm sure they're…

On an unrelated note: I always wonder how people nowadays identify the Internet with WWW. There are so many ways to use the Internet in a way not even remotely related to the current power struggles between greedy businesses and duped users, with incompetent governments meddling in from time to time.

How many people use it this way? Internet without people doesn't have much use. Internet with only geeks on is better, but still pretty limited.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook hearing was a sham

#45

Post by gargravarr »

notspanishflu wrote: post #24
gaius wrote: post #12

If a person logs out of Facebook, and Facebook continues to track them anyway, then that’s clearly violating consent, and there was a meeting where someone said “we need a way to track people who explicitly do not want to be tracked” and everyone in the room nodded.

Facebook tracks everyone, every time. Tracks users and non users. Tracks even people trying to avoid that company. For example, the infamous pixel code. !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e…

I have NoScript set to blacklist any JS from any Facebook domain. Breaking half the internet by default is worth it to neuter this invasive tracking.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook hearing was a sham

#46

Post by arcticfox »

Dowwie wrote: post #42

I have had enough of the latest anti-Facebook vitriole. A lot of people want to see someone, preferably Zuck, drawn and quartered, but I don't. He has accepted responsibility for mistakes and has agreed to do more to protect its users. I believe him. I also believe he has earned a chance to redeem himself, considering the value that Facebook has created for society at little to no cost to its users. Most of the Hacke…

> considering the value that Facebook has created for society at little to no cost to its users.

Is Facebook a net positive for society? Every positive use of the platform I've seen has been offset by a negative one. Maybe I just have bad friends.

Also the "little to no cost" is debatable, when the users have been packaged and delivered as fresh marketing meat to firms like Cambridge Analytica in exchange for a $500B market cap.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook hearing was a sham

#47

Post by RafiqM »

cm2012 wrote: post #22
ngcazz wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The value of people's data is precisely _why_ GDPR is important. I should be able to take it away from you after I granted you temporary access to it.

Your data on FB is worth precisely one thing to them: the ability to target you with ads on FB. When you don't use FB, it's useless to them.

Facebook ad targeting does not require you to use Facebook.

Facebook Audience Network is a display ad network like Adwords.

It's deployed widely across the web and mobile apps.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook hearing was a sham

#48

Post by chiefalchemist »

listenallyall wrote: post #26
chiefalchemist wrote: post #9

These are the same elected officials that approved ISPs selling usage data? The same officials that were silent when Snowden released what he had? Etc. Do I trust MZ and FB? Yes, as much as I trust Uncle Sam. Hint: Not much. The sham is on us. Again.

+1. Zuckerberg should have pointed out exactly who voted for the renewal of the FISA surveillance program in Jan. "Look, if an American citizen is angry enough and chooses to never share any more data with Facebook, s/he has that right and the ability. With the NSA/CIA/FBI/TSA/Homeland Security/traffic cameras/license plate readers/stingrays, there is no opt-out. Period."

In theory yes. It would be entertaining.

The reality is, he'd be screwed.

Nor can we discount FB isn't a favored front of sorts for various "data collection agencies."

p.s. I find it (sadly) funny how so many are upset with ZM and FB, but are completely unaware about Snowden, Obama's expansion of the Patriot Act, etc.

FB is the obvious scapegoat. It currently has to play the role, even if it hates doing so. But for how long?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook hearing was a sham

#49

Post by sveme »

Dowwie wrote: post #42

I have had enough of the latest anti-Facebook vitriole. A lot of people want to see someone, preferably Zuck, drawn and quartered, but I don't. He has accepted responsibility for mistakes and has agreed to do more to protect its users. I believe him. I also believe he has earned a chance to redeem himself, considering the value that Facebook has created for society at little to no cost to its users. Most of the Hacke…

> considering the value that Facebook has created for society at little to no cost to its users.

Would you mind listing the positives (and negatives as well) that you believe facebook created for society? I'm strongly against Facebook, but I'd be happy to be convinced of its generally positive effects. Though please don't mention their Open Source contributions, that's not Facebook, the social media network.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook hearing was a sham

#50

Post by cdolan »

nerdponx wrote: post #27
netsharc wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best part was someone asked if Facebook tracks you even if you've logged out of their website. Holy shit, moment of truth for Zuck, I thought. Nope, he deflected by saying he'll get his team to get back to the senator, and then he spewed jargon ("I know websites use cookies [bla bla] for security"). Oh, he knew the answer, but he couldn't say it in front of all the cameras watching. And of-effing-course he knows…

Stop using Ghostery and switch to uBlock Origin.

Why
Post reply on HN