Psyop and you don't need a tinfoil hat to see it.
Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy
291–300 of 719 posts
Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy
#292Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Tracking everything people do isn't a "business model"—it's a crime. Could you point me to a law that codifies this as crime? I have yet to see convincing proof of widespread or significant harm caused by tracking/retargeting. These arguments always seem to rely on hyperbole and redefining terms and norms. No, I don’t work at FB. No, I don’t work in digital advertising.
Congress can, and should, make it a crime.
It would be very difficult to make this a crime, because a lot of customers WANT companies to be able to track everything about them. What they don't want is for their information to then be sold and passed around willy-nilly.
Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy
#293Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what way could this be possibly be “a fake story?” Do you not believe that it happened? Or is she making stuff up? Or do you just mean that people don’t really actually care about the topic? Or because it’s not previously unknown, it’s too late and public interest is supposed to move on to other topics now? The initial bombshell was around instagram’s affect on teen girls mental health, so calling it an attempt to…
OP likely means it's disingenuous- the true intentions are hidden- it's part of a lobbying effort for greater control and consolidation of power.
Whose true intentions are hidden, and who is trying to lobby? The person who posted this on HN and all of the people who upvoted it here and all the comments critical of FB here and twitter and twitter users and bloggers and redditors and, yes, traditional news?
It seems like the assertion is that this isn't newsworthy... despite the fact that huge amounts of people clearly care, but that this is only really making news for a reason totally separate from the fact that there is new leaked data and people clearly care.
Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy
#294The two best ideas I've heard: - Require age verification by law and ban kids from using it. We ban kids from alcohol we should ban them from this. - Require ID verification by law but allow people to use a fake name. Fixes the bots issue and the kid depression issue. The market isn't going to get there by itself because of competition. If insta implements this then they lose market share to snap. So there's a strong…
I'd go in a completely opposite direction:
- Require that users be allowed to access anonymously.
This protects people from Facebook, by disassociating their identity from their "user" while allowing FB to market to the user.
Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy
#295Earlier quoted context omitted.
I will categorically say that I'll take unfettered corporations over unfettered government every single time . I can quit Facebook. Good luck quitting your government. These are not remotely equivalent things, and I bristle every time I hear someone suggest it.
> I can quit Facebook. Maybe. If I quit Facebook, I can't messenger my loved ones anymore and my Oculus is now a lovely brick someone bought me for Christmas. At a certain scale, the power dynamics start to look very similar. Governments still generally maintain a monopoly on violence, that's a big difference. Generally. I think we can consider "Deported because your employer has no further use for you" a mostly-gove…
How did people communicate with their loved ones before Facebook? Are you hearing yourself?
Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy
#296Earlier quoted context omitted.
Each "team" accuses the other of being authoritarian. So, when blue team is in charge, the reds think of themselves as anti-authoritarian. When red team is in charge, the blues think of themselves as anti-authoritarian. Basically, it's a rhetorical ploy to gain a few cheap points: When the side in charge does something you don't like, just call them "authoritarians," and your cause, whatever it is, becomes more appea…
Except what you are saying is not really true. Most conservatives want to reduce government power, not extend it. The left, on the other hand, universally wants to extend government reach. I would recommend reading "The Authoritarian Moment" which goes into detail as to how the left are basically winning: https://www.amazon.com/Authoritarian-Moment-Weaponized-Ameri... To quote from the book's introduction: "There are…
> "There are certainly totalitarians on the political right. But statistically, they represent a fringe movement with little institutional clout. The authoritarian left, meanwhile, is ascendant in nearly every area of American life. A small number of leftists—college-educated, coastal, and uncompromising—have not just taken over the Democratic Party but our corporations, our universities, our scientific establishment, our cultural institutions. And they have used their newfound power to silence their opposition."
This is just an emotional quote that doesn't help reinforce your original statement:
> Most conservatives want to reduce government power, not extend it. The left, on the other hand, universally wants to extend government reach.
So I am not sure what I am supposed to conclude from your citation here; It seems a bit circular in its logic. (i.e., it assumes that "the left .. want to extend government reach", and the quote indicates that group is in positions of power in the private sector, and thus wants to extends government reach?)
Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy
#297I find it weird for a whistleblower to be so "lib", as the kids say. She said she 'loves' Facebook, and wants to fix it, not harm it. I don't want Facebook fixed and I do want Facebook harmed. I don't want the government to meddle with what types of things people can say online, I want them to ban the business model of stalking people online and selling intimate details of their lives. If the problem is Facebook choo…
You see this clip? https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1445185217510187013?... She only joined facebook to combat "conspiracy theories", which IMO she's not referring to the fake Russian collusion story... so it's clear where her intentions are. That's probably why congress and the media are pushing it.
Will you outline the conclusions you're drawing from this? You seem to be implying something, but it's not clear exactly what that is.
Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy
#298The two best ideas I've heard: - Require age verification by law and ban kids from using it. We ban kids from alcohol we should ban them from this. - Require ID verification by law but allow people to use a fake name. Fixes the bots issue and the kid depression issue. The market isn't going to get there by itself because of competition. If insta implements this then they lose market share to snap. So there's a strong…
I think people are missing your point. Yes it is chilling and yes who in their right mind would give FB their ID but I think that's exactly the point. No one should want want to. People let FB abuse them simply because they don't know what's going on behind the scenes and having been manipulated too much already. FB knows waaaay too much about people already and has no problem selling that data to whoever puts money in their pockets.
Re: Whistleblower to Congress: Facebook products harm kids and democracy
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Tracking everything people do isn't a "business model"—it's a crime. Could you point me to a law that codifies this as crime? I have yet to see convincing proof of widespread or significant harm caused by tracking/retargeting. These arguments always seem to rely on hyperbole and redefining terms and norms. No, I don’t work at FB. No, I don’t work in digital advertising.
Everything was legal until the lawmakers made it a crime, even stalking from bushes. As the society evolves, we introduce more and more laws to govern it, just as some laws are retired.
So the original claim should have been "nothing is a business model, everything is a crime"?