201–210 of 714 posts
Friend: "What? How'd you manage that one?"
Zuckerberg: "People just submitted it. They trust me. Dumb fucks"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh? I would echo the sentiment of you recalibrating what a normie is. This is a crazy take. I would guess that fair amount of people have no idea that Facebook rebranded to Meta, let alone what goes on in and around the company. Meta products are entertainment, not water and power, comparing them to that is so overblown. Plenty of people don't use IG or Facebook at all, and plenty of people just go on every now and…
Here's what I found when I googled "polling on Mark Zuckerberg": > Roughly 54% to 70% of Americans express an unfavorable view of him > Zuckerberg is viewed negatively by both major parties. Democrats and Republicans alike report high rates of disapproval regarding his influence and leadership. > Dislike for the Meta CEO spans all age groups, though younger adults display particularly high skepticism. YOU GUYS are so…
Clearly that isn't true.
Now you're hyper focusing on how people feel about FB, and not whether it precludes them from being the target market. Convenient.
And before you respond saying "I never said they aren't the target market, just that they hate FB". To which I say, reread the damn conversation. You're obviously drawing a relation between hating FB and not being the target market. Even if you're now scrambling to back out of that claim because we've shown you 3 billion reasons why you're wrong.
I have a hard time understanding, given the abundance of bad faith and predatory behavior Meta has displayed over entire span of its existence, why anyone would want to consult with its "personal AI" or grant it access to "all aspects of your life".
Why are all the seemingly smart people on HN so narrow-minded to the point of speaking idiotic nonsense? What do you think their 3.6B MAU are, all bots?
Does anyone else remember "Facebook M"? In 2015 Facebook (not yet renamed to Meta) launched a personal assistant named simply "M" that lived in Messenger and functioned remarkably like ChatGPT does today. At the time it was basically entirely humans on the backend, with the idea that they could replace humans incrementally as they collected data. Really ahead of its time. They shut it down in 2018, which seems shorts…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are 3 billion users of FB/WhatsApp/Instagram combined Is there tho? I have Facebook account but don't use it in any meaningful way. I'm certainly not feeding it any new data. I'm curious to know what percentage of that 3 billion are zombie accounts like mine.
There almost certainly is. I think on HN people aren’t really aware that they don’t represent the median internet user super well. I would wager if you were to tally every late millennial and zoomer across the west, Instagram usage would probably be near 90%. Facebook usage among older people is also still absolutely rampant, at least anecdotally. Not to mention WhatsApp usage which is huge everywhere but the US seem…
Knowing Facebook's behavior around user data why would anyone with memory of their behavior use this product? Why would you give them access to your accounts, your email, your purchase habits, your preferences, your communication style and more. How do they wash this stink off?
And on top of that, we've all seen how confidently LLM's get things wrong. I've seen them get better, but even the current SOTA models fumble. Why would you want to send a bot a message "sure, reschedule my flight" and have a bot potentially fumble that in all sorts of ways? I really really do not see the appeal. My calendar and my emails and my things to do are all things I want to be on top of. Not have it half-ass…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
WhatsApp is E2EE, but Meta controls both ends. Instead of reading your plaintext on the server, they read it on the client. Not that tricky. I presume the hardest part would be avoiding detection via decompilation and other reverse engineering techniques. Not familiar with that space (can anyone here shed some light?), but it seems likely that an entity with Meta’s resources would be able to figure that out. E2EE pro…
They only need to get caught doing it once to have a gigantic lawsuit on their hands. They could possibly pull it off very selectively, but doing it in a dragnet fashion seems incredibly risky.
So e.g. opening a link to an Amazon product that a friend sent makes you a target for ads in that category.
It's a suspicion, they'd probably argue their EULA allows this. The typical "we have to monitor links for dangerous content" is always the standard bullshit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh? I would echo the sentiment of you recalibrating what a normie is. This is a crazy take. I would guess that fair amount of people have no idea that Facebook rebranded to Meta, let alone what goes on in and around the company. Meta products are entertainment, not water and power, comparing them to that is so overblown. Plenty of people don't use IG or Facebook at all, and plenty of people just go on every now and…
Here's what I found when I googled "polling on Mark Zuckerberg": > Roughly 54% to 70% of Americans express an unfavorable view of him > Zuckerberg is viewed negatively by both major parties. Democrats and Republicans alike report high rates of disapproval regarding his influence and leadership. > Dislike for the Meta CEO spans all age groups, though younger adults display particularly high skepticism. YOU GUYS are so…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted, so I'm not trusting Meta with much, and it's the only way I can reach quite a lot of people. A lot of people I know trust them begrudgingly (primarily with Instagram, because all of their friends are on it as well). People don't need to love a company to use its products. The perceived benefit merely needs to be bigger than the perceived cost.
> WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted, - Meta data of your messages is not encrypted so meta can make a graph of who you talk to and when - backups are not encrypted by default so plaintext of your private chats can be obtained - even if you enable encryption for backups all it takes is for the other person in your private convo (or a person in a group chat) to not enable it for your messages to be available in plaintex…
So now Android strips location info when sharing an image to an app. A filter layer between filesystem and app, to add complexity to the whole system...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> hypothetical about a future totalitarian police state, or evil hackers, or whatever, but that makes you sound crazy. Immigration agencies are absolutely monitoring social media when people cross borders, apply for visas, etc. There's nothing hypothetical or future about this at all.
> Immigration agencies are absolutely monitoring social media when people cross borders, apply for visas, etc. There's nothing hypothetical or future about this at all. The hypothetical part was not about them being able to do it, but about them caring to do anything with that information. My mother is pretty much locked-in on fb/whatsapp/instagram. She travels internationally rather frequently, including to more "qu…
Well yeah if that is how you choose to have that conversation then sure.
> more than welcome to claim that she might not be educated or aware enough to understand the issues at hand
I made no such claim.
You seem pretty committed to your strawmen so good day to you sir.