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

201–210 of 360 posts

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#201

Post by drawkbox »

hueving wrote: post #113
drawkbox wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That little ISP who has no real use of it Those little ISPs like Comcast, Verizon, Cox, AT&T etc. I can't imagine those small companies would want your data or want to use it after bribing politicians to get the right to do it. Everyone knows Google tracks you, same with Facebook. They offer a service and people understand that. You aren't paying you are the product. You are paying your ISP for access to the intern…

>They offer a service and people understand that. No they don't. Maybe in a superficial sense, but the vast majority of the public doesn't have any clue how data can be combined and mined to reveal far more than they thought they were bargaining for. Otherwise there would be no sudden Facebook scandal.

The scandal is that third party companies like Cambridge Analytica harvested the whole social graph and used it to manipulate people.

People know that Google and Facebook track as they are ultimately ad companies, and if you get a free service people know that your data is the product.

We pay for ISPs to protect privacy, not sell it off, that is the big difference.

Many people have seen Facebook tracking from the marketing/business or even small group/page side with their analytics and Facebook is known for their ads and sponsored content. Facebook is a marketing platform, everyone knows they use your data. ISPs are what you use to get online, not known as marketing companies that have ad networks, though they want to be.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#202

Post by jonathanyc »

kimdcmason wrote: post #199
grzm wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's been evidence, admittedly anecdotal AFAIK, that YouTube recommendation algorithms can tend towards increasingly extremist content from quite innocuous starting points. For example: * https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/973716995521748992 * https://twitter.com/Limerick1914/status/972837152940855296 This doesn't mean YouTube staff are purposefully designing the algorithm to specifically trend towards extremism: t…

.

You could write a pseudo-explanation even longer than the comment you are purporting to describe, or you could simply read the words that I wrote and not try to put words in my mouth.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#203

Post by drawkbox »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #122
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…

Uh, Google and Mozilla and a handful of organizations are converting all web traffic to HTTPS through subtle manipulation of standards and user interface. They even proxy mobile traffic from their search engine. ISPs can't even see what IP you're visiting because it's all fronted by CloudFlare. Even your DNS is being hidden by an HTTPS tunnel in the browser. Your ISP soon won't be able to see anything you do online.…

Do you trust the EFF?

> The number one creepiest thing on our list of privacy-invasive practices comes courtesy of Verizon (and AT&T, which quickly killed a similar program after Verizon started getting blowback).

> Snooping through your traffic and inserting ads Which ISPs did it before? AT&T, Charter, CMA

> Hijacking your searches Which ISPs did it before? Charter, Cogent, DirecPC, Frontier, Wide Open West

All of these areas are going to be tried again by the ISPs with this law.

[1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/five-creepy-things-you...

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#204

Post by grzm »

jonathanyc wrote: post #202
kimdcmason wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.

You could write a pseudo-explanation even longer than the comment you are purporting to describe, or you could simply read the words that I wrote and not try to put words in my mouth.

Would the two of you ('jonathanyc and 'kimdcmason) please stop engaging uncharitably with each other? There might be common ground there somewhere, but you're not even trying to listen to each other. It doesn't matter at this point who's right or who's wrong or who started it or who's at fault. You're both contributing to continuing it. As one HN member to another, please help increase civility and substantive discourse.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#205

Post by product50 »

joering2 wrote: post #180
product50 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good luck to you trying to use these.

Honestly curious what you have against DuckDuckGo or Protonmail, same with MapQuest.

You cannot be honest if you are asking this question. You are comparing MapQuest with Google Maps and are asking me, in all earnest, what is that I find better in GMaps?

Similarly with Protonmail and GMail. How about email spam to start with? Or maybe email search? What about automatic filters? Or what about the fact the Protonmail is a subscription service if you want to use their advanced features.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#207

Post by drawkbox »

projektir wrote: post #198
drawkbox wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That post seems anti-Facebook and Google, not pro-ISP.

I mentioned how you can block Facebook and Google.

The pro-ISP part was more about the thread and that ISPs are paid for internet access for privacy, without an expectation of tracking.

Google and Facebook are free and have an expectation of tracking because they make their money from ads/tracking.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#208

Post by jonathanyc »

grzm wrote: post #204
jonathanyc wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could write a pseudo-explanation even longer than the comment you are purporting to describe, or you could simply read the words that I wrote and not try to put words in my mouth.

Would the two of you ('jonathanyc and 'kimdcmason) please stop engaging uncharitably with each other? There might be common ground there somewhere, but you're not even trying to listen to each other. It doesn't matter at this point who's right or who's wrong or who started it or who's at fault. You're both contributing to continuing it. As one HN member to another, please help increase civility and substantive discou…

I feel obligated to listen to and respect people who disagree with me on the issue of whether Google and Facebook are evil. But I can get and have gotten intelligent and reasoned perspective from people who aren’t spouting the names of logical fallacies as if they were hexes and caltrops.

As much as I feel obligated to engage with others constructively, I feel obliged to discourage and make others aware of nonconstructive behavior. I take your point that this thread is going nowhere, though, and I will stop. I acknowledge I may have gone too far.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#210

Post by projektir »

jerheinze wrote: post #182
ForHackernews wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they're slow as shit, difficult to configure correctly, and make you more conspicuous to most three-letter agencies.

> Because they're slow as shit, Tor isn't that bad actually for browsing, while i2p needs more love regarding speed. > difficult to configure correctly, For Tor: You just download the Tor Browser. Already pre-configured. > and make you more conspicuous to most three-letter agencies. Good argument for actually using them.

> You just download the Tor Browser. Already pre-configured.

Isn't Tor Browser fairly bad due to it being a target? I'm not sure if that changed recently, but I recall seeing lots of "don't use the Tor Browser bundle".

Tor also relies on exit nodes to exist, yet it's considered very dangerous to run one.

Post reply on HN