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

Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 487 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress

#311

Post by decebalus1 »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #81
misiti3780 wrote: post #41

"Is it true facebook can track user browsers even after they are logged out of facebook?" Zuck: "I need to get back to you on that"

Honestly is there anyway that he could explain the Facebook Pixel/ad network that wouldn't just be describing any ad network? By definition, ad tracking (cookies etc...) is opaque to most people and explaining it publicly would make it seem like FB is doing something more nefarious than others. It's an important discussion but his response would just make FB seem way worse on that specific issue than highlighting how…

> Honestly is there anyway that he could explain the Facebook Pixel/ad network that wouldn't just be describing any ad network

The only ad network in front of Congress today, was Facebook. 'Everyone else is doing it' or 'this is the nature of the business' doesn't qualify as an excuse. Perhaps it could have been good for the large public to know what goes on with ad networks these days.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress

#313

Post by dragonwriter »

jvreeland wrote: post #19
HoppedUpMenace wrote: post #15

MZ: "You control and own the content you post on Facebook" Something seems just a tad bit disingenuous about this.

It was an answer to a question that wasn't asked. The senator was asking whether facebook owns that data it has about a person, and the answer was that you own what you post. Those are very different sets. A follow up to answer whether facebook believes it owns the data it's accumulated about you would've been great.

> The senator was asking whether facebook owns that data it has about a person, and the answer was that you own what you post. Those are very different sets.

It answers by exception; specifically, the answer is “Yes, except for information consisting of content posted by that user or other users, which is owned by the user who posted it.” I don't think the answer was at all unclear.

It's obviously couches in a way which directs the attention of the inattentive to the most user friendly component of that answer because it's the only explicit part, but minimizing the PR fallout is literally Zuckerberg’s job, so expecting him not to anything less than the maximum he can in that regard without lying to Congress is expecting nonfeasance on his part.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress

#314

Post by almost_usual »

shiftpgdn wrote: post #281
almost_usual wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most citizens don't care about the details of any technology they use on a day to day basis, they only want it to work correctly and enrich their lives. Do you understand all the mechanics of an automobile? Ever worked on installing a new suspension for your car? Most people go to a shop to get this work done and even though they don't know details of the process they trust the mechanic to get the job done right. How…

I do actually, and in fact through the beauty of the internet a layman could have a pretty good conceptualization of how to do so with their own vehicle through Wikipedia, YouTube, etc. Nobody is forcing you to use Facebook. Everyone has their own agency in this world. There is no part of the world that is locked out because you don't use Facebook. These senators are clearly completely clueless for the most part. Man…

> Nobody is forcing you to use Facebook

Deleted Facebook years ago, yes my world is fine without Facebook.

> I do actually, and in fact through the beauty of the internet a layman could have a pretty good conceptualization of how to do so with their own vehicle through Wikipedia, YouTube, etc.

You've missed the point of my analogy. Facebook is advertised as beneficial, Mark Zuckerberg claims it enriches lives and brings the world together. When a user begins engaging with the service under those pretenses they expect a product that will enrich their life. There are users who are forever tarnished by Facebook, even if they delete the service their data has been mishandled and leaked across the internet.

> These senators are clearly completely clueless for the most part. Many of them so far removed from basic internet and computer literacy it is embarrassing.

I think we're clueless for the most part. We're so entrenched in the internet and computer culture we forget about everyone else who isn't. Citizens deserve the right to own their data and have transparency into how it is handled by other services. Companies who don't support that initiative care more about their bottom line than their users.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress

#315

Post by wtf_is_up »

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #300
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree. Several controversial questions were dodged by saying his team would follow up. While it's attractive to paint politicians as incompetent buffoons, let's not forget each of them has their own staff and understands what it means to delegate to your staff and not have answers immediately on hand that only a staff expert would understand.

I'm pretty sure both of you are correct. There was a large amount of tech illiteracy on display but, at the same time, Mark dodged TONS of questions and spoke indirectly like a professional. That entire testimony was very unsatisfying, in my opinion.

>That entire testimony was very unsatisfying, in my opinion.

After watching dozens of hours of congressional hearings over the past 2 years, this is not at all surprising. These committees have no teeth.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress

#316

Post by vlovich123 »

oconnor663 wrote: post #98
btown wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook doesn't delete all cookies (for instance, there's an `sb` cookie still set) in their logout response. They may choose not to do anything with the cookies that remain, but the technical answer to the question is yes. And even if they currently did delete all cookies, there's nothing from preventing them from introducing cookies that do remain. Zuck knows this is generally feasible - he's a talented software e…

> They may choose not to do anything with the cookies that remain, but the technical answer to the question is yes. I think you could say the same thing about IP addresses. A website might log the IP addresses of people who visit them, or they might not, but quite a lot of tracking is feasible. The problem with focusing on feasibility there, is that you end up with an answer like "yes, just like every other website i…

While a website may be able to track you via IP address within itself, it can't track you across websites like FB can since their code gets injected to a lot of websites (which they do use to track you when you're signed in - my guess would be the same holds for when you're logged out).

Re: Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress

#317

Post by [deleted] »

rdiddly wrote: post #273
fbonetti wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a really odd line of questioning from people who don't seem to understand the subject matter. This gem made me laugh out loud: Senator: How do you sustain a business model in which users don't pay for your service? Zuckerberg (in a disdainful tone): Senator, we run ads. https://clips.twitch.tv/FantasticCrowdedDelicataPipeHype Edit: I directly transcribed the exchange

The question and its answer succeed in getting Zuckerberg on record (in the Congressional Record, no less) as saying that his business model depends on advertising, with all that that implies about the relationship between Facebook and its users. Think of it as like when you're on the witness stand and the attorney asks you a question. It's not because he doesn't know the answer. It's because he wants you to say the…

[deleted]

Re: Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress

#318

Post by tenpies »

kahlonel wrote: post #312

I'm not from US, can someone explain how bad it is if anything that Zuckerberg said during the whole session proves to be false/lie/wrong later on? Is it considered perjury, or is perjury only specific for courts/legal matters?

He was not under oath, so even if he was caught lying it is legally inconsequential.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress

#319

Post by andromeduck »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #298
andromeduck wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't make any sense. If you're receiving questions that weren't published prior to the interview it's perfectly understandable that not all questions can be answered immediately. In fact, I'd be more suspicious if he answered everything without needing to follow up. If however you're the one raising a question, I think it's your responsibility to ensure that you or someone on your team someone does some basic…

> If you're receiving questions that weren't published prior to the interview it's perfectly understandable that not all questions can be answered immediately. In fact, I'd be more suspicious if he answered everything without needing to follow up. Right so I'm not expecting him to answer _every_ question without referring to his staff. There were, however, key controversial questions which he did not answer by claimi…

> I don't think there's a requirement to be very informed about the subject matter.

Why would you think that? This is a time limited, one day high profile public hearing.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg testifies before Congress

#320

Post by romwell »

forgot-my-pw wrote: post #255
mercer wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's so frustrating how close they get to asking the real questions...

"The Facebook hearing is the greatest generational divide I’ve ever seen. It’s like watching WWII generals question somebody on drone strikes and cyberwarfare." https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/983788172306874369

WWII generals invented drone strikes (V2, anyone?) and cyberwarfare (using computers to disrupt operations).
Post reply on HN