What's Up With Facebook?

[Midwesthonky]

What you are missing is that most are not smart users.

What do you mean I don't own that photo that I posted to your website/app? I'm the one that took the photo and I posted it to the website/app that you own. I don't care what your user terms say in that 100 pages of lawyer BS and that you don't charge me for use of your app or webpage. That's my photo and my data that I posted for the whole world to see how awesome my life is!

Righteous indignation!!

If it's free, it's getting paid for somehow. NOTHING is free. As someone already said, you are the product (your data) that is being sold to pay the bills and allow Zuckerberg to buy a massive compound in Hawaii. There has to be a way to monetize the app or website or it goes away when the seed money is used up. It's amazing how many people don't get that little fact. Like shouting "build that wall and make Mexico pay for it!!" without thinking how expensive it would be to build a wall along 2,000 miles of border which can be defeated with a taller ladder nor think about all Mexico has to do is say "Yeah, um...no." No thinking going on at all.

All I can do is shake my head when I hear a college graduate complaining because they have $80,000 in school loans and can only find a job as a barista with their Bachelor's degree in English Literature. What did you think you could do with a BA in English Lit? Wait, that implies there was thinking going on. Like my baby sister who complains the heat doesn't work in her cheap rent-controlled apartment she shares in NYC. What did you think you would get for such a cheap rent in NYC? Working heat? Again, no thinking going on but that's ok because I can complain about it on Facebook and then complain when that information is used to target ads for space heaters to my screen...

 

[pewternhrata]

Yes, we do know. What is different is the specificity that they can use it unlike a newspaper add that goes to every household who subscribe to the paper.

While I can agree with that, it's also our ability to choose based on our own opinions/views. Withing that newspaper we will choose what we read and agree with. I see it the same on social sites (yes more info will be pushed, typically to ones own views, and can be read or passed by)

Majority of people seem to ride out trends more than anything. Quick Facebook meme is the truth to them with no understanding of the issues at play. Read through fb agreements and it's all lined out for us to read and understand. Most are misinformed with apps and permissions granted to run and install them. Why does my flashlight app need access to my camera? Simple, the flash is part of the camera, without granting permissions the app will not work. That's not to say a random 3rd party app won't misuse it, but again look for trusted publishers. Facebook wanting contacts, well thats so the address book can sync up with fb. It doesn't have to be enabled but in doing so there could be some risks via 3rd party.

 

[herbu]

There has to be a public consensus that the laws be actively enforced... The same politicians who backed the laws also have failed to spend money to enforce them.

EXACTLY right! Remember the old Andy Griffith recording about the football game where the ref gave the other team 3 balls? When questioned, the ref said, "Well, you're not doing too good with the one that you have".

The same people advocating for more laws are the ones who refuse to use the ones we have.

 

[herbu]

"people you know" is the critical part here, even if only 250k or so people used the "attitude test", vendor (Cambridge Analytica) got all the data for people you know, total amount of personal records leaked around 87 MILLION people.

1. So is this the first time it was done? If not, why the uproar now?
2. I still don't see a problem. If I'm identified as a conservative, it's likely that many of my "friends" on the Facebook are conservatives. So including my "friends" in their targeted audience seems like a reasonable call. Besides, all my "friends" clicked the same "I Accept" box that I did.
3. Where is the intrusion when I get an advertisement on the Facebook? Unless it has a picture of a pretty girl, I probably won't click on it anyway. It is the price I'm willing to pay to see pictures of my friend's cute puppies.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

1. So is this the first time it was done? If not, why the uproar now?
2. I still don't see a problem. If I'm identified as a conservative, it's likely that many of my "friends" on the Facebook are conservatives. So including my "friends" in their targeted audience seems like a reasonable call. Besides, all my "friends" clicked the same "I Accept" box that I did.
3. Where is the intrusion when I get an advertisement on the Facebook? Unless it has a picture of a pretty girl, I probably won't click on it anyway. It is the price I'm willing to pay to see pictures of my friend's cute puppies.

1) My previous post wasn't a response to you.
2) First confirmed massive private data leak happened back in 2014. In 2015 FB knew about it and did nothing.
3) I don't give two shits if you left, right, middle under or over in your preferences. Your privacy was violated without you providing explicit consent.
4) Ads are not an intrusion of your privacy. 3rd party getting ALL of your data and your friends' data without your knowledge is a violation of trust between you and FB. The uproar now is due, as I've mentioned, FB tried to hide it when it originally happened. This leak allowed 3rd party company using private personal data to pinpoint people who could be convinced to vote Republican nominee and using any possible method, including very targetted misinformation and brainwashing to affect their votes.

If you on the side of - "I have nothing to hide", then you're even more stupid than I already think.

 

[Swerd]

EXACTLY right! Remember the old Andy Griffith recording about the football game where the ref gave the other team 3 balls? When questioned, the ref said, "Well, you're not doing too good with the one that you have".

"What it was, was football" I loved his football routine.

The same people advocating for more laws are the ones who refuse to use the ones we have.

That works in more than one way. Of course, the example one chooses depends on his political persuasion.

With gun laws, people, such as you, argue that those others who want greater regulation refuse to enforce existing laws. And people who advocate greater regulation of gun sales argue that enforcement of the existing laws are hobbled by refusal of politicians (mainly GOP) to spend money enforcing those existing laws. The poor record on background checks before gun purchases is largely due to inadequate funds.

With immigration laws, we hear similar arguments. Those in favor of strict enforcement of federal immigration laws (deportation) insist that local state, city, county police do a lot of the heavy lifting. Those opposed say, if you want to deport 10 million illegal immigrants, put your money where your mouth is. Hire the people required to do the job. Don't shift the burden to local governments, they don't have immigration policies.

The most relevant example goes back to Prohibition in the 1920s. The Dry politicians went so far as to amend the Constitution and pass strict laws prohibiting manufacture and sales of most alcoholic beverages. These same dry politicians, however, were too stingy to pay for the large federal force needed to enforce these new laws. They expected the states, cities, and other smaller local police forces to step in and enforce the new federal laws on their own dime, without any federal funding. Some of them did, but many others did not. That is probably the main reason why Prohibition failed – no one wanted to really enforce it.

 

[herbu]

3rd party getting ALL of your data and your friends' data without your knowledge is a violation of trust between you and FB.

But I have no trust in the FB. Well, almost no trust. I trust them to display pictures I post of fish I catch. I trust them to let me see pictures my "friends" post. And one more... I trust them to sell/use ANYTHING they can to make money.

So if I give them access to my contacts, I expect them to exploit it. I expect them to exploit anything I click on and every keystroke I make while on their platform. And I expect them to do the same for everyone else who uses their product. Because of that expectation, I have seen no problem so far.

My question of, "Is this the first time this has happened?", was not specifically directed at you. I believe this kind of political profiling has been used for years. Oddly, it only became an issue when Trump supporters did it. Funny how that seems to work in so many areas.

And I have no doubt I can actually lay claim to much more stupidity than the already generous portion you allow. However, I'm with you on the "I have nothing to hide" argument. It is shallow, naive and is not mine. The crux is expectation.

Some people believe in and expect a free lunch. I don't. The fact is that people are using somebody's product, and complaining about it. If you don't like it, don't use it.

The good news is that this whole issue will become moot in a few more months. I'm told that net neutrality thing will destroy the internet soon.

 

[herbu]

That works in more than one way. Of course, the example one chooses depends on his political persuasion.

You are exactly right! Neither side can claim exclusive rights to political shenanigans, dirty tricks or double dealing. But we all know one side is much worse than the other.

 

[mtrycrafts]

You are exactly right! Neither side can claim exclusive rights to political shenanigans, dirty tricks or double dealing. But we all know one side is much worse than the other.

It's one thing for the shenanigans to happen inside your border and totally another when it come in from
other countries.

 

[herbu]

It's one thing for the shenanigans to happen inside your border and totally another when it come in from
other countries.

Unless we talk about non-citizens voting. That is dirty, illegal, outsider action that actually does affect the ballot. I know we can all condemn that... right?

 

[highfigh]

I read and hear a lot of comments from people who are outraged that FB and other social media sites are sharing their private info. If they wouldn't fill out the forms as extensively and omit personal info, I guess nobody would have a problem, but since people like to talk about themselves......

If the site won't allow clocking on 'Finish' without providing info that someone thinks is too personal, their decision is clear- fill it in and be one of the masses or don't, and be an outsider.

I received a new agreement from Yahoo this morning- I haven't decided whether I'll agree to it, or not (just woke up), but here's a link to it-

https://guce.oath.com/collectConsent?ccSessionId=1_cc-session_3e58cfec-7354-4dee-b7e4-566236fcf4f3&lang=

 

[panteragstk]

Glad I never got a Facebook account. Never really saw the point. I never wanted to know what people are thinking all the time. It'd drive me nuts. My limited interactions with some people are plenty.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Unless we talk about non-citizens voting. That is dirty, illegal, outsider action that actually does affect the ballot. I know we can all condemn that... right?

Absolutely.

 

[Ponzio]

Unless we talk about non-citizens voting. That is dirty, illegal, outsider action that actually does affect the ballot. I know we can all condemn that... right?

Are u being facetious or do u believe that?

 

[TechHDS]

Glad I never got a Facebook account. Never really saw the point. I never wanted to know what people are thinking all the time. It'd drive me nuts. My limited interactions with some people are plenty.

I had a account with FB it's been deleted a few year's ago now, maybe longer. I have info scattered all over Facebook. A EX opened up 50 or so fake profiles using some of my email address and photo's of family members. Just so she could play casino games and pass on information to others so it couldn't be tracked back to her. This is nothing new fake accounts there are millions of fake accounts on the internet. This site alone probably has a few hundred to a few thousand alone. I called into FB, I emailed FB with a legal picture ID to get those fake profiles removed even gave the PC ID, MAC address and location of most of the fraudulent sites were being created at. Some where closed most are still up my info has been fraudulently used on FB for over 15 years minimum. FB, Craigslist, and other's has been used for human trafficking, drug trafficking, not to mention the adult p*** industry. FB to Me is a Idea of a time when the internet was coming of age. With all the other sites on the internet like Twitter and other's FB I believe is nothing more than a tool for FBI, ICE, NHLS and other government agencies to use as a tool as a means of gathering information on the masses. Just like this site.

 

[herbu]

Are u being facetious or do u believe that?

Is that a serious question or are you being facetious?
Illegal immigrant voting is the law of the land in a number of local elections already. Does anyone doubt it is the reason and goal for liberal support?

From Newsweek... hardly a conservative rag... http://www.newsweek.com/immigrants-are-getting-right-vote-cities-across-america-664467

 

[Ponzio]

Is that a serious question or are you being facetious?
Illegal immigrant voting is the law of the land in a number of local elections already. Does anyone doubt it is the reason and goal for liberal support?

From Newsweek... hardly a conservative rag... http://www.newsweek.com/immigrants-are-getting-right-vote-cities-across-america-664467

So we're talking about select cities not state or national elections, as our fearless leader as alleged, in which legal immigrants work, pay taxes and are documented.

 

[herbu]

So we're talking about select cities not state or national elections, as our fearless leader as alleged, in which legal immigrants work, pay taxes and are documented.

Yes, so far only certain cities have formally passed laws making it legal for illegal immigrants to vote. That is not the illegal voting to which you refer.

But this has nothing to do with the Facebook. I have a question to those of you who think the Facebook should be regulated by the govt. What do you think about their practice to censure and prioritize posts based on liberal vs conservative content? Should that also be regulated?

 

[pewternhrata]

Yes, so far only certain cities have formally passed laws making it legal for illegal immigrants to vote. That is not the illegal voting to which you refer.

But this has nothing to do with the Facebook. I have a question to those of you who think the Facebook should be regulated by the govt. What do you think about their practice to censure and prioritize posts based on liberal vs conservative content? Should that also be regulated?

I don't think there needs to be any regulations. It is a social site, if there are concerns about a social site swaying voters, then all social aspects need to be regulated. Candidates would have to be regulated. Banners in peoples yards. The list goes on. Is society that much of a loose cannon that they are blaming Facebook for trump getting elected? How about freedom of choice, I get to choose what I want, yes on fb there are more ads and stories, but that doesn't change my ability to think. But that's just me.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

I don't think there needs to be any regulations. It is a social site, if there are concerns about a social site swaying voters, then all social aspects need to be regulated. Candidates would have to be regulated. Banners in peoples yards. The list goes on. Is society that much of a loose cannon that they are blaming Facebook for trump getting elected? How about freedom of choice, I get to choose what I want, yes on fb there are more ads and stories, but that doesn't change my ability to think. But that's just me.

No one is asking to regulate any social aspects. This is about protecting your own private info. Europe is miles ahead of us in that regard and FB is about to pay dearly for playing loose with it.
If you read my posts a bit more carefully, I hope you'd understand better than your view is "a bit" misguided. As your changing one's opinions. Sure, you may have indeed strong beliefs and you won't take what you read on FB to heart. Congrats. Not everyone is like you. It's not (just) FB at fault here. The brainwashing campaign was orchestrated by professional and very good ones at that. So you may not fall for whatever propaganda Russians have been spewing on FB, but many did.
Also, I recommend you to read this excellent blog then you have a chance.: https://youarenotsosmart.com/