> The quote is "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." I'm quite familiar with the quote. Except that in practice, covering up a negative action is often e

> The quote is "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." I'm quite familiar with the quote. Except that in practice, covering up a negative action is often exactly what lands people into hot water (see Watergate, Clinton, etc.). Facebook strenuously denies this conspiracy. [0] There are in fact laws governing consent for recording. Of course, it's impossible to prove that Facebook has never listened in on people's conversations, but it's a very suspect claim to say they are today. > I mean they denied they gave NSA direct access to their servers, but NSA had direct access to their servers. They were legally obligated to deny that, so the exact opposite of the situation today (you're legally obligated to disclose if you're recording someone). > They could gather the data and only apply it as a weight to an already collected data point that isn't related to the microphone. Perhaps, but that's an entirely different claim than what the conspiracy theorists are claiming. [0] http://newsroom.fb.com/news/h/facebook-does-not-use-your-phones-microphone-for-ads-or-news-feed-stories/ http://newsroom.fb.com/news/h/facebook-does-not-use-your-pho...