5 ms·

+1. Zuckerberg should have pointed out exactly who voted for the renewal of the FISA surveillance program in Jan. "Look, if an American citizen is angry enough

+1. Zuckerberg should have pointed out exactly who voted for the renewal of the FISA surveillance program in Jan. "Look, if an American citizen is angry enough and chooses to never share any more data with Facebook, s/he has that right and the ability. With the NSA/CIA/FBI/TSA/Homeland Security/traffic cameras/license plate readers/stingrays, there is no opt-out. Period."

chiefalchemist 9y ago
In theory yes. It would be entertaining. The reality is, he'd be screwed. Nor can we discount FB isn't a favored front of sorts for various "data collection agencies." p.s. I find it (sadly) funny how so many are upset with ZM and FB, but are completely unaware about Snowden, Obama's expansion of the Patriot Act, etc. FB is the obvious scapegoat. It currently has to play the role, even if it hates doing so. But for how long?
- mistermann 9y ago
  This is a good explanation of why this hearing was so poorly designed such that nothing could be discovered. I highly doubt it was accidental.
  - mmd45 9y ago
    What type of discovery would you like to make? It seems to me that whatever fb has they control and do with as they please and have the money for lobbyists and lawyers to corporate-splain their actions away and pay the occasional fine (cost of doing business). I'm having a hard time understanding why any of what is known is at all a surprise to someone who understands tech.
    - manjushri 9y ago
      >I'm having a hard time understanding why any of what is known is at all a surprise to someone who understands tech. The vast majority of FB users don't understand tech, and that's the root problem. These hearings aren't for technical minded people. If they were, there would be technical minded people asking the questions.
      - mmd45 9y ago
        But still, what type of "discovery" is being hoped for?
        manjushri 9y ago
        Showing how billions of people's psychological profiles can be algorithmically weaponized against them would be highly informative I would think. That way the average user would understand the types of things they are "consenting" to when they write a blank check for their personal information.
    - mistermann 9y ago
      If a qualified person was asking the questions, the public would then know the reality of the situation, as well as get a decent look into how honest Mr. Zuckerberg is. I suspect what we watched was fairly well scripted theater, right down to the humiliating booster seat as well as the talking points cheat sheet that he "accidentally" let a reporter get a picture of. This wasn't about discovery, truth, or justice, it is about shaping public opinion. But hey, maybe I'm wrong, maybe what comes out of this will be some reasonable regulations that the technical community will more or less agree do in fact provide substantial improvements to privacy of individuals. I'd happily take the other side of that bet though.
      - chiefalchemist 9y ago
        "This wasn't about discovery, truth, or justice, it is about shaping public opinion." Agreed. And the irony completely stomps on the absurdity meter.
      - 18pfsmt 9y ago
        I am of the opinion that if we let FB continue in its reckless treatment of its users data, people will eventually flock to a better platform when one emerges. UseNet/IRC were much better social platforms for privacy, but the ease of use/convenience much worse. I am glad of this whole debacle simply because people won't act like I'm a freak anymore just because I won't use FB.
- return1 9y ago
  > But for how long? usually hype cycles last a few months, until the next outrage takes over to keep people busy.
  - chiefalchemist 9y ago
    I should have been more clear: How long before FB pushes back? And what might that look like? Is Congress capable of regulating something like FB? They can't solve immigration / DACA.
    - return1 9y ago
      Why would FB push back in the first place? Assuming their bottom line is not being hurt, they 'll be glad to be best buddies with the congress.
      - chiefalchemist 9y ago
        Ego. And power. Those drive a lot of history.
Consultant32452 9y ago
I would be shocked if the government was not a major customer of FB.
- chiefalchemist 9y ago
  Per (the book) Dragnet Nation, there is plenty of data being sold. And yes, not all buyers are the private sector. If you think of what we do know, the unknowns are likely 10x as freightening.

chiefalchemist 9y ago

In theory yes. It would be entertaining. The reality is, he'd be screwed. Nor can we discount FB isn't a favored front of sorts for various "data collection agencies." p.s. I find it (sadly) funny how so many are upset with ZM and FB, but are completely unaware about Snowden, Obama's expansion of the Patriot Act, etc. FB is the obvious scapegoat. It currently has to play the role, even if it hates doing so. But for how long?

mistermann 9y ago
This is a good explanation of why this hearing was so poorly designed such that nothing could be discovered. I highly doubt it was accidental.
- mmd45 9y ago
  What type of discovery would you like to make? It seems to me that whatever fb has they control and do with as they please and have the money for lobbyists and lawyers to corporate-splain their actions away and pay the occasional fine (cost of doing business). I'm having a hard time understanding why any of what is known is at all a surprise to someone who understands tech.
  - manjushri 9y ago
    >I'm having a hard time understanding why any of what is known is at all a surprise to someone who understands tech. The vast majority of FB users don't understand tech, and that's the root problem. These hearings aren't for technical minded people. If they were, there would be technical minded people asking the questions.
    - mmd45 9y ago
      But still, what type of "discovery" is being hoped for?
      - manjushri 9y ago
        Showing how billions of people's psychological profiles can be algorithmically weaponized against them would be highly informative I would think. That way the average user would understand the types of things they are "consenting" to when they write a blank check for their personal information.
  - mistermann 9y ago
    If a qualified person was asking the questions, the public would then know the reality of the situation, as well as get a decent look into how honest Mr. Zuckerberg is. I suspect what we watched was fairly well scripted theater, right down to the humiliating booster seat as well as the talking points cheat sheet that he "accidentally" let a reporter get a picture of. This wasn't about discovery, truth, or justice, it is about shaping public opinion. But hey, maybe I'm wrong, maybe what comes out of this will be some reasonable regulations that the technical community will more or less agree do in fact provide substantial improvements to privacy of individuals. I'd happily take the other side of that bet though.
    - chiefalchemist 9y ago
      "This wasn't about discovery, truth, or justice, it is about shaping public opinion." Agreed. And the irony completely stomps on the absurdity meter.
    - 18pfsmt 9y ago
      I am of the opinion that if we let FB continue in its reckless treatment of its users data, people will eventually flock to a better platform when one emerges. UseNet/IRC were much better social platforms for privacy, but the ease of use/convenience much worse. I am glad of this whole debacle simply because people won't act like I'm a freak anymore just because I won't use FB.
return1 9y ago
> But for how long? usually hype cycles last a few months, until the next outrage takes over to keep people busy.
- chiefalchemist 9y ago
  I should have been more clear: How long before FB pushes back? And what might that look like? Is Congress capable of regulating something like FB? They can't solve immigration / DACA.
  - return1 9y ago
    Why would FB push back in the first place? Assuming their bottom line is not being hurt, they 'll be glad to be best buddies with the congress.
    - chiefalchemist 9y ago
      Ego. And power. Those drive a lot of history.

Consultant32452 9y ago

I would be shocked if the government was not a major customer of FB.

chiefalchemist 9y ago
Per (the book) Dragnet Nation, there is plenty of data being sold. And yes, not all buyers are the private sector. If you think of what we do know, the unknowns are likely 10x as freightening.