4 ms·

Why we should collectively worry about Facebook and Google owning our data

ommunist 8y ago
I’ll tell why you should not worry about that. Google rules over your choices in search for more then 10 years and you only benefit from that. You are not a human for Facebook or Google, you are commodity, your attention is commoditized. This is what you probably sacrifice as a human to GooF, but its your choice. And since you act freely by choosing GooF, you should not worry. Your freedom is impaired.
davidwihl 8y ago
I am so done with these rants while the hosting page has 16 potential trackers reported by Privacy Badger, including both Facebook and Google. If you are truly outraged, do something about it besides baiting me with even more trackers. Regulate yourself before asking governments and courts to regulate everyone else.
- FussyZeus 8y ago
  Not working with Facebook and Google is suicide for a media outlet right now, and as consumers of news, we're not entirely blameless in that dilemma. Doesn't justify the tracking and intrusive ads, all I'm saying is, businesses are gonna business. Even here, an aggregator and community I respect, people complain about trackers and in the next breath, get angry because sites like the Wall Street Journal have setup paywalls, and some even get angry about things like the Guardian asking for a donation at the end of their articles. I mean I can't imagine these news sites enjoy selling their souls to the Devil, but it's not like we gave them a massive list of alternatives.
  - Rjevski 8y ago
    "Working" with Facebook and Google doesn't mean embedding their trackers into your site. You can still link to your content on Facebook/Google without the trackers on the actual site.
  - imgabe 8y ago
    > I mean I can't imagine these news sites enjoy selling their souls to the Devil, but it's not like we gave them a massive list of alternatives. It's not like they gave us anything worth an alternative. Most news is garbage and has little to no immediate impact on anyone's life that would make it worth paying for.
- dfxm12 8y ago
  I would assume the author of this piece has very little input into the layout of the site. If you have genuine concerns about that, is this the most fruitful place to air them? Try this: https://thenextweb.com/about/#contact https://thenextweb.com/about/#contact
  - davidwihl 8y ago
    If this topic is so important to the author why would he choose a host that is contradictory to his point? I don't have a problem with thenextweb.com. I have a problem with people who do not practice what they preach.
jrs235 8y ago
I feel like this focus on FB and Google is a misdirection campaign being run by the media conglomerates who are tied in with many of the service providers. Comcast, Verizon, etc. love keeping the public eyes off of them while them suck up our viewing and visiting information. Also, if FB and Google take a hit and can't be the incumbent ad and marketing platforms then the providers will become enriched as advertisers flock to them. The providers hate competition. Just look at all the selection and competition we don't have. Yes, it's important to know what FB and Google are doing but I think it's hurting us by not focusing on ALL companies.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > Comcast, Verizon, etc. love keeping the public eyes off of them while them suck up our viewing and visiting information One, this is trivially defensible against with a VPN. Two, ISPs have regional scale; Facebook and Google are international. Three, we have actual evidence of Facebook repeatedly dropping the ball and causing tangible harm on multiple continents. We don’t have the latter for ISPs nor Google (in respect of the latter, outside YouTube).
  - mondoshawan 8y ago
    A VPN is beyond most users understanding -- even trivial ones -- and guiding someone to a reputable one will be difficult at best. ISPs may have regional scale, but the big ones, Comcast, Verizon, etc. run significant parts of the internet's uplinks and switching infrastructure, and you can bet it's not just outgoing traffic they snoop. They have been caught with their fingers in the cookie jar many many times. At least with FB and Google you can choose not to use their services and block their trackers. You can't choose where your packets flow, and in many regions there is literally only one option for bandwidth because of local government sanctioned monopolies over the infrastructure.
    - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
      > They have been caught with their fingers in the cookie jar None of those transgressions resulted in visible, tangible harm the way Facebook's have. Would I love to go after the ISPs? Sure. But going after them is falling for policy perfectionism. Facebook and Google are in the crosshairs. This isn't a choice between doing something about them or the ISPs; it's a choice between doing something about them or not. If privacy advocates want to do more than talk, this is the time to show discipline.
snthd 8y ago
"Collective worry" is how you get the bystander effect.
- ng-user 8y ago
  Worrying for the sake of worrying proves only detrimental to the individual
coffeeacc 8y ago
I never used facebook, and I'm 80% of my way to being off google - I'm not worried.
rexgallorum2 8y ago
On GDPR: Could Facebook users around the world not set their location to somewhere in the EU and/or use a VPN to connect through servers in the EU?
- Kalium 8y ago
  Absolutely! The text of GDPR expressly allows companies to make you prove you are entitled to any rights you claim, though.

I’ll tell why you should not worry about that. Google rules over your choices in search for more then 10 years and you only benefit from that. You are not a human for Facebook or Google, you are commodity, your attention is commoditized. This is what you probably sacrifice as a human to GooF, but its your choice. And since you act freely by choosing GooF, you should not worry. Your freedom is impaired.

davidwihl 8y ago

I am so done with these rants while the hosting page has 16 potential trackers reported by Privacy Badger, including both Facebook and Google. If you are truly outraged, do something about it besides baiting me with even more trackers. Regulate yourself before asking governments and courts to regulate everyone else.

FussyZeus 8y ago
Not working with Facebook and Google is suicide for a media outlet right now, and as consumers of news, we're not entirely blameless in that dilemma. Doesn't justify the tracking and intrusive ads, all I'm saying is, businesses are gonna business. Even here, an aggregator and community I respect, people complain about trackers and in the next breath, get angry because sites like the Wall Street Journal have setup paywalls, and some even get angry about things like the Guardian asking for a donation at the end of their articles. I mean I can't imagine these news sites enjoy selling their souls to the Devil, but it's not like we gave them a massive list of alternatives.
- Rjevski 8y ago
  "Working" with Facebook and Google doesn't mean embedding their trackers into your site. You can still link to your content on Facebook/Google without the trackers on the actual site.
- imgabe 8y ago
  > I mean I can't imagine these news sites enjoy selling their souls to the Devil, but it's not like we gave them a massive list of alternatives. It's not like they gave us anything worth an alternative. Most news is garbage and has little to no immediate impact on anyone's life that would make it worth paying for.
dfxm12 8y ago
I would assume the author of this piece has very little input into the layout of the site. If you have genuine concerns about that, is this the most fruitful place to air them? Try this: https://thenextweb.com/about/#contact https://thenextweb.com/about/#contact
- davidwihl 8y ago
  If this topic is so important to the author why would he choose a host that is contradictory to his point? I don't have a problem with thenextweb.com. I have a problem with people who do not practice what they preach.

jrs235 8y ago

I feel like this focus on FB and Google is a misdirection campaign being run by the media conglomerates who are tied in with many of the service providers. Comcast, Verizon, etc. love keeping the public eyes off of them while them suck up our viewing and visiting information. Also, if FB and Google take a hit and can't be the incumbent ad and marketing platforms then the providers will become enriched as advertisers flock to them. The providers hate competition. Just look at all the selection and competition we don't have. Yes, it's important to know what FB and Google are doing but I think it's hurting us by not focusing on ALL companies.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> Comcast, Verizon, etc. love keeping the public eyes off of them while them suck up our viewing and visiting information One, this is trivially defensible against with a VPN. Two, ISPs have regional scale; Facebook and Google are international. Three, we have actual evidence of Facebook repeatedly dropping the ball and causing tangible harm on multiple continents. We don’t have the latter for ISPs nor Google (in respect of the latter, outside YouTube).
- mondoshawan 8y ago
  A VPN is beyond most users understanding -- even trivial ones -- and guiding someone to a reputable one will be difficult at best. ISPs may have regional scale, but the big ones, Comcast, Verizon, etc. run significant parts of the internet's uplinks and switching infrastructure, and you can bet it's not just outgoing traffic they snoop. They have been caught with their fingers in the cookie jar many many times. At least with FB and Google you can choose not to use their services and block their trackers. You can't choose where your packets flow, and in many regions there is literally only one option for bandwidth because of local government sanctioned monopolies over the infrastructure.
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > They have been caught with their fingers in the cookie jar None of those transgressions resulted in visible, tangible harm the way Facebook's have. Would I love to go after the ISPs? Sure. But going after them is falling for policy perfectionism. Facebook and Google are in the crosshairs. This isn't a choice between doing something about them or the ISPs; it's a choice between doing something about them or not. If privacy advocates want to do more than talk, this is the time to show discipline.

snthd 8y ago

"Collective worry" is how you get the bystander effect.

ng-user 8y ago
Worrying for the sake of worrying proves only detrimental to the individual

coffeeacc 8y ago

I never used facebook, and I'm 80% of my way to being off google - I'm not worried.

rexgallorum2 8y ago

On GDPR: Could Facebook users around the world not set their location to somewhere in the EU and/or use a VPN to connect through servers in the EU?

Kalium 8y ago
Absolutely! The text of GDPR expressly allows companies to make you prove you are entitled to any rights you claim, though.