> Facebook said the label was intended to only identify historical treason. “Treason was included as a category, given its historical significance. Given it’s a

> Facebook said the label was intended to only identify historical treason. “Treason was included as a category, given its historical significance. Given it’s an illegal activity, we’ve removed it as an interest category,” a spokesperson said. I'm very confused by this. What is "historical treason" in this context? Also, this certainly also sounds bad in light of all this: > The news comes a day after Facebook was discovered to have given privileged access to its site to mail service Mail.Ru, a Russian site with links to the Kremlin. I feel like it should just be assumed at this point that Russia probably used this information successfully to identify dissidents and is knocking on their doors at this very moment. And then of course there's this: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/05/russia-funded-facebook-twitter-investments-kushner-investor https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/05/russia-funded-f... I've donned a tinfoil hat lately but, in this day and age, I feel it's justified.