13 ms·
Not sure who downvoted you. But I agree 100% with this, he is a high value target.
by ic4l 7y ago
Not sure who downvoted you. But I agree 100% with this, he is a high value target.
- 9dl 7y agoSo we, filthy plebs, have low value and because of that we have to share our data for free Nice
- kd5bjo 7y agoNothing is preventing you from putting a sticker over your webcam, just like Zuck does.
- 9dl 7y agoOr I can close my eyes and imagine that nothing happened Result will be the same Stickers do not work - because people around you do not put it too magically And what even sillier - that someone have phone with installed fb app in 2k19
- lawlessone 7y ago>Stickers do not work They do though.
- 9dl 7y agoThey do if everyone put it Do everyone put it?
- wlesieutre 7y agoNo one else has a computer in my bedroom
- 9dl 7y agoSo your neighbors with hires full spectrum light camera pointed at your windows does not count Mhhh, okay
- wlesieutre 7y agoIf I were Mark Zuckerberg, the sticker is the solution to my laptop camera, and buying up all of the adjacent houses is the solution to neighbors http://money.com/money/4346766/mark-zuckerberg-houses/ http://money.com/money/4346766/mark-zuckerberg-houses/
- 9dl 7y agoBut you are not him And you still need to control your data And you can't do that now effectively And if people will defend corporations and hide its fu we will newer live in better world
- notzuck 7y ago> stickers do not work. lulwut?
- dylan604 7y agoWhy are you concerned if someone else does/doesn't do something? You can only control your own actions. Not protecting yourself by covering your webcam because the majority of others do not is not sound logic. I have a bright pink piece of tape over mine, and it is always a conversation starter. I have seen later that many people do wind up covering their webcam. It's not a 100% conversion rate, but it is definitely > 0%.
- 9dl 7y agoWhy someone want defend corporations? Especially those which breaking law What motivations of such people?
- vonmoltke 7y agoWho here is defending "corporations" (by which I assume you mean corporate bad behavior)? Do you think Facebook and their ilk are the only actors who might want to hijack the cameras on your devices?
- 9dl 7y agoThere is no good corporate behavior >Who here is defending "corporations" dylan604 try to change focus of attention. This is type of manipulation. And in this context, this is defence >Do you think Facebook and their ilk are the only actors who might want to hijack the cameras on your devices? Nope. But for some reason fb can't do QA. At all And this do most of the work for other "actors" Why this happens?
- dylan604 7y agowait, what? i am not defending evil corp at all. IMO, my comment about covering the camera on your device is purely self-defense because evil corp can't be trusted. how you can twist my self-defense suggestion as defending evil corp's decision to nefariously use the webcam is some serious bending of logic
- pc86 7y agoThis is an intentional misreading of the parent comment and does not belong on this forum. Zuck being a high value target for extortion/exploitation/attack is an objective fact. Saying so doesn't imply that anyone else is "low value" - attackers will attack whoever and whatever they can to achieve their goal, which is almost always money.
- 9dl 7y agoIf it is misleading then first priority of fb is defending privacy and user data at all costs. Everyone, not just one person Nice
- vonmoltke 7y agoOther than not using them themselves (which, just to be clear, they absolutely should not be doing), how is Facebook supposed to protect everyone from remote camera takeovers?
- 9dl 7y agoDo QA Do a security properly Do a code for security Do QA properly Do not hide thing like Cambridge Analytica
- semiotagonal 7y agoI feel like a high value target to me, though. If the environment is untrustworthy enough for Zuckerberg to defend himself against it, he should consider his own role in making it that way.
- ic4l 7y agoBut the truth is you should always treat your environment as untrustworthy. I don't think you should deduct him points for blocking his webcam. It is an ADDITIONAL privacy step. He runs a company with thousands of employees, and with any company like that you never know if someone may decide to become a bad actor, and physically compromise him. But yeah lets continue to hate on facebook.
- semiotagonal 7y ago> But yeah lets continue to hate on facebook. Yes, because they're voracious collectors people's personal information. We can hate on "bad actors" as well, we don't have to choose one or the other. But as long as Facebook is behaving creepily, whether deliberately or inadvertently, let's hate on them. There is no reason to tolerate their mistakes.