4 ms·

Why? Rather than hoping for regulation on data use and other negative social media effects which should fix issues with social media companies including Faceboo

Why? Rather than hoping for regulation on data use and other negative social media effects which should fix issues with social media companies including Facebook; why hope for a downfall of a particular company. It is not like the thing that replaces FB in case of a ban will be any better.

YinglingLight 6y ago
Well a competitor wouldn't be the brainchild of CIA's LifeLog program, for starters.
- meowface 6y ago
  Source? I see this claim made in a few places, but I can't find any evidence beyond "Facebook was created the same day LifeLog was shut down" (February 4, 2004). Not that I'm a fan of Facebook's data collection, but claiming it's a CIA operation is a substantial claim that would require substantial evidence beyond that date being shared, which very easily could be a coincidence. (Also, if it were really planned as a secret successor, why would they publicly do it on the same date?) I'm pretty skeptical Zuckerberg was in contact with the CIA when he started Facebook in his dorm room if that's the only piece of evidence.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
dr-detroit 6y ago
According to ABC news the CIA and other intelligence agencies sponsor these social media apps so what makes you think they are in competition with anyone?
jonathanstrange 6y ago
No company has ever treated me worse as a paying customer than Facebook but there are plenty of more objective reasons, too. They are enforcing a Kafkaesque set of rules they apparently do not comprehend themselves, and they are interpreting and enforcing them selectively. For example, Steve Bannon was not banned from Facebook after he suggested "jokingly" that Dr. Anthony Fauci and Christopher Wray should be beheaded. However, when someone made a clearly satirical Facebook page "Behead Zuckerberg" it was quickly eliminated, even though it was meticulously screened for policy violations. This is just one example that made headlines, there are thousands of similar examples. Facebook also influences the distribution of posts based on political indicators. For example, there is evidence that the dissemination of posts about Assange's extradition trials were blocked. There is also plenty of evidence of algorithmic discrimination, and examples of ads functionality and targeting that shouldn't even exist. For example, you could target ads to 13 year old girls in a specific town that have specific interests. I'd say that's a bit creepy. Last but not least, Facebook provides a fake customer service that seems to be intentionally designed to waste time, and there have been recent discussions of claims of fraudulent payment transactions - people were apparently charged for non-existent services on their ads accounts.
p0nce 6y ago
bad website, you cannot post to your followers, it makes people unhappy, advertising there is useless

YinglingLight 6y ago

Well a competitor wouldn't be the brainchild of CIA's LifeLog program, for starters.

meowface 6y ago
Source? I see this claim made in a few places, but I can't find any evidence beyond "Facebook was created the same day LifeLog was shut down" (February 4, 2004). Not that I'm a fan of Facebook's data collection, but claiming it's a CIA operation is a substantial claim that would require substantial evidence beyond that date being shared, which very easily could be a coincidence. (Also, if it were really planned as a secret successor, why would they publicly do it on the same date?) I'm pretty skeptical Zuckerberg was in contact with the CIA when he started Facebook in his dorm room if that's the only piece of evidence.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

dr-detroit 6y ago

According to ABC news the CIA and other intelligence agencies sponsor these social media apps so what makes you think they are in competition with anyone?

jonathanstrange 6y ago

No company has ever treated me worse as a paying customer than Facebook but there are plenty of more objective reasons, too. They are enforcing a Kafkaesque set of rules they apparently do not comprehend themselves, and they are interpreting and enforcing them selectively. For example, Steve Bannon was not banned from Facebook after he suggested "jokingly" that Dr. Anthony Fauci and Christopher Wray should be beheaded. However, when someone made a clearly satirical Facebook page "Behead Zuckerberg" it was quickly eliminated, even though it was meticulously screened for policy violations. This is just one example that made headlines, there are thousands of similar examples. Facebook also influences the distribution of posts based on political indicators. For example, there is evidence that the dissemination of posts about Assange's extradition trials were blocked. There is also plenty of evidence of algorithmic discrimination, and examples of ads functionality and targeting that shouldn't even exist. For example, you could target ads to 13 year old girls in a specific town that have specific interests. I'd say that's a bit creepy. Last but not least, Facebook provides a fake customer service that seems to be intentionally designed to waste time, and there have been recent discussions of claims of fraudulent payment transactions - people were apparently charged for non-existent services on their ads accounts.

p0nce 6y ago

bad website, you cannot post to your followers, it makes people unhappy, advertising there is useless