Losers Lose - Facebook Edition
Facebook is being hammered for allowing the data firm Cambridge Analytica to acquire 50 million user profiles in the U.S., which it may or may not have used 1 to help the Trump campaign. But the outrage misses the target: There's nothing Cambridge Analytica could have done that Facebook itself doesn't offer political clients.
Cambridge Analytica is old news for anybody who actually pays attention. We're talking Nov '16 - google it.
Facebook got beat at their own game. But the drumbeat of faux outrage continues.
As always, losers lose.
Comments
-
Fuck Facebook
-
That's what happens when you have a monopoly like Amazon.
-
Exxon spills oil, they clean it up and pay a fine.
Facebook spills personal data, people tweak their privacy settings and vow never to use Facebook again.
Amazon is nearing Sherman Anti-Trust territory.
Will be interesting to see how gubment deals with digital era problems. -
The problem is that they are already behind and the lawmakers are generationally disconnected from the actual state of the world. These problems were predictable and like Paws said, old news. Right now there is a very literal time gap between lawmakers (and populace) who's understanding of the digital world is probably 10 years behind it's actual pace, and the generations who have 100x more adaptational skill and ability to see things for what they are.Dude61 said:Will be interesting to see how gubment deals with digital era problems.
This is the true national (and societal) security issue. I don't want to go full "cyberspace is the battlefield of tomorrow blah blah blah," but it's 100% true and lawmakers have made it painfully clear they STILL have no idea what that means. -
Hopefully by staying the fuck out of them.Dude61 said:Will be interesting to see how gubment deals with digital era problems.
If people want to use freely accessible areas of the internet to gain an advantage for anything, then let them. If their competition doesn't like it, then their competition needs to get off their ass(es) and do the same thing.
But instead, we like to let people who cry "hey, no fair!" have their lazy ass pathetic fucking way. Society is largely addicted to the process of turning to government to solve every little ticky tack problem. It's as if most people are operating at a low level of consciousness, and don't fully understand the potential of their own humanity. -
This guy gets itFenderbender123 said:
Hopefully by staying the fuck out of them.Dude61 said:Will be interesting to see how gubment deals with digital era problems.
If people want to use freely accessible areas of the internet to gain an advantage for anything, then let them. If their competition doesn't like it, then their competition needs to get off their ass(es) and do the same thing.
But instead, we like to let people who cry "hey, no fair!" have their lazy ass pathetic fucking way. Society is largely addicted to the process of turning to government to solve every little ticky tack problem. It's as if most people are operating at a low level of consciousness, and don't fully understand the potential of their own humanity.
-
This is tricky because they are now in the business of influencing elections and other things with massive stakes. Should platforms like Facebook be allowed to take on political clients or their agencies? I don't believe they should as it goes well beyond marketing and promotion. It is psychological manipulation. And yeah, you can say well isn't that what marketing is anyway? For sure to a point, but imo there is a big difference between a sign in a front yard, a TV campaign ad, and what these data tools do.Fenderbender123 said:
Hopefully by staying the fuck out of them.Dude61 said:Will be interesting to see how gubment deals with digital era problems.
If people want to use freely accessible areas of the internet to gain an advantage for anything, then let them. If their competition doesn't like it, then their competition needs to get off their ass(es) and do the same thing.
But instead, we like to let people who cry "hey, no fair!" have their lazy ass pathetic fucking way. Society is largely addicted to the process of turning to government to solve every little ticky tack problem. It's as if most people are operating at a low level of consciousness, and don't fully understand the potential of their own humanity. -
Dude61 said:
Exxon spills oil, they clean it up and pay a fine.
Facebook spills personal data, people tweak their privacy settings and vow never to use Facebook again.
Amazon is nearing Sherman Anti-Trust territory.
Will be interesting to see how gubment deals with digital era problems.
This is what the end of Net Nootrality has brought PEOPLE!!!!!!! -
If enough people are stupid enough to take a meme or a fake story on Facebook as the gospel enough to influence an election, than we are getting the democracy that we deserve.WilburHooksHands said:
This is tricky because they are now in the business of influencing elections and other things with massive stakes. Should platforms like Facebook be allowed to take on political clients or their agencies? I don't believe they should as it goes well beyond marketing and promotion. It is psychological manipulation. And yeah, you can say well isn't that what marketing is anyway? For sure to a point, but imo there is a big difference between a sign in a front yard, a TV campaign ad, and what these data tools do.Fenderbender123 said:
Hopefully by staying the fuck out of them.Dude61 said:Will be interesting to see how gubment deals with digital era problems.
If people want to use freely accessible areas of the internet to gain an advantage for anything, then let them. If their competition doesn't like it, then their competition needs to get off their ass(es) and do the same thing.
But instead, we like to let people who cry "hey, no fair!" have their lazy ass pathetic fucking way. Society is largely addicted to the process of turning to government to solve every little ticky tack problem. It's as if most people are operating at a low level of consciousness, and don't fully understand the potential of their own humanity.
I'm more worried about Facebook's invasiveness into the other aspects of life such as your personal, financial and professional info. However there is a solution for this as well for those that feel threatened. Delete your account. -
The scary thing is today people just can't/won't think for themselves. Facebook is essentially just quick dopamine spike groupthink clusterfuck these days.
-
I guess this begs the question about why we should be concerned that there are going to be influences on an election. Is it somehow wrong to want a candidate to win? Why do they care? Is there not a legitimate reason? Is it maybe because we've allowed the role of government to become so powerful that it can really fuck people over, and therefore people have a massive incentive to make sure the guy who doesn't fuck them over gets elected? If so, should we not look at ways of limiting government so that people don't have to resort to psychological manipulating a bunch of people on social media?WilburHooksHands said:
This is tricky because they are now in the business of influencing elections and other things with massive stakes. Should platforms like Facebook be allowed to take on political clients or their agencies? I don't believe they should as it goes well beyond marketing and promotion. It is psychological manipulation. And yeah, you can say well isn't that what marketing is anyway? For sure to a point, but imo there is a big difference between a sign in a front yard, a TV campaign ad, and what these data tools do.
We don't even ask these questions. We just say "BAN IT! BAN IT! BAN IT!"...like, almost seamlessly and automatically. It's not healthy, IMO.
And like I was saying, I especially don't see the issue since we already know that these types of tactics are being employed by backers of various candidates from both parties. Elections are like sports. Whatever one team is doing to gain an advantage, you bet your as s the other team is doing something similar. In the end, the playing field is level.
-
We need older whiter representatives to fix this
-
These are definitely fair questions to ask.Fenderbender123 said:I guess this begs the question about why we should be concerned that there are going to be influences on an election. Is it somehow wrong to want a candidate to win? Why do they care? Is there not a legitimate reason? Is it maybe because we've allowed the role of government to become so powerful that it can really fuck people over, and therefore people have a massive incentive to make sure the guy who doesn't fuck them over gets elected? If so, should we not look at ways of limiting government so that people don't have to resort to psychological manipulating a bunch of people on social media?
The playing field is definitely level and politicians gonna politic, but these tactics start to become morally and ethically corrupt quickly. This is not a new issue for politics, but in this age the effects are amplified 100x.Fenderbender123 said:
And like I was saying, I especially don't see the issue since we already know that these types of tactics are being employed by backers of various candidates from both parties. Elections are like sports. Whatever one team is doing to gain an advantage, you bet your as s the other team is doing something similar. In the end, the playing field is level. -
-
Do something.Dude61 said:Exxon spills oil, they clean it up and pay a fine.
Facebook spills personal data, people tweak their privacy settings and vow never to use Facebook again.
Amazon is nearing Sherman Anti-Trust territory.
Will be interesting to see how gubment deals with digital era problems. -
Look for the FTC to throw the weight of its new minted jurisdiction around.
-
I deleted my facebook like 4 years ago. Jesus christ someone put sven in charge.
-
New Facebook Privacy Policy: There isn't any privacy and you should have no expectation of such. Everything you do here is recorded and sold for money. Get over it. You knew what the fuck you were signing up for, you bunch of fucking narcissists. You wanted everyone to know what you were doing? Well, you got it asshole. Quit your bitching or stop using Facebook.
-
Why anyone felt the need to stay on it once their mom and aunt and such started messaging them I'll never know.
As soon as family was on it I was out. It was for creeping on hotties and posting pictures of being at parties. -
Kreist, you don't have to friend your fucking family. I sure as hell don't. Don't let your worlds collide, Jerry.Pitchfork51 said:Why anyone felt the need to stay on it once their mom and aunt and such started messaging them I'll never know.
As soon as family was on it I was out. It was for creeping on hotties and posting pictures of being at parties.
-
So No Xma,... er uh Sorry, Holiday Party cookie pics?BearsWiin said:
Kreist, you don't have to friend your fucking family. I sure as hell don't. Don't let your worlds collide, Jerry.Pitchfork51 said:Why anyone felt the need to stay on it once their mom and aunt and such started messaging them I'll never know.
As soon as family was on it I was out. It was for creeping on hotties and posting pictures of being at parties. -
It’s lik forgotten news & shit. Obama’s analytics were lauded publicly.RaceBannon said:
