C'mon, Zuck... don't make us feel second class. Come talk to us in Europe – EU politicos Mark Zuckerberg has been warned not to treat European Facebook users as "second class" as pressure mounts on the CEO to face the music from politicos on the other side of the Pond. As execs from the social media business are lining up meeting after meeting with EU politicians, one name was notably absent from the attendee list …
Zuk's appearance in Europe is pointless... Whenever he was asked a thorny question about pervasive tracking yesterday, he just answered with "I'll have to get my team to get back to you". Expect more of the same...
We need something far more powerful. Most of America lives in ignorance about Instagram's owner. We must counter that. Send a chilling message to big tech. They say knowledge is power... Social media is so toxic and addictive we need to treat it as a health issue, and prioritize it according.
Yesterday's testimony should act as a warning to Europe... Nothing is going to change. Facebook / Google are raw propaganda machines run by data abusers and arch manipulators. They act like tyrannical dictators above any government or country! That's how human history will look back at this time.
Don't let the suits and smiles fool you, its all 'lawyers n lies', on our way to a 'Person Of Interest' dystopia... Zuk watched that show, and found it a helpful guide. Of course that kind of industrial apparatus requires constant offline and online tracking. Exactly what Zuk wouldn't talk about yesterday!
"Social media is so toxic and addictive we need to treat it as a health issue, and prioritize it according."
Absolutely. So many people see addiction as what junkies do or those poor sods who get caught up in gambling addicition but social media is just as bad. It feeds on pulling you into a feedback loop, the more you post, the more you get feedback the more you want to post to get more validation for your moronic posts. Then you find yourself checking your feed every few minutes to check your latest post's progress. It took me about a year to realise I was hooked by social media's vile hold. I then simply did cold turkey, cut it out of my life. I still occassionally go back as I met some good people I like to keep in touch with but it's simply that, a few checks now, a quick PM to a few people and I'm out for a few more weeks. Laugh all you like, call me a complete weak-willed bellend but we all have a "hook" that will pull us into something we can't see is taking over our lives.
"He can bloody afford any price hikes." possible, but can he afford a Europe wide ban and associated removal of advertising revenue starting in Europe?
It only takes one group to get the dominos falling and the US companies have been ignoring the rest of the world's laws for a very long time.
In terms of benefits to Europe, no local advertising money leaving the state alone is going to pay for a lot of improvement then add in the new money for external companies looking to sell in Europe once the US looses it's control.
Zuck might think he is going to just walk away from his responsibility but if the US is brought to book over this then he is going to suffer at home too
Nobody is forced to have a Facebook account. If you do, accept the consequences of your choice.
I have never chosen to do it and I bet that there are several gigs of data on me.
Same as a lot of other people, I have been isolated by their algos from material posted by the users, analysed, categorized, named, correlated to postal addresses and GPS coordinates of my properties and made ready for consumption in their data feed.
They know where I live, they know where my kids go (despite none of them having a f***book account), they know what car I drive including its registration number, they know where I go on holidays, they know what I eat, they know what are my dietary requirements... Shall I continue?
If they have dumped less when you have given them a subject access request they were lying because this means that they have not dumped the full data which they can relate to you and only "your" data.
Nobody is forced to eat high sugar food. If you do, accept the consequences of your choice. Even though the sugar content is hidden away in small print on the label and the consequences are not very clear with diets telling people to cut out fat.
Lets not victim blame here, there are plenty of people that don't understand how this all works such as the people questioning him.
Lets reword that....we would like to insist to invite Mark Zuckerberg comes to visit us, at his expense, even though he has no legal obligation or requirement to do so, isn't bound by UK law, and even though it's potentially damaging to his image and that of his company and shareholders, we'd like him to come all the way over here and answer questions from some self important pricks that have a "God complex" to massage their ego's whilst you clearly have nothing better to do with your time.
There's a lovely witch hunt waiting for you and we can't seem to understand why you wouldn't want to join in?!
Had mark been lucky enough to have been gifted with a modicum of wisdom then he would gladly accept the invitation he has been kindly offered. Wholeheartedly. But alas, mark was not that lucky!
If the godfather politely invites you to something then I strongly advise you to accept his invitation and I do it in the most vehement terms. Your own good is at stake.
That people have the power to inflict quite a bit of harm on mark's business.
Fully agree.. if you agree to the T/C's then don't complain.. This is the same for the US.. the self important pricks that are being voted for later this year just need to make then faces being seen to do some work.. and Facebook is a good way to do this...
What's mind-blowing Zuckerberg talks only about one app, were data slurped to Cambridge Analytica.
Of course there were millions of Facebook apps between 2006 and 2015 that slurped billions of FB user data points. The whole business model of half of the apps was in fact slurping data to begin with.
So when will media actually start investigation (at least the Guardian started it, thanks!, despite facing threats from Facebook) But the whole fiasco is a whole lot bigger. It's a huge huge privacy issue.
In the real world Mark Zuckerberg would have to sit in jail for billions of stolen users data, unfortunately media journalists and US congress man/woman and EU counterparts don't have a clue about how a website works.
Mushroom: 'Feed them shit and keep them in the dark'. So is Mark living in a bubble or is someone else really is in charge...? My guess: Zuk is a totalitarian-sociopath delusion-liar who thinks if he repeats PR lines enough, just by sheer will, the world will start to believe the lies!
-----
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43725643
-----
"In another combative exchange, the business leader was questioned about the data his firm collected on people who had never signed up to his service. Zuckerberg said this was done for security purposes.
But he professed not to be familiar with the term "shadow profiles" despite it having been used widely by the media during a past Facebook data privacy controversy. And he was unable to say how many types of data were being gathered about non-members.
"You said everyone controls their data," said Democratic congressman Ben Ray Lujan. "But you are collecting data on people that are not even Facebook users, that have never signed a consent or privacy agreement.
"When you go to Facebook's 'I don't have a Facebook account page and would like to request all my personal data stored by Facebook', it takes you to a form that says go to your Facebook page and then on your account settings you can download your data.
'We've got to fix that'"
Zuckerberg has gone on the record... However, Facebook is such a cult its likely there are layers of defenses to protect the 'Great Leader' from any fallout. What we need now are more Whistleblowers to come forward with new 'Ugly Truth' memos confirming the CEO knew exactly what was going on.
There's always a smoking gun. The question is, how long will this take to come to light.... DC lawmakers are smart enough to read between the lines, but they're also frequently complicit. Big media is too! Both should have joined up the dots years ago.
I find a bit pathetic that politicians insist on talking to the CEO of the company, when he is obviously not the most competent person to talk to.
By the way, is this the first time that EU bods ask for an American CEO to cross the Atlantic? Meetings must happen all the time, but I don't recall there was a similar invitation for Bill Gates in the 90s.
"It was my mistake, and I’m sorry. I started Facebook, I run it, and I'm responsible for what happens here,"
Heard it before Mark, no doubt it will be repeated ad nauseum over the next few years and no doubt nothing will actually change. Public mea culpas are no substitute for a prison sentence.
In the U.K. ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the Law and aiding and abetting is a criminal offence in its own right - Zuckerberg should, therefore, really be obliged to face the music in Blighty.
The U.K. has a special relationship with U.S. insofar as it bends over and the U.S. gives it a good shafting every now and then, but, despite this it seems unlikely that the U.S. would turn a blind eye to his special rendition, so that's probably a non-starter, no matter how many times it invaded Grenada without first consulting Brenda (or even Queen Margaret).
Granted, the U.K. does occasionally have a passive-aggressive hissy-fit and say "no" once in a while but the problem with that is that, like all whores, there will come a time when she's just too old and her pimp loses interest in her, stops cajoling and just beats her black and blue and takes the cash. That time will be post Brexit when, having no influence any more the U.K.'s lack of linguistic talent will equal that of the U.S. and it will, understandably, cut it out of the loop and shout in English at Johnny Foreigner on their own behalf rather than through a poxy proxy.
So, what does the U.K. have that the U.S. wants?
How about Julian Assange?
It could offer to exchange him for Zuckerberg.
The U.K. is prepared to expel Russian diplomats for reasons that, even should they ultimately prove accurate, are (as yet at least) unproven. Well, Ecuador is known to be harbouring a fugitive from the Law, so there's seemingly all the cause necessary to storm the embassy and expel everyone, no?
Now, this isn't a reflection of my view of Assange in any way - I'm not even sure I have a view on him. But, in the world of Realpolitik, it seems prudent to consider all options irrespective of their morality, no? And, whilst we may soon be too long in the tooth for U.S. tastes, it does have something of a hard-on for old Julian.
</just a decidedly amoral thought - my parents would be ashamed of me>
"The challenge: Typical digital retargeting technologies rely on cookies, but they're not always accurate. If you have multiple people sharing a computer, or if your audience is moving between desktop, mobile or tablet devices, you could be wasting your budget on the wrong audience.
The solution: Instead of relying on search interests based on cookies, which can cause overlap, target real individuals. This is where Facebook has it's biggest advantage over competitors. It's the only platform where you can actively target individuals who might be interested in your products (instead of hoping that you show up in search).
One great way to reach real people is with Custom Audiences from your website. These identify people with Facebook IDs who have visited specific product pages or added products to a cart. Once a Custom Audience pixel is placed on your website, you can use that data to remarket to visitors across all their devices.
Try this: Test your Facebook retargeting Ads against your display campaigns on Google Display Network to see how the results compare."
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
