Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Sheryl Sanderg came out today to say that Facebook has a "responsibility to protect your data, and if they can't they don't deserve to serve you. Which is confusing because who are they "protecting your data from"? Their whole business model is to sell your data. How else do you think they make money?

Seriously - the balls of these people.....

4 comments:

  1. Capital of Texas RefugeeThursday, March 22, 2018 1:37:00 AM

    "... responsibility to protect your data, and if they can't they don't deserve to serve you ..."

    Translation: you're now a scumbag if you deal with Facebook because if you understand all of the ways in which Facebook sells your information and compromises your privacy, yet you still continue to use Facebook, you've essentially agreed to a deal with the devil.

    So technically Facebook doesn't "deserve" customers like that because Facebook "deserves" better customers, and all Facebook gets is a bunch of scumbags who are OK with making deals with the devil.

    See, it's really easy to lie using the truth! :-)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't really give a shit if people want to overshare. That is on them. What I care is Facebook manipulating reality. After all, Facebook was once for fighting against censorship in China... Then they said - if you can't fight them - join them. And China basically taught them how to keep their citizens complacent. Just manipulate what they see. And that is what is evil. People are basically sleepy sheep. Once there is a new platform they will flee like myspace.

    It also makes me really mad that Facebook basically collude with the government to make sure any potential competitor had a zero chance of starting up. (because "the government was on their side". Facebook and Google and Apple basically own the internet now. You can't create a new app without Apples blessing. Effectively locking their competitors out. All your traffic goes through them in one way or another.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Capital of Texas RefugeeSaturday, March 24, 2018 4:29:00 AM

    Yes, but I was looking for that Devil's Advocate position where you try to understand something totally evil from the perspective of The Devil Himself ...

    As ballsy as this bit from Sandberg was, it isn't what the executives of Facebook appear to believe, but is instead a cleverly edited version of what they believe.

    What they actually believe is that they are better people than their users, and that was the point I had turned into parody. That's how Facebook can justify pulling all of this manipulative crap -- it's like what Thomas Sowell wrote about "the anointed" many years ago.

    Faceborg, Goolag, and Crapple are ripe for eminent domain proceedings, and I'd like to see parts of all three of them regulated like public utilities.

    I'd especially like to see this happen to the Apple Store and iTunes -- Apple likes to call its security model a "walled garden" when the system is really a "walled GULAG" ...

    ReplyDelete
  4. I am generally against regulating private companies as utilities because then they just become monopolies. I am however for spitting up monopolies. I really don't think a company like Facebook should be trying to influence an election either way. They should have to abide by the equal time rule.

    But generally Facebook understands if you just lie nicely, people will believe you. I don't think they believe a bit of this shit. They are just manipulators.

    ReplyDelete