Follow

The New York Times reports Facebook gave Microsoft, Amazon, Spotify, Netflix, Apple, Yandex, Yahoo and others far more access to users' data than previously admitted, including access to private messages:

nytimes.com/2018/12/18/technol

There is never going to be a better time to , the violations are only going to get worse.

If you know someone who wants to try alternatives and needs a simple non-technical guide, try sending them this:

switching.social/ethical-alter

(via @bobstechsite)

@switchingsocial @bobstechsite Facebook is going down the tubes, just like Google+ and Twitter. How long will it take? Too long, but oh well ....

@switchingsocial @bobstechsite holy shit, they opened up private messages to third parties as well?

@switchingsocial @bobstechsite infatti non capisco. Con tutti i reati fatti non l'hanno ancora chiuso!

@switchingsocial

I don't like it. But I'll always be more concerned that government agencies track us, and share our data, without consent. At least with FB, people can choose to use it or not. The NSA there is no such opt-out at all.

@bobstechsite

@hiyitopatada @switchingsocial actually you can't.

If you don't your share data with Facebook, your family & friends will. They also make bulk data available to other services you use in exchange for their information. Finally, they buy credit check information & financial transactions in bulk.

So... You actually can't opt-out. And unlike a democratic government, you can't vote out Mark Zuckerberg.

@bobstechsite @hiyitopatada

Yup. It's very telling how Zuckerberg dodges questions about the data FB has on non-members.

This *really* needs to be regulated, data companies will not behave when left to their own devices.

@bobstechsite
Governments can do a lot more damage to people. FB can't fine or imprison people, or suddenly criminalize peaceful behavior for dubious reasons.
@switchingsocial

@hiyitopatada @switchingsocial no, but they can take you to court and bankrupt you over a meritless case (unless you're fortunate enough to live in a country with taxpayer-funded legal aid & "loser pays" rules).

They can also use investor cash to lobby elected representatives to block pro-consumer reforms. (You may view that favourably. I don't!)

Alternatively if they were feeling malicious they could "accidentally leak" your private information and let criminals or mob justice do the rest.

@hiyitopatada @switchingsocial then of course there's relentless PR campaigns.

Did you hear the one about the woman who frivolously sued McDonald's because her coffee was too hot? Turned out it wasn't so frivolous!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_

@hiyitopatada @bobstechsite @switchingsocial Mark Zuckerberg has popularized the idea that privacy is irrelevant. How often did you hear someone that he/she has nothing to hide. This idea is in a way more harmful than let's say imprisoning people because it erodes the fundamentals of democracy.

@ericbuijs @hiyitopatada @bobstechsite

There's also a lot of denial going on with users, people find something so convenient and "free" that they cannot accept it actually comes with a heavy price.

@hiyitopatada
@bobstechsite @switchingsocial

Do you honestly think the smartest people at facebook who work with surveillance aren't going to the same conferences and networking with the smartest people in surveillance at the NSA?

Likely it is just a revolving doors with lots of professional connections and easy ways to quietly share data. It would be absurd to believe otherwise.

@hiyitopatada @bobstechsite @switchingsocial

Even if this wasn't true, why would the NSA build elaborate schemes to siphon off all the data passing through the internet and ignore the massive source of centralized information (and capability for manipulation) that is facebook?

Facebook is basically just doing free work for the NSA, collecting and centralizing the data for them.

@hiyitopatada @bobstechsite @switchingsocial

You can't seperate government surveillance from corporate surveillance without opening a window and throwing occam's razor as hard as you can out of it.

@Alonealastalovedalongthe @hiyitopatada @bobstechsite

I think you're right. Whoever collects this data is a danger to all of us because it can be distributed to others and used to do bad things. Indeed, just having the data may make good people do bad things because they will be tempted to use it.

It's like the ring in "lord of the rings", our aim should be to stop it falling into anyone's hands.

@switchingsocial
@hiyitopatada @bobstechsite

Agreed. Evil is a structural property, it has little to do with the ethics of the people within the structure (which doesn't absolve people like zuck, just highlights that zuck is just a schmuck playing an important part within an evil structure).

@switchingsocial @hiyitopatada @bobstechsite

Lord of the rings is a great example because the ring can be thought of as a centralized database of information about a group of people. Whoever possesses that ring holds the true center of power within that group of people, laws and society be damned.

Aka Cambridge Analytica.

@switchingsocial @hiyitopatada @bobstechsite

If Facebook had far more data about US citizens than the US government did, than Facebook would be the real political structure and the government a mere reflection of it.

It is absurdly unlikely the NSA doesn't have their hands in Facebook tho.

@Alonealastalovedalongthe @switchingsocial @hiyitopatada @bobstechsite
Of course. If anyone had any doubt, look at Google's willingness to coordinate with the govt of China. How much more likely must they be to cooperate and coordinate with the govt of the country they are based in-- which has sealed subpoena power over them, just in case they aren't. AT&T was shown to be routing calls though NSA surveillance. They all do this stuff.
USA is a corporatocracy, after all. $$$

@hiyitopatada @bobstechsite @switchingsocial Call me naïve but the way I see it is that government is required by law to serve the public interest and to be transparent about its operations, even if this doesn't happen in reality. Companies don't have this requirement even in principle. Disclaimer: I'm from a Nordic country, we tend to trust the state.

@mmin @hiyitopatada @bobstechsite

Sure, and I agree in general that elected governments are more reliable than private companies.

However mass surveillance powers can corrupt governments as they become addicted to how convenient it is.

For example, UK terrorist surveillance laws being used to spy on dog walkers:

theguardian.com/world/2016/dec

Even worse though is if "big data" corrupts elections, as then it becomes unclear whether votes are legitimate, which destabilises entire countries.

@switchingsocial @bobstechsite This actually got broadcast on the news in the US last night so there might be more migrants coming in the next few days

@switchingsocial pawoo is a good #Android client that merits to be mentioned on your page ;)

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

mastodon.at is a microblogging site that federates with most instances on the Fediverse.