• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Facebook (lack of) Privacy ? !

UDRider said:
Although Obama did indeed use FB data how and for what purpose were different. There are two points of discussion here.
First how data was obtained by CA. Second how it was used.
Click to expand...
Since we are not in the Political section, I do not want to carry this on too far. I find the subtle differences moot divisiveness. I also know that myself and others, were the targets of negative campaigning by the DNC and Obama campaign that originated with Facebook. So while I use the following as a reference, I also know it is not completely accurate. And again it seems to point to a bias even in this supposed unbiased site. We may be totally without media hope, if this is the Pulitzer Prize standard. Megan McCain Statement Scrutinized by Politifact
 
clutchslip said:
Since we are not in the Political section, I do not want to carry this on too far. I find the subtle differences moot divisiveness. I also know that myself and others, were the targets of negative campaigning by the DNC and Obama campaign that originated with Facebook. So while I use the following as a reference, I also know it is not completely accurate. And again it seems to point to a bias even in this supposed unbiased site. We may be totally without media hope, if this is the Pulitzer Prize standard. Megan McCain Statement Scrutinized by Politifact
Click to expand...

I don't think consent is a subtle difference. As link you have provided describes.
 
Zuck live now on the hot seat in congress.

He's saying all the right/nice things but any changes that limit FB ability to collect/collate/hoard personal info for advert targeting will impact their profitability/valuation and therefore probably not happen.
 
There are warning messages on cigarettes leaving no doubt as to the damage they cause to health, yet, millions of people ignore those messages and smoke. Can we honestly say that all those smoking were lied to and thus made the decision to smoke because they didn't know the risks?

Isn't there now an epidemic among young people choosing the vape?

Are they addicted? Sure.

Is Facebook addicting? Ask someone you know who is a FB fiend to stop using it and see how they react. Withdrawls? You bet.

The point is that FB for many has become a dependancy, an addiction and no amount of regulation can stop what is going on, it takes the individual to stop using it to make a difference.

So WOZ like other "profile" people said he deleted himself from FB. In the details is that he just changed his setting and got rid of some content and basically suspended his use. Why didn't he delete his account? In case things change of course. Isn't that like buying a pack of cigarettes but not smoking them right away in the hopes a cure for cancer is found or an annoucement get made that medical science was wrong and its really ok to smoke after all?
 
The issue isn't the fact that FB uses our data and "spies on us". That's like a big "no shit". Anyone can, given enough time, read and learn what they do with the data. The issue is the fact that they disobeyed their very own policies. This Cambridge Analytica situation violates the stated policies.

Would you agree that a beverage manufacturer that claims to sell 100% juice should suffer some sort of penalty if it was discovered that it broke that promise and is not in fact 100% juice? I don't see any difference here. You seem to be always wanting to "blame the consumer".
 
Last edited:
You're just a foolish simpleton if you really believe they sell 100% juice. Everyone knows they add water and frankly if you're not making it yourself you deserve to get cheated.
 
mean dad said:
You're just a foolish simpleton if you really believe they sell 100% juice. Everyone knows they add water and frankly if you're not making it yourself you deserve to get cheated.
Click to expand...

i disagree. i have issues with false advertisement. You're essentially cheating people out of their money.
 
UDRider said:
I don't think consent is a subtle difference. As link you have provided describes.
Click to expand...
I didn't consent to have my information used. You are ignoring that in BOTH incidents MILLIONS of people had their information used without their permission. Talk about bias, for Christ's sake. Because your friend signs up to support Obama doesn't mean that you consent to supporting Obama and having propaganda sent to you, showing John McCann as a Nazi. Yes, a Nazi! Like I said there is no discernible difference, unless you are already biased. You might have been signed up and not even noticed because the narrative suited your biases.

Obviously, it and ALL technology must be run by the Government, because it is already documented that "Right Wing" viewpoints are being suppressed. The only way to stop that arbitrary "hate speech" removal is to make it all a giant public entity, so I can take anyone and everyone to the damn SCOTUS, without question about private enterprise.
 
clutchslip said:
Since we are not in the Political section, I do not want to carry this on too far. I find the subtle differences moot divisiveness. I also know that myself and others, were the targets of negative campaigning by the DNC and Obama campaign that originated with Facebook. So while I use the following as a reference, I also know it is not completely accurate. And again it seems to point to a bias even in this supposed unbiased site. We may be totally without media hope, if this is the Pulitzer Prize standard. Megan McCain Statement Scrutinized by Politifact
Click to expand...
From what I read in your link, the two things are magnitudes apart.
The Obama campaign created a Facebook app for supporters to donate, learn of voting requirements, and find nearby houses to canvass. The app asked users’ permission to scan their photos, friends lists, and news feeds. Most users complied.

The people signing up knew the data they were handing over would be used to support a political campaign. Their friends, however, did not.

The people who downloaded the app used by Cambridge Analytica did not know their data would be used to aid any political campaigns. The app was billed as a personality quiz that would be used by Cambridge University researchers.

Aleksandr Kogan, one of the Cambridge researchers involved in the project, sold the data to the upstart political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica. The company then sold its services not only to the Trump campaign, but to the presidential campaign of Sen. Ted Cruz and the senatorial campaign of Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., among others.
Click to expand...
I guess the interpretation depends on your political bent.
 
mototireguy said:
Zuck live now on the hot seat in congress.

He's saying all the right/nice things but any changes that limit FB ability to collect/collate/hoard personal info for advert targeting will impact their profitability/valuation and therefore probably not happen.
Click to expand...

:laughing

30594765_1671915342863443_3610590792185439003_n.jpg
 
Schnellbandit said:
So WOZ like other "profile" people said he deleted himself from FB. In the details is that he just changed his setting and got rid of some content and basically suspended his use. Why didn't he delete his account? In case things change of course.
Click to expand...

That is not why he suspended his account. He opted to suspend instead of delete to protect his brand from being scooped up and misused.
 
I find the whole thing both amusing and sad. Amusing how passionate people are about an issue they seem to understand so little about.

Sad for what it says about the health of our democracy :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top