The creepiness that is Facebook

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby 82_28 » Fri Jan 31, 2020 3:31 pm

First off, just provide a link, not no quote. Make it redundant. I see what you are saying and see your point in missing that but just copy and paste that shit at the bottom for rectification. I don't click on the links embedded within the quote function I don't think ever have I. Under the chosen formatted "quote" to show you are making a point add the link. Such as:

Check out this rad story at espn.com!


https://www.espn.com/
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 11194
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby Belligerent Savant » Sat Feb 01, 2020 12:56 am

.

In either case, it's redundant. Either way you'd be clicking on a link. What is the burden, here?
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5217
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby JackRiddler » Sat Feb 01, 2020 12:23 pm

You guys know how much easier this link business is on Facebook? :twisted:

And you never have to quote, since everything's forgotten five hours later.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby conniption » Wed Sep 22, 2021 4:23 am

RT

Irish and Italian privacy watchdogs sound alarm over Facebook's new smart glasses
Image
FILE PHOTO. Facebook logo reflected in a pair of glasses. © Global Look Press / imageBROKER.com / Christian Ohde

17 Sep, 2021
Ireland's data privacy watchdog has expressed concerns over new smart glasses, produced by Facebook in partnership with Ray-Ban, stating it's asked the tech giant whether the device can properly notify people they're being filmed.

The Irish Data Privacy Commissioner (DPC) voiced its concerns over the glasses on Friday. The smart glasses, manufactured by Facebook in cooperation with Ray-Ban, were unveiled by the tech giant last week. The device drew not only the media's eye, but also the close attention of authorities in a number of countries.

Italy's watchdog Garante Privacy asked the DPC to solicit some answers from the tech giant on whether the device is actually in compliance with privacy laws. The Irish privacy watchdog is the EU's leading body in dealing with Facebook, as the European operation of the tech giant is headquartered in Dublin.
Also on rt.com Facebook’s smart glasses are an attempt to profit from our narcissistic culture, and also a cause for privacy concern
"While it is accepted that many devices including smart phones can record third-party individuals, it is generally the case that the camera or the phone is visible as the device by which recording is happening, thereby putting those captured in the recordings on notice," the Irish regulator said in a statement.

The watchdogs now want to know whether the device is capable of properly indicating it's filming the surroundings and of notifying people around the wearer of ongoing recording. So far, Facebook has failed to provide conclusive evidence the glasses are capable of doing this, the DPC noted.
With the glasses, there is a very small indicator light that comes on when recording is occurring. It has not been demonstrated to the DPC and Garante that comprehensive testing in the field was done by Facebook or Ray-Ban to ensure the indicator LED light is an effective means of giving notice.

Unlike Google's ill-fated take on the smart glasses concept, the Facebook version doesn't appear to have any distinctive features, looking pretty much like regular Ray-Bans. The wearable tech, however, comes with two frontal cameras, two speakers and three microphones to film and record the surroundings, as well as boasting a battery life of some six hours.

"Accordingly, the DPC and Garante are now calling on Facebook Ireland to confirm and demonstrate that the LED indicator light is effective for its purpose, and to run an information campaign to alert the public as to how this new consumer product may give rise to less obvious recording of their images," the DPC concluded.
Also on rt.com LifeLog 2.0.? Facebook summons the ghost of Google Glass with Ray-Ban ‘smart glasses’ capable of stealthily recording uninitiated

https://www.rt.com/news/535158-irish-da ... k-glasses/

~~~
RT

How Amazon, Facebook, Google and Microsoft wage a domestic War on Terror, and make billions

16 Sep, 2021
By Kit Klarenberg,
an investigative journalist exploring the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions.
https://twitter.com/KitKlarenberg


A new report has laid bare the relationship between Silicon Valley and the American state, and the trillions of dollars they have made since 9/11.

The War on Terror was a veritable feeding frenzy for defense contractors, with the sector profiting to the collective tune of trillions. However, it wasn’t the only industry cashing in – as a new report produced by three US campaign groups reveals, “household names in tech like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft have respectively reaped billions from selling tech to the war machine.”

In all, 86% of government contracts awarded to Amazon and 77% to Google to date are said to have been related to the War on Terror. That income played a pivotal role in transforming these organizations from small start-ups, literally operating from basements, into global behemoths. What’s more, the crosshairs of this effort have now been turned inward, with everything from databases to drones repurposed for domestic use.

Of the five federal agencies that have spent most on the services of major tech companies over the past two decades, four were central to, or established as a result of, the War on Terror – the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Justice and State. Since 2004, at least $44.5 billion has flowed from this quartet to Big Tech.

The report calculates that sum could’ve provided food and nutrition aid to the entire population of Afghanistan 15 times over, ensured access to shelter, healthcare, food, and water to the entire population of Iraq 26 times over, or distributed over 108 billion pounds of food in Yemen. Instead, it funded endeavors such as Google’s Maven program, which used artificial intelligence to make drone strikes deadlier. Data analyzed only covers publicly available information too, so cited figures are “very likely an underrepresentation.”

continues... https://www.rt.com/op-ed/534939-big-tech-911-profit/
conniption
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby Luther Blissett » Mon Oct 04, 2021 1:05 pm

Love that the entirety of Facebook — Instagram, WhatsApp, Oculus, etc — are down from a DNS issue across North America and parts of Europe experiencing mobile carrier issues (particularly UK and Italy) mere hours after Frances Haugen took to 60 minutes to publicly blow the whistle on Facebook’s engineered divisiveness for profit.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4990
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby Harvey » Mon Oct 04, 2021 1:27 pm

Luther Blissett » Mon Oct 04, 2021 6:05 pm wrote:Love that the entirety of Facebook — Instagram, WhatsApp, Oculus, etc — are down from a DNS issue across North America and parts of Europe experiencing mobile carrier issues (particularly UK and Italy) mere hours after Frances Haugen took to 60 minutes to publicly blow the whistle on Facebook’s engineered divisiveness for profit.


She appears to be arguing that Facebook doesn't censor enough. Hot take: Globocap houseplant.
And while we spoke of many things, fools and kings
This he said to me
"The greatest thing
You'll ever learn
Is just to love
And be loved
In return"


Eden Ahbez
User avatar
Harvey
 
Posts: 4165
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (20)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby norton ash » Mon Oct 04, 2021 1:27 pm

Part of today's creepiness... Ambassador Bridge closed due to bomb threat, and container port at LA/Long Beach way backed up, among others ... and an oil spill in the midst of it at Huntington Beach... I'm bracing for something big, by intuition... manufacturing supply chain and communication problems for N. America maybe. Strange day so far.
Zen horse
User avatar
norton ash
 
Posts: 4067
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby DrEvil » Mon Oct 04, 2021 2:57 pm

Harvey » Mon Oct 04, 2021 7:27 pm wrote:
Luther Blissett » Mon Oct 04, 2021 6:05 pm wrote:Love that the entirety of Facebook — Instagram, WhatsApp, Oculus, etc — are down from a DNS issue across North America and parts of Europe experiencing mobile carrier issues (particularly UK and Italy) mere hours after Frances Haugen took to 60 minutes to publicly blow the whistle on Facebook’s engineered divisiveness for profit.


She appears to be arguing that Facebook doesn't censor enough. Hot take: Globocap houseplant.


Haven't seen the interview, but I think the main concern is that Facebook always goes for the content that pisses you off the most, because that makes you stick around so they can sell more ads. That's really all it boils down to: if it lets them sell more ads they will do it. If it impacts their ad sales they will stop doing it. They're not a social media company, they're an advertising company, same as Google.

Here's their revenue by business segment for the second quarter this year:
Advertising: 28,5 billion dollars
Everything else: 0,5 billion dollars

Their business model is inherently broken. Not for them, but for everyone else. The whole company should be burned to the ground.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3972
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby Harvey » Mon Oct 04, 2021 5:18 pm

Dr Evil, this may come as a shock and a huge surprise to you but I simply don't believe your analysis.

Edited to add: Of course there's an element of truth in your argument. There's nothing wrong with facebook that launching Zuckerberg on a one way rocket to the asteroid belt then burning down all it's servers and salting the earth underneath them wouldn't fix. Yes, Facebook is exactly what you described, but this is an argument for more censorship, which I can safely presume you're down with.
Last edited by Harvey on Mon Oct 04, 2021 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
And while we spoke of many things, fools and kings
This he said to me
"The greatest thing
You'll ever learn
Is just to love
And be loved
In return"


Eden Ahbez
User avatar
Harvey
 
Posts: 4165
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (20)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby Luther Blissett » Mon Oct 04, 2021 5:22 pm

I think my favorite take is that this is punishment for listening to the mean whistleblower.

Any chance it’s a mad dash cleanup op before data can be subpoenaed?
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4990
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby Harvey » Mon Oct 04, 2021 6:47 pm

Luther Blissett » Mon Oct 04, 2021 10:22 pm wrote:I think my favorite take is that this is punishment for listening to the mean whistleblower.

Any chance it’s a mad dash cleanup op before data can be subpoenaed?


I think you have it exactly right. The mean whistleblower is amplified, garnering credibility, setting the agenda and yes, creating clicks. The good whistleblowers are in jail or dead or censored. Which one is system friendly?
And while we spoke of many things, fools and kings
This he said to me
"The greatest thing
You'll ever learn
Is just to love
And be loved
In return"


Eden Ahbez
User avatar
Harvey
 
Posts: 4165
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 4:49 am
Blog: View Blog (20)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby DrEvil » Mon Oct 04, 2021 7:04 pm

Harvey » Mon Oct 04, 2021 11:18 pm wrote:Dr Evil, this may come as a shock and a huge surprise to you but I simply don't believe your analysis.

Edited to add: Of course there's an element of truth in your argument. There's nothing wrong with facebook that launching Zuckerberg on a one way rocket to the asteroid belt then burning down all it's servers and salting the earth underneath them wouldn't fix. Yes, Facebook is exactly what you described, but this is an argument for more censorship, which I can safely presume you're down with.


I honestly don't care what Facebook censors or not (actually, that's a lie - I want them to censor everything except birthday notifications and pictures of your dog), the same way I don't care what the NYT or WaPo or MSNBC or FOX let through their gates. It's all the same shit. Facebook is just the latest tool for delivering empire talking points to the masses (whether Zuckerberg likes it or not. It's too big not to be co-opted). Used to be TV and newspapers, now it's Youtube and Facebook. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

As an added bonus, the more people are disgusted with Facebook, the greater the odds that they leave, and that people set up alternatives, like the various video hosting sites that started popping up when Youtube got heavy-handed.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3972
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby conniption » Mon Oct 04, 2021 7:28 pm

RT

Back from the dead: Facebook & Instagram online again for some users after massive 6-hour outage

4 Oct, 2021

After paralyzing the work and social life of those dependent on their services for nearly six hours, Facebook and Instagram have started to come back to life. The outage resulted in Facebook's biggest drop in shares this year.

Facebook’s Chief Technology Officer Mike Schroepfer tweeted around 6:45 pm ET that company’s services were “coming back online,” noting that it may take time to get them in a fully functioning mode.

“To every small and large business, family, and individual who depends on us, I'm sorry,” he tweeted apologetically.

Instagram also resorted to Twitter - one of the few social media seemingly left unscathed by the disruptions - to announce its return.

“Instagram is slowly but surely coming back now – thanks for dealing with us and sorry for the wait!” Instagram’s PR team tweeted.

As the services were experiencing the outage, Facebook’s shares plunged, shedding nearly 5 percent in one day in what has become the company’s worst drop this year. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg is estimated to have lost his fifth position on Forbes’ list of the world’s top billionaires as a result, that is in addition to billions of dollars.

The co-owned platforms, along with a series of other sites and apps, encountered major outages on Monday, with some down for hours on end. Facebook’s app wouldn’t load at all for many mobile users, while those on desktop received error messages. Instagram users were given similar prompts, with the glitches continuing on both for going on six hours straight.

Also on rt.com Zuckerberg loses OVER $6 BILLION as Facebook-empire outage drags into HOURS

Facebook’s support team earlier acknowledged it was “aware that some people are having trouble accessing our apps and products,” saying it would work to resolve the issues “as quickly as possible."

Also on rt.com Golden age or collapse? Snowden teases future without Big Tech after trolling Facebook throughout disastrous six-hour-long outage

Companies and telecom services including Spectrum, T-Mobile, Verizon, AT&T, Xfinity and even Google itself experienced widespread outages on Monday, as reported on outage tracker DownDetector.

https://www.rt.com/usa/536584-facebook- ... ne-outage/
conniption
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby drstrangelove » Wed Oct 06, 2021 6:09 am

I assume the hedge/mutual funds will buyout all the current web hosts and businesses that maintain server racks. Then they'll get the politicians to regulate a barrier to entry beyond that profitable to any new market entrants. Once that is done, the funds can roll out corporate governance policies that snuff out any sites that organically grow to threaten the ones they are currently in the process of co-opting, as Dr Evil pointed out.

This just happened to the web host I use for my site. Got bought out by another large web host conglomerate type corporation that I assume is public.

Regulating the operation of physical server racks will go hand in hand for the coming crackdown on cryptos. Plus who knows what's going on with CPU shortages.

So for the foreseeable future, they may be playing a game of whack a mole. But if all the big server rack corporations are controlled, then sites that pick up tractions won't be able to scale up beyond running rigs illegally their garages. They'll probably start treating entire websites like they do currently with Facebook and twitter posts.

The effect of this of course, will make communication online more decentralised. which is good. though you'll no longer be able to reach a larger audience with any of your naughty misinformation. but we'll hopefully be able to sustain small online communities like this one here.

I actually think Twitter and Facebook are the good guys at the moment. But only because of who they undermine.
User avatar
drstrangelove
 
Posts: 981
Joined: Sat May 22, 2021 10:43 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The creepiness that is Facebook

Postby conniption » Wed Oct 06, 2021 8:10 pm

Off-Guardian

The real story behind Facebook’s terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week
The social media giant is in the crosshairs, and that might be bad news for the internet in general.

Kit Knightly
Oct 6, 2021

Facebook suffered a massive outage on Monday. At the same time a high profile “whistleblower” has come forward to dish the FB dirt. These two things have combined to create a perfect storm of narrative portraying Mark Zuckerberg’s company as a monster in desperate need of slaying by some deft government intervention.

But to what extent is that story contrived? Is Facebook willingly going along with it? And what does it mean for the rest of the internet?

What happened?

For several hours on Monday afternoon Facebook – and its subsidiaries Instagram and Whatsapp – were completely offline. Rumours circulated that large portions of the social media giant had been totally deleted. Others suggested it was a cyber attack.

Facebook itself insists there was no attack, and that it was purely an engineering error, but of course no tech company would ever admit to being vulnerable to a hack.

There’s always the possibility the whole event was staged of course. Either way, the timing is very suspicious.

Why do you say that?

For weeks an anonymous “whistleblower” has been “leaking” documents to the Wall Street Journal allegedly showing Facebook is utilising highly unethical business practices.

The leaker of the so-called “Facebook Files” finally revealed her true identity as Frances Haugen, a data scientist, in an interview with 60 Minutes this past Sunday.

The massive Facebook outage then happened on Monday, with Ms Haugen’s scheduled testimony in front of Congress happening the following morning on Tuesday.

If it is all a coincidence, then Facebook has had a very unfortunate week.

So what did the “whistleblower” say?

What didn’t she say? In her hours of testimony on Tuesday, she tore the company apart. Alleging everything from being a danger to children’s mental health to outright breaking the law.

In her 60 Minutes interview, she told the reporter “again and again Facebook has chosen profits over safety”.

Drug cartels, hate speech, genocide, anorexia…Haugen laid the blame for all of that and more at Facebook’s feet.

Facebook is a monster…so isn’t this a good thing?

No, not at all.

For one thing, we should always be sceptical in the face of any narrative so meticulously planned and rolled out.

An ‘anonymous whistleblower’ coming forward with a team of lawyers, and coordinated interviews on primetime TV just before her testimony to congress looks a lot too much like a glitzy PR campaign or a promo for a new movie.

For another, consider what Facebook is actually being accused of. It’s not mass surveillance, censorship or abuse of its monopoly that’s making the headlines, but rather being too lax in what it allows people to say and see.

Facebook “enables hate speech”, “can’t effectively police vaccine misinformation” and is “damaging democracy”.

These are all mainstream talking points designed to stifle debate and control the conversation.

Yes, many people hate Facebook (with good reason), but that hatred is now being deliberately cultivated so that people will cheer on its break up or regulation, without realising that other, smaller companies would be hit much harder by any new “standard rules for the internet”.

Like so many other testimonies before congress in the past, the entire event looks fake and probably is. A stage-managed exercise involving some “expert witness” telling a bunch of politicians exactly what they want to hear, so they can go ahead push the legislation they were going to push anyway.

It’s all leading up to loud bipartisan calls for “regulation”, and that’s not a good thing.

Why not?

Let me answer that question with a couple of my own. Do think the political conversation on Facebook is too controlled? And do you think that will get better if it becomes subject to governmental oversight?

Of course not, “regulating” facebook will take what small amount of freedom still remains on the platform, and crush it entirely. And it won’t just be about Facebook, it’s not even really about Facebook now, it’s just that they’re being used as a stalking horse to come after the smaller, less controlled platforms.

There’s a good chance Facebook is actively playing heel here, and are willingly going along with this narrative. Just check what their spokesperson Lena Pietsch said on Tuesday [our emphasis]:

Today, a Senate Commerce subcommittee held a hearing with a former product manager at Facebook who worked for the company for less than two years, had no direct reports, never attended a decision-point meeting with C-level executives — and testified more than six times to not working on the subject matter in question. We don’t agree with her characterization of the many issues she testified about.Despite all this, we agree on one thing; it’s time to begin to create standard rules for the internet. It’s been 25 years since the rules for the internet have been updated, and instead of expecting the industry to make societal decisions that belong to legislators, it is time for Congress to act.


Despite discrediting and disagreeing with absolutely everything the “whistleblower” said, they still concede Congress needs “to act” and produce “standard rules for the internet”. Why would they do that?

Facebook is clearly falling in line to bring in stricter regulation of the web.

OK, so what will this new “regulation” look like?

Well, that’s a harder question to answer. Having just been presented with the problem, the media are still very much in the reaction phase of the narrative (see this whiny specimen in the Guardian) – “solutions” are being talked about but only in very vague terms.

An article on MSNBC headlines “Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp are back up. But their outage is an opportunity.“ and echoes Ms Pietsch almost word for word: Regulators should do better, but Congress should also act. It ends with a link to an article from this May in Politico calling for a “public internet”.

A “public internet” means, essentially, breaking down the big tech firms and publicly funding “community guided” platforms that focus on more local concerns.

Or, more cynically, compartmentalizing the internet to limit the field of potential communication.

The supposed aim of a “public internet” would be to “bring us back together” and remove “hate”, but that will mean stopping people from disagreeing with the consensus.

The “public internet” might be the long-term goal, but it’s still only a foetus of an idea.

For the more immediate “regulation” ideas, we can turn back to Ms Haugen, who after so keenly defining the problem, enthusiastically recommended a list of solutions.

These include, but are not limited to, a new “independent” overseer for Facebook (perhaps a new government agency), and the “reform” of Article 230.

Article 230 is the law that says social media platforms have no liability for the content their users create, “reforming it” could open up social media companies to a lot of lawsuits.

Interestingly, some policy organizations have argued that “stripping this law away could entrench reigning tech giants because it would make it harder for smaller social media platforms with fewer content moderation resources to operate without facing costly lawsuits.”

So at least one of Ms Haugen’s proposed solutions would potentially benefit Facebook, whilst almost certainly crippling their smaller competitors.

Funny that.

Conclusion

Since its inception the internet has been a digital wild west and, despite numerous attempts to seize control of it, it remains a place of relative freedom.

Facebook, Google, Amazon and their ilk are corporate monsters, no question, but we still need to be careful when applauding calls for their regulation or break up. Especially if the companies themselves seem to actively cooperate.

Much of the time any mooted “regulation” is not aimed at the corporate giants, who have the connections and resources to survive it, but their smaller competitors. In that way it both secures the monopoly of a handful of gigantic businesses, and further centralises the power of the state.

Remember that corporate giants and the Deep State are not in opposition to one another, they work together in mutual self-interest.

Facebook might be notionally in the media crosshairs, but that is a pantomime. The real targets are alternate platforms like Telegram, Gab and Parler, or as yet unborn independent outlets.

More broadly, it’s part of an ongoing campaign against the ability of millions of people to freely communicate with each other, because that is a genuine threat to both the power of the state the and greed of corporate monoliths.

So, when big government and big tech fight, refuse to pick a side and don’t believe a word of it.

They like each other really, but they hate you.
_______

comments


~~~

RT

Bringing Facebook to heel: A system-connected ‘whistleblower’ and a ‘for the children’ narrative mask a bid for political control

Nebojsa Malic
is a Serbian-American journalist, blogger and translator, who wrote a regular column for Antiwar.com from 2000 to 2015, and is now senior writer at RT. Follow him on Telegram @TheNebulator and on Twitter @NebojsaMalic
5 Oct, 2021

Politicians always couch power grabs in talk of safety or protecting children. If something looks too good to be true, that’s because it is. Both of those truisms apply to the case of Facebook ‘whistleblower’ Frances Haugen.

Haugen came seemingly out of nowhere to testify before the Senate on Tuesday, yet she revealed nothing besides well-rehearsed bromides about the Menlo Park behemoth putting “profits over people” and somehow endangering Our Democracy by refusing to police misinformation, or something. Stunning and brave!

She also landed a ‘60 Minutes’ interview over the weekend, got instantly verified on Twitter, and received praise from the extremely online Democrats (aka the ‘Resistance’ during the Trump era) for her stunning bravery. Her advice to the Senate wasn’t to break up Facebook, either, but to turn it into an arm of the government – for the “common good,” of course, and to protect the children.

The fervor with which the corporate media machine and Washington politicians embraced Haugen ought to give everyone pause – yet most people recoil at the thought, because that would mean defending Mark Zuckerberg’s monstrosity and the rest of Silicon Valley’s magnates... continues... https://www.rt.com/op-ed/536688-faceboo ... e-control/
conniption
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:01 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests