Facebook has not been doing enough to comply with a 2020 privacy order: FTC

If you love making an open source thing, and you love its users, at some level it doesn't really matter why Meta pays your paycheck. They're still paying your paycheck while you get to do something you love.

React

PyTorch

Flow

React Native

Folly

RocksDB

llama

HHVM

Relay

Fresco

zstd

Buck

Sapling

Redex

JSX

infer

Define the word "target".

I would argue that for the likes of Facebook and Google, they consider anyone fair game.

Of course they would never use the word "target", but ...

Maybe not in America, but WhatsApp is basically mandatory in some countries. Schools will send out communications exclusively over it and many businesses exclusively use it for payment. 92% of Israeli phones have it installed. For some, the option is Facebook or not participating in society.

A closed circuit camera system that exists for the purpose of helping to prevent or resolve any criminal issues and is otherwise not used for anything else is far different from tracking non-FB users (eg, "he isn't forcing you to use Facebook") and profiling them via trackers embedded on websites that you may use even without a FB account.

You do not expect a stranger to track everything possible about you and then go on to sell that data from a casual interaction.

You don't have to actually use Facebook in order to have your privacy violated by Facebook.

This came out years ago in Congressional hearings. It's also why lots of people who never had Facebook accounts got privacy-violation money from Facebook — it created profiles of people in the backgrounds of photos.

Unless you are constantly on guard and take defensive measures, Facebook spies on you even if you don't use it. So he is forcing you to contribute to Facebook.

Tell that to anyone who needs to use an Oculus device for work. Facebook required, friend!

1. Data Privacy - They will try to find every possible way to sell your data and not get noticed. An easy example of that is when fb started throwing fits when apple didnt let it track users activity across all apps by default. They tried to hide behind the fact that it would "severely" affect small businesses.

2. Depleting Mental Health - They will try to find every possible way to keep you engaged on the platform. That is often done by algorithmically promoting content that inspires extreme emotions in you. Emotions such as anger, jealousy, lust etc. Experiencing these emotions for an extended period of time EVERYDAY is not healthy for maintaining a good emotional balance.

3. Fake News - They will try to find every possible way to shrug off responsibility for spreading fake news. This affects politics by creating echo chambers, healthcare by preventing people from believing in the correct diagnostics and other areas.

I agree that nobody is stopping you from opening facebook, but facebook is like smoking. Everyone only wants to try it once, and then many fall into the downward spiral.

I was reading somewhere that how resisting facebook and all of facebook products everyday is not possible with the will power reserves that an average human has. This is because he is competing with psychologists and researchers employed by facebook who have been studying human behaviour for years.

I do not have any sources to back my claims. Social Media has personally affected me a lot so I keep reading about the phenomena out of curiosity. Here's one little article that breifly describes what I am talking about. https://medium.com/thrive-global/how-technology-hijacks-peop...

- Nobody is forcing me to use youtube, but youtube has years of collection of important tutorials and educational material.

- Nobody is forcing me to use facebook (and its products) but fb has gathered users over the years that forces me to use the product in order to remain a part of the social sphere. Kids feeling left out in high-school because of not using instagram is an example.

- Nobody is forcing me to use Netflix, but if I want to watch the trendy movie that my friends are talking about, I do not have a choice.

If you see the pattern, tech companies by the virtue of their money have created a social effect where they might not "force" me to use their product but I have to use it if I wish to remain a part of the society.

It is difficult to swim upstream and the companies by the virtue of their deep pockets have shifted the flow that helps them make the most money.

Parenting in general has entered the cat.

(That said, I do agree that we need boundaries on the manipulation of younger minds. I've seen others make this analogy before: We don't let kids buy cigarettes in stores -- why should they have the full force of addictive algorithmic social media unleashed on them? [for that matter, why should adults, but that's another story])

You knew exactly what they meant, why pretend otherwise?

Not sure what I feel about it.

Nintendo and Disney corporate mascots appear to be classic characters.

Apple makes products that make you look cool.

Bud Light is the beer of young, good looking people at parties and watching sports.

Ads aren't just selling you a product, they are brand marketing and brand positioning.

They're handing away their data or having their desires manipulated, and I don't think children can be reasonably asked to make a judgement on whether that's a good decision for them or not.

I do see the point that you're making about turning 18. Fortunately, I think that's somewhat of a self-limiting problem. If kids turning 18 genuinely can't withstand the ads, they'll start filing for bankruptcy and credit card companies will stop issuing them lines of credit.

Nor me. But in those days, they couldn't push cigarettes, booze and gambling at us.

The first (and only) Zelda game I played was Breath of the Wild, and it was indeed one of the best games I've ever played. Certainly Nintendo is guilty of peddling mascots as monetary vehicles, but there is substance in the occasional great video game they develop, so I wouldn't necessarily put them in the same category as Disney...

But Disney, on the other hand...they are a merchandise company -- full stop. Everything they do funnels directly into the licensing and selling merchandise (and not just to children -- those Loungefly backpacks are basically a contagion for adults). This made them $56.2 _billion_ in 2021.

If you have young kids, it's incredibly hard to avoid the gravity well of toys, apparel, and all the other merchandise that Disney vomits out. And the funnel is the entertainment they produce, which is often feel-goody to the point where you begin to pass them off in your head as benign.

I think they are exposed to far less ads than I was actually because TV ads are mostly gone. I never hear them asking for some random toy like the kind I remember from my youth.

If you want to prey on seniors, if you want to run an MLM or affiliate marketing ring, or if you want to organize an insurrection or promote a conspiracy or antivax group Facebook Groups is THE PLACE. By absolute volume it's way worse the Telegram groups. Old people can't figure out Telegram, but Facebook Groups is their jam.

If you really want to make "six figures online" while working "four hours a week" all you need is a scammer mentality and a few Facebook Groups. Message me for access when you're ready to level up your life.

I dont think removing social media is a solution. I do think some sort of realID for social media that could identify every user is real & a certain age would be beneficial (think Worldcoin but not done by a private entity). I think this alone would solve a large issue around social media. The other requirement that should exist is some balanced discussion to remove the echo chamber effects. Amplifying only certain thought patterns is dangerous.

Take reddit for example. A single bot farm with 100 or so accounts can effectively manipulate entire communities.

Yes. The only problem I have with the government going after TikTok is that they should be going after the entire industry.

You go after one company to establish legal precedent. Then you go after the whole industry.

There is just no big benefit to justify the amount of damage done to mental health and privacy.

IMO "bad for Facebook" ~= "good for society" has always been true.

It's not a "sad place to be as community", they are a corp and their bait-and-switch was expected ever since they got created, at least from the people who don't idolize corporations that is. It was extremely obvious they'll position themselves as helpful, pull tons of people in, and will then start to make use of all that precious data.

It would boggle my mind if somebody was actually surprised by this.

If there are already existing laws that cover this, the FTC is just doing their enforcement job.

* Not necessarily actions I would call “thumbscrews” like their current proposed penalties for Facebook, and mostly actions I think are appropriate, but it is still an indicator of who they’re willing to take action against.

Facebook violated the order by the FTC, and for the order to have any teeth to it, there must be some sort of enforcement action behind it, just like for bail. Right now it seems like FB is just getting told off by saying the FTC will 'propose' FB not to benefit from certain data collection. Ok, so nothing has been actually enforced for the violation.

And what about for the past violations? Will FB be forced to delete all their data they collected during the time they were under the FTC's order? The proposal (if even passed), will only limit future collections, not violations that have already happened and profited from.

> Now, the FTC has proposed changes to the 2020 order that would prohibit Facebook owner Meta from launching new products on any of its platforms without procuring written FTC compliance confirmation and prevent the company from monetizing any of the youth data it collects across Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Oculus.

Actually the most manipulative ads are “brand” ads for things like Coke or BMW. These have no significant difference to their competitors so their only strategy is to manipulate you into associating them with more positive emotions.

That’s just the first four I saw and I’d say that’s actually phenomenal targeting. It’s some very niche things that apply to me quite well.

I think parents have some responsibility to teach their children how to interact with the world. I’ve been teaching mine about the difference between ads and non-ad content. That will prepare them for life as adults. Childhood is actually a great time to learn about ads because your parents prevent you from wasting too much money on it.

Corporations can act through their agents. Corporations cannot feel their agents’ emotions because they are unable to feel.

Thank God for the Supreme Court which will see right through Lina Khan's agenda. And you can thank Lina Khan for destroying FTC through her overreach