volak

It's not facebook's fault people are uninterested and uneducated. Every company has one responsibility and one responsibility only - to make money for investors.

People who use facebook make a choice, consciously or not. They are all making a choice to sell their data in exchange for the platform.

Its not a hard sell - people sell a lot more for a lot less all the time.

Keep in mind this is not new. Companies like Sears, Walmart, Honeywell have customer data dating back 60 years. I've seen some of it. They never delete any of it - every credit card swipe, every zip code you've lived at, every product you've bought or returned.

This is the future. If you care about the uneducated or uninterested public then join a group educating people about the value of their data and what big business does with it.

Government will never be able to fix this.

My only point is - your entire statement is basically "trust facebook" - no one should trust facebook. Personal information is the product facebook sells - it should surprise no one when that data is sold.

What's so bizarre to me about this whole ongoing story is the complete lack of perspective and common sense.

You give facebook all your information willingly and for free - and then people are surprised when facebook sells the information? Facebook's business is not to protect your information.. its to sell your information to advertisers. You're paying to use their platform to connect with your "friends" by giving up your rights to whatever they can scrape off your phone.

This is not a surprise.

Mr. Zuckerberg will appear before the panel and promise data-security changes but at the end of the day facebook is still a business for advertisers wanting your shopping lists, contacts, interests, and personal profile to sell you stuff. The only thing that will change will be facebook's vetting process so only "friendly" corporations like walmart and BP have access to everything Cambridge Analytica had.

be on gmail -> click google images picture -> click caption link to small video -> click another youtube video -> ERROR

4 links away from gmail - not allowed. Pretty simple

Without NN there would be a ton more providers to choose from because we'd be able to compete on more than price.

Comcast's of the world can oversell their lines by 4x what we can because they can simply get the word out to low-traffic users better than we can. Thats 4x the revenue smaller ISPs just don't get directly because of NN.

You may or may not be surprised that many tools needed to provide an "email only" service already exist and are quite easy to implement.

Something as easy as allowing email + 3-4 links past email would solve virtually all problems and support calls and a bit of usage monitoring would eliminate the fraud

To eliminate support calls I would simply design a system where any place they went FROM their email would work - maybe up to 3 or 4 links past email.

And of course monitor account usage and call up tech-savvy granddads who email themselves youtube videos to get around the block.

There is an entire undeserved niche from the dialup crowd who are extremely unhappy paying more than $10 a month - so yes it could be well worth the investment.

As for caps - which do you think would sell people better: "You have full access to anything on your email" vs "You can download 500 mb of data a month"

And what will happen to their service when the grand kids come over and want to watch netflix?

Because they want all their grandchildren's pictures too.

Telling a customer they have full access to anything on their email vs telling a customer they have 500mb a month. Which do you think sells better?

I work for a growing medium sized ISP - and I'm against net neutrality. I could write an entire essay about the unintended consequences, hypocrisy, ridiculous internet memes, and monopolies but I'll only leave one point that hopefully strikes a chord in those who only see one side.

As a smaller ISP we are constantly asked for cheaper plans for - typically - older people who "just want to check their email." Thanks to net neutrality we cannot offer these people anything.

We are forced to compete DIRECTLY against the comcast's and AT&T's in our region. A competition where our only weapon is cost. And if we lower our costs we only get a bunch of power users who consume 10x more bandwidth than typical users - the big business marketing departments eat our budgets for breakfast.

Without net neutrality the first thing we'd do is setup a "email only" plan - charge $5 a month and literally knock on doors in retirement homes and sign up swaths of people. We could probably oversell the single line by an order of magnitude more than usual.

Net neutrality directly prevents any sort of choice for the consumer as to what level of internet access they want or need. And yes that might sound scary - but the VAST majority of people in certain age groups just simply dont WANT to pay $80 a month to check their email.

I'm surprised its only 71%

No what would appease practically everyone would be if r/all - the "frontpage of the internet" - had clearly defined rules as to what that means. Is it a collection of top up-voted content from a collection of subreddits? Apparently not due to this and other "algorithm changes."

Take twitter shadow banning people as its an easier example.

The rules of twitter are simple - someone tweets and it gets put at the top of a follower's feed. This is accepted as "the truth of twitter." When this truth is altered and all of a sudden some individual's tweets are NOT showing up in follower's feed people should be rightly pissed. No matter who the target is - because the accepted rules of the platform have been twisted to push an agenda. It is no different than propaganda and an insult to free expression.

> If you turn your head one way it's fair

Anyone can certainly justify anything if they are willing to turn their head with the breeze. I would point out the blatant mod and brigading bias in r/politics as an example of something you as a presumed liberal should be equally mad about. The content there is laughable and part of the reason why people even subscribe to the TD to get what little news is there.

Reddit has a problem - and its been written about before. Mods are dictators of their own communities and have complete control to push their own agendas within places that should be neutral. I don't see much of a future for the platform if this is not solved.

Trouble is that too is your opinion. As a frequent of r/all after the first TD purge I see 2-3 TD links there a day. Nothing so outrageous.

It kind of bothers me that people let companies like facebook, twitter, google, reddit, etc push their agendas and bury conservative news. Recent data suggests facebook "fake news" alone could have swung the election. Social media being the primary source of news these days.

I'm all for these platforms having the right the police their own site - but they have to be open and honest about it. Otherwise you end up with conspiracy theories going viral making one side super pissed and willing to elect Donald Trump over the beneficiary of what they perceive massive conspiracy to silence people.

Well I could write a r/hillaryclinton upvote script and post on gists in a few minutes - doesn't really prove anything. The only people who could have real evidence of rule breaking would be the admins and from the little we know we know the admins hate TD - if they are being botted they'd be gone already

The bandaid was to allow people to filter subs themselves (which is great). Writing code to target a specific community crosses the line

Fiber lines are someone else's platform. If Comcast was limiting access to huffingtonpost.com it would be their right as its their platform. I don't think I'm confusing anything.

I don't buy the argument that they are exploiting anything - but I do recognize that their community is very overly active but I wouldn't call that exploiting

As a liberal - its been my view to respect and fight for anyone's right to say whatever they want, regardless of my own views.

If there are bugs with the reddit platform that are being exploited, there would be no reason to "prevent stickied posts from showing on r/all"

I don't really want to comment - but I'd just say to anyone (including the writer of this article) to imagine someone artificially limiting the impact of your favorite platform of free expression. Hell just turn the mental corner and consider your arguments FOR net neutrality. Or try to recall your disappointment every time you read about some site being banned in China or Iran.

To China and Iran - facebook is a "disruptive community." To use reddit's language.

Its a sad moment in history that the people calling themselves liberals don't actually know what it means.

I love the game and have played it many times over the last 5 or so years... But does anyone else feel kind of betrayed/insulted that the project is not open source? The team is mostly just supporting 1 or 2 core devs who take years to release new features - and for a while now tools like dfhack are basically required to play the game.

The game has a huge community of fans but no one can contribute in any meaningful way. I dunno I find it mildly frustrating.