I find it disappointing that many of the questions and Mr. Zuckerberg's answers regarding content shared on Facebook focus on pictures and textual messages. Very little discussion of gathering and use of PII such as name, gender, sexual orientation, location, likes, interests and social relationships. I believe these are the most valuable pieces of information to advertisers and data miners.
Just a semantic nit pick on PII (personally identifiable information)...
Name is PII, location at a high enough resolution is PII. The rest are metadata about an individual but not PII. Knowing someone is a straight male doesn't tell you enough to identify a person.
This is relevant because GDPR (and other things) special case PII.
Also absent from the discourse is how much Facebook uses inferences from behavioral data in building user profiles.
For example, let's say that I have not told Facebook my sexual orientation. Do they attempt to infer that missing information from what content I view, for how long and how frequently? Is such data shared with 3rd parties? Is it used in ad targeting?
I'm probably in the extreme minority but I don't see anything wrong with them selling data that people voluntarily give them (no one is forced to use FB -- I assume they'll be monetizing 100% of the information I give them), but I would see an ethical issue with selling access to individuals based on inferred data; to the person buying it that is. If I want to advertise to 25 year old straight females, I'd want that profile to be built on data that was actually given to FB and not on "we kinda think this person matches that profile but we're going to tell you you're 100% reaching this demographic".
I don't know enough about FB's ad model to know whether they're doing this type of false advertising of their own product though.
Zuckerberg: “...but it’s the only way we can reach BILLIONS of people!”
This super creepy line tells you all you need to know. Facebook is insane. Their leader has lost touch with reality and the physical world. Karen Horney, a psychoanalyst from the 1950’s, said that the final stage of psychosis is when someone believes themself to be a god. I don’t think Mark Zuckerberg is suffering psychosis, but what kind of person thinks, like some Egyptian Pharoh, it’s their right to reach all the masses of the Earth?
I can't believe a senator asked "How does Facebook make money." I thought it was a rhetorical question at first but the senator was like "Oh!" when Zuck said "Ads."
We've had a US Representative that worried about the island of Guam tipping over because the Navy added personnel to the island, so I'm not often surprised.
This actually points to a real failure of lobbying by the tech industry. Part of lobbying is to inform the lobbying target and make them look reasonable knowledgeable on camera. Ignorance is your problem, stupidity can be masked a bit.
The later questions have a chance of being better. These things usually go in order of seniority so the dusty old congresspeople who have barely used anything on the internet get to go first. That front loads the testimony with the 'so what is this Facebook' questions.
Congress is too old and clueless to ask smart questions. Zuck's acting all Lore from Star Trek. FB stock is up just because people keep thinking they'll beat this shit, which they won't.
They absolutely will beat it. Facebook isn't done until there is a direct competitor, not "an alternative". Plus, they own Instagram and Whatsapp which are becoming increasingly valuable properties.
Just wait till earnings. They are going to beat, and anyone not onboard is going to feel the full power of FOMO.
Eh, they're just like any other non-techie. It's us in the minority, not the other way around. Elected officials are usually experts in law, or at least psychology ;-)
This is blown out of proportion. The reason why people are leaving Facebook is not political at all. It also has nothing to do with decentralization, by the way.
Yes, people are leaving because of privacy, but not from advertisers but from their parents! People are still using whatsapp, because it's easy and crystal clear that when you send a message to a whatsapp group, only the people in the group will see it. And it's not that people can't do that in Facebook, it's just that perhaps the interface is not adequate for that.
What was meant is that you can access most of Youtube's content without having to log in, whereas of Facebook which requires you to be authenticated most of the time to access content.
For a lot of industries there is actual knowledge or a subject expert on the staff. That is why a lot of folks actually have phone numbers for certain staff of a Senator / Rep.
You mean whining by ted cruz. That was literally all he ever did. Also didn't he force a bunch of college students to attend his doomed presidential campaign announcement and ask for their cell numbers?
The dude is responsible for ruining the entire country and old people are still joking and wonder in awe on his intelligence. Maybe because he might give them donations in the future?
Let's assume that Facebook helped get Donald Trump elected. (Whether this is true or not, we'll find out). Are you saying Trump is ruining the country?
Then why does Facebook take the entire responsibility for "ruining" the country? What about Donald Trump himself and Trump supporters in the U.S?
I feel like Donald Trump's persona and his supporters having an influence in the country is way more complex issue than Facebook ad campaigns.
> Then why does Facebook take the entire responsibility for "ruining" the country?
Arguably, because moral responsibility does not have to add up to 100%; an actor which decided to pursue an activity whose harms to others are reasonably foreseeable can bear full moral responsibility for those harms without in any way diminishing the responsibility of other actors who also participated in the same activity and for whom the results were also reasonably foreseeable. (This is similar to the legal concept of joint and several liability.)
Yes Trump is ruining the country and its institutions. I think there should be some decent people from the country in the right wing without fraud or sexual abuse accusations. Having different beliefs is not the problem. This guy is straight up criminal. He's gonna go to jail for collusion probably. His decisions affect the entire world not just the USA.
The issue is not the ad campaigns alone. The main thing is the bubble people are put into. Hate driven silos of people!