Discussion in 'Site Security & Legal Issues' started by Alfa1, Apr 12, 2018.
Mark Zuckerberg pretty much said to Congress that a paid model would have no data shared.
Absolutely agree. Very sadly and begrudgingly so...
Cheers to world minus pointed animus, malicious intent and outright hateful audacity
Why wouldn't such a large entity as Facebook consider a paid model?
I bet each and everyone of us who have owned and operated forums and websites WISH ours were as successful as these huge social media conglomerates... We wish ours were as successful enough to consider paid model. #JealousyMuch?
To outright say, "you will have to pay to use FB as that will become an avenue of revenue recuperation" as Maddox did is an exercise in making innuendo, insinuation and a 'maybe we've considered it' as truth. At this point - it simply is not. It IS fake news.
And ugh... I hope this comment doesn't come back to bite me in the ass.
You guys please stop trying to conjure up the worse. ARG!!!!
PoetJC well the man said it himself. Whether it comes about or not is something for him and his cohorts to decide, so you can't call it FAKE NEWS when he actually said it. It can only be considered FAKE NEWS if he didn't say it, or said something to the contrary - such as, 'we will NEVER charge to use FB'. But he did say a paid option was considered. Which, from the mouth of a businessman, means' yeah it's on the table, cut off my revenue from scraping data that advertisers can use and you're going to have to pay to use my platform.'
What's FAKE about that? He said it, it's in the video! No innuendo no insinuation, he SAID IT! Didn't you follow the link and watch the video? He SAID IT! Otherwise I wouldn't have repeated it here lol.
What's fake about it is that we have no idea if this is the viable plan for the future of Facebook or whether it's something that was on the drawing board before even the inception of TheFacebook (as an embryonic thought) or whether it was something that was dreamed up in a boardroom yesterday .... What's fake about it is that we are trying to have folks stirred up to a tizzy about a RUMOR. Not even a rumor really (as per the video) - but the answer of a hypothetical .... the sawed-off/hacked-up question from some senator who obviously has no idea how Facebook even works... The clip posted speaks for itself. And as far as I know - a hypothetical is not a truth. In fact - a hypothetical is NOT the truth. And the amount of scare-mongering is ..... warranted at worse, premature at best and fake news otherwise. The premature and worse as concerns Facebook's future has not been birthed yet.
What is it with you and the word 'FAKE'; the man said it - what's FAKE about that? Just because nothing 'official' has been announced doesn't make it FAKE! And the only person getting in a tizzy is YOU! It's not here yet, but the implication of what he said to Congress is that there will be a paid for version of FB if the scraping of data is removed; what do you think Zuckerberg made his billions from? If his means of making money are removed then he will have two choices - charge for using FB or bin it. He did say that there would 'always' be a free version of FB but your Privacy controls would have to be severely limited in order for him to gain revenue. Anything with the word 'FREE' applied will almost always have a catch to it.
Chill out or you'll bust a blood vessel over nothing lol.
FACEBOOK CHARGING A FEE
As of April 16, 2018 that is simply untrue! It is FAKE news. It is innuendo. It is a whole lot of things. It is not the truth.
People have been talking about FB charging a fee for the 10 years I've been a member of it. If it's not true - wth is it then? Rumor? Okie dokie then. Well... Fake news might be a synonym of rumor. Eh... IDK.... Who cares. All I know is that - if there is a fee inevitably assessed - then it's likely that the stock market will have a great day bouncing back from some ridiculous presidential tweet of some sort when FB introduces it's $7.50/mo add-free premium service ala Netflix. LOL ... IDK
No popping of blood vessels though
Whatever! - you have the argument all to yourself. I'll comment no more your retorts.
If you ask me, the real fake news is the entire congressional hearing. It's nothing more than a dog and pony show. If you think those senators are just a group of "old farts who don't understand Facebook or social media" you are being naive. They know exactly what FB is and how it works (far better than most FB users) because every political party (not just in the US) has taken full advantage of both the data FB gathers and the access to it's userbase for targeted ads. They were quite happy to let that continue, until recent events started people asking too many questions. Now they have to to put on this show, pretending to "uncover" all the evil that Facebook does. There are politicians, after all, and to borrow from Mel Brooks they "have to protect their phoney-baloney jobs". Zuckerberg is the scapegoat -- a complicit one, but still a scapegoat.
I wouldn't feel too sorry for Zuckerberg though. He'll do just fine. Clearly, Facebook is well into planning for a new business model for the post privacy laws world. I suspect that his statement about there "always being a free version" was carefully crafted to gauge public reaction to the idea. I'll bet soon people will have the choice of explicitly consenting to letting FB track them and use their data, while they continue to use the platform for free, or they can pay a subscription fee that comes with a crossed-fingers promise that their privacy will be preserved. I wouldn't be surprised if FB does better under a new, ostensibly more open model.
Apparently Facebook (like Google and other companies) also buys data from third parties like credit card companies. This allows them to track your purchases and buying behavior. As well as your susceptibility to and conversion rate when serving you certain types of advertising.
I assume this is just one more layer of the onion considering there are 5-6k data points.
We already knew about the fb pixel registering what people write in forms.Ultrasound messaging to register which ads you see/hear on TV/Radio or who you meet was already known to me as well.
And like from stores like Target. One of my relatives got shocked when she saw her meds listed on her wall and she only gave minimal info into FB. She found out many stores are sharing info with FB, Google and others. That is just creepy. She did delete her account after that.
And on the phone, one need to turn off FB's access to the mic. I DJ part time and someone was showing me how FB was identifying songs and when it couldn't recognise it, he came up to the table and asked "What tune you playing? My FB app couldn't tell me....."
And FB is drawing people from mboards. It's bad when on another mboard I'm on that people are pushing the admin to move it to FB.