11-04-2018, 04:48 PM
Having watched for over three hours, I have several observations on the Zuckerberg testimony:
1) When you think about it, the people whose data was used by Cambridge Analytica aren't the ones who are complaining. This Cambridge Analytica flap is only a battle between one group of dirt-bags against another group of dirt-bags and they are both fighting over the dog bone of OUR DATA. Its not a privacy issue. It is a battle of abuser vs abuser.
2) The idea was tossed up at the hearings that maybe Facebook should be required to make sure PUTIN IS NOT PUTTING OUT FAKE NEWS INSIDE RUSSIA ITSELF. This is how wierd this can get.
3) Facial recognition software is apparently considered a terribly dangerous item. Why? I don't get it.
4) You will never be able to keep Russians from indirectly buying ads to influence our elections through American sources. (Russia has hardly been mentioned in these hearings at all).
5) The default should always be for more information available rather than less information available.
6) The biggest question mark is: why is "fake news" a problem? I think I can recognize fake news when I see it. Why do I need a third party to identify and protect me from "fake news"? The "fake news" issue has been around at least since Gutenberg invented the printing press. Today, it's a thinly disguised attempt at censorship.
7) The code-word "data scraping" is a biased epithet like "dreamers" or "rust belt." If I want to buy an add that is targeted to Bernie Sanders fans, why shouldn't I be able to do it? Why is that a bad thing? It's the politicians who don't want anybody to reach into their weak spots politically. This whole "data scraping" concept is nothing but selfish self-protection for politicians and nothing more, in my judgement.
8) The predominant model for reference to me is the old Bell Telephone model. No one ever expected the telephone company to police obscene phone calls or harassing phone calls. The phone company was never responsible for what people said over the phone lines. So why should Facebook be asked to be accountable for what people pass over and through their network? What's the difference between Facebook and Bell Telephone?
James Lateer
1) When you think about it, the people whose data was used by Cambridge Analytica aren't the ones who are complaining. This Cambridge Analytica flap is only a battle between one group of dirt-bags against another group of dirt-bags and they are both fighting over the dog bone of OUR DATA. Its not a privacy issue. It is a battle of abuser vs abuser.
2) The idea was tossed up at the hearings that maybe Facebook should be required to make sure PUTIN IS NOT PUTTING OUT FAKE NEWS INSIDE RUSSIA ITSELF. This is how wierd this can get.
3) Facial recognition software is apparently considered a terribly dangerous item. Why? I don't get it.
4) You will never be able to keep Russians from indirectly buying ads to influence our elections through American sources. (Russia has hardly been mentioned in these hearings at all).
5) The default should always be for more information available rather than less information available.
6) The biggest question mark is: why is "fake news" a problem? I think I can recognize fake news when I see it. Why do I need a third party to identify and protect me from "fake news"? The "fake news" issue has been around at least since Gutenberg invented the printing press. Today, it's a thinly disguised attempt at censorship.
7) The code-word "data scraping" is a biased epithet like "dreamers" or "rust belt." If I want to buy an add that is targeted to Bernie Sanders fans, why shouldn't I be able to do it? Why is that a bad thing? It's the politicians who don't want anybody to reach into their weak spots politically. This whole "data scraping" concept is nothing but selfish self-protection for politicians and nothing more, in my judgement.
8) The predominant model for reference to me is the old Bell Telephone model. No one ever expected the telephone company to police obscene phone calls or harassing phone calls. The phone company was never responsible for what people said over the phone lines. So why should Facebook be asked to be accountable for what people pass over and through their network? What's the difference between Facebook and Bell Telephone?
James Lateer