
Zuckerberg hits users with the hard truth: You agreed to this - popee
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/03/zuckerberg-hits-users-with-the-hard-truth-you-agreed-to-this
======
mikro2nd
I never cared about what Facebook did with the data they collected from their
users because I did NOT consent. I chose to remain off their platform. I am,
however, reliably informed that they nevertheless /persist/ in gathering data
about me -- presumably via friends and family and the FB apps they use, along
with backend pattern and facial recognition and so on.

Any claim of theirs that I "consented" to them building, using and profiting
by my foibles, relationships and habits is false. Not merely disingenuous; an
outright lie.

~~~
candiodari
I think at this point, given that both Android and IOS make giving apps access
to your contact list easy, you are in fact in these sorts of graph databases
in a couple dozen organizations by now, courtesy of people you know. Facebook
is not going to be the worst of them by a looooooooooooooong shot.

Pokemon Go, Skype (now Microsoft), Whatsapp, Snapchat, Line & WeChat if you
live in Asia, Path, Yelp, Twitter, ... all the bigger internet companies [1]

And sadly there's the really cheesy ones like "Fantasy War Tactics" [2]. How
many of your friends play that sort of crap ?

[1] [https://venturebeat.com/2012/02/14/iphone-address-
book/](https://venturebeat.com/2012/02/14/iphone-address-book/)

[2]
[https://www.reddit.com/r/AndroidGaming/comments/42ok29/why_w...](https://www.reddit.com/r/AndroidGaming/comments/42ok29/why_would_a_game_need_access_to_contacts_and_phone/)

------
pieter_mj
Yes you consented, but it's not an informed consent. Facebook will do anything
to keep you as uninformed as possible (unreadable legalese, dark UX patterns,
opt-outs, ...)

~~~
austincheney
So many excuses. The story _" Of course I agreed, but its all their fault
because I didn't know what I agreed to"_ gets old.

Everybody has known for years that Facebook uses this data against you to make
money. If it didn't upset you before why would it suddenly upset you now?

~~~
mulletbum
Can someone explain why this is getting downvoted? This is Hacker News not
Reddit, please express your angle with text, not just a downvote.

~~~
cryptoz
Hacker News downvotes on emotion every second of every day. It is far worse
than reddit. Do not complain about downvotes here, that is against the rules.
It is _not_ against the rules here to downvote a comment because you disagree
with it, unlike reddit. That's normal here and how HN is meant to work.

------
falcolas
Dear Zuckerberg,

If we consented to this and were still genuinely surprised, its an indication
that the consent was not sufficiently informed. This is your problem, not
ours. Most of us Average Joes just don't understand the scope of what data
collection is possible when we give you access to our phone's features -
especially when you couch the access request for quite innocuous and even
helpful features.

Worse, we don't really understand what can be done with this data. That you
can take location data and will use it to infer where we live and work - that
you could use it to categorize us according to race and religion - these kinds
of possibilities just never crossed our minds when you asked for our location
to share with nearby friends.

So, no, we did not agree to this - we were not well enough informed to agree
with this. To paraphrase a meme: You might be legally correct, but you're an
asshole.

~~~
liberte82
No, it's literally your problem, if there are things happening with the data
that are causing you problems.

~~~
dlwdlw
The libertarian attitude only works if you assume everyone is equal. Children
are not. And because access to knowledge and wisdom (which includes when and
how to seek out knowledge, usually passed on by educated parents.) huge
portions of people can be left in a semi-childlike state. Tendency to
violence, under-appreciation for exponentials, etc...

The role of parental systems is to mitigate the issues of orphans who become
disenfranchised. Entire races can be orphaned from traditional values of they
were severed from their cultural root. (slaves) the elderly also often become
orphaned and so are a big target for scams.

Excessive and imposed "family" is just a cult but that doesn't mean family
values don't at a role in functioning society. There is a limit to individual
ability.

------
Ajedi32
FYI, Zuckerberg's _not_ referring to the EULA or TOS. He's talking about this
dialog box in the app itself:

[https://i.imgur.com/zGUdifB.png](https://i.imgur.com/zGUdifB.png)

Specifically, the very first sentence of the dialog box, which says:

> Continuously upload info about your contacts like phone numbers and
> nicknames, and your call and text history.

The article's not entirely clear on that point, so I thought I'd mention it
here.

~~~
callahad
Thanks for the screenshot. That's a pretty clear and overt prompt.

...And one I would never agree to, yet my address book is in my Facebook data
export. I wonder what previous iterations of that prompt looked like,
especially around the time of Android 4.0, which must have been about when I
installed the app. Does anyone know if there are old screenshots, or historic
versions of the APK available anywhere to check?

------
mtgx
"And sure, we were as misleading as possible about it and tried our best to
trick you into clicking that Next button, but that doesn't count, right?"

This reminds me of Steve Jobs' "You're holding it wrong." Tone deaf. Platforms
always share the most responsibility. This applies to any UX thing. You can
argue that the users are "idiots" for not doing what you think they're
supposed to do, or you can fix your UX to make it as easy to understand as
possible.

Alternatively, you can design your UX with dark patterns to ensure that users
do a lot of stuff that are not good for them and aren't supposed to do, but
you convince them or trick them into doing anyway, because that's good _for
you_.

I also think that by using this strategy Facebook _may_ win the battle, but
it's going to lose the war. Eventually people will go "Well, then, if it's my
fault, then maybe I shouldn't be accepting all of that stuff Facebook is
pushing into my face in their apps." And then Facebook will slowly but surely
die as people use it less and less as "Facebook intended" them to use it.

------
nobleach
Statements like "you agreed to this" are disingenuous at best. Probably a more
truthful statement would be, "you had to know we were getting SOMETHING out of
this." While yes, the terms and conditions were completely forthright about
what Facebook could do with collected data, they were counting on an a very
small percentage of their users actually reading (or caring) about those
terms. I can agree that no one has the right to be outraged though. The only
sticky part here is that if I violate Facebook's Terms and Services, they'll
terminate my account. They'll most likely still use my data after the
termination of our agreement though.

------
AJRF
"Hey we would like to give you weather reports and the ability to see when
people in your area are selling things

P.s we will sell this on to third parties so they can target you to influence
elections."

The problem here is Facebook doesn't ever word things like this, they up sell
Facebook platform features, even if they are segways into increased
advertising revenue.

I think regulation should have a stance on this. It needs to be easy for users
to see exactly how their data is being used, and in a timely fashion. If the
company can't protect our data, they don't deserve to have it.

What do you say Mark? You agreed to this*

* - [https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/180325071038-01-faceb...](https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/180325071038-01-facebook-apology-note-exlarge-169.jpg)

------
thisisit
I have a Facebook account on which I have shared as little as possible. When I
downloaded the data off the platform, it was completely empty which was no
surprise.

But, as it turned out my friends were not so lucky. All of them had my number
saved. Some had my birthday. Quite a few had tagged me at my work location
etc.

So, even with efforts on my side to try and not share data, FB still has a
profile on me. I find it hard to believe that there are lot of other platforms
which can build such a cache of information about me, without me giving them
explicit permission.

------
OrganicMSG
That's funny, as I'd say that;

>"Contact uploading is optional. People are expressly asked if they want to
give permission to upload their contacts from their phone – it’s explained
right there in the apps when you get started."

doesn't really cover the complaint from Dylan McKay regarding;

> "metadata about every text message I've ever received or sent"

and;

> "the metadata of every cellular call I've ever made, including time and
> duration"

------
andy_ppp
This discussion was flagged marked as dead and knocked off the front page
within a few minutes, is that normal? It seems strange that it’s no longer
flagged or dead but still off the homepage. I find this to be the most
damaging Facebook story on there so I worry about why it’s been removed when
the discussion on here was interesting.

------
dustingetz
Another prisoner's dilemma stuck at backstab/backstab. No individual company
can offer simple terms, because it's against their short-term interests.
Simple terms only work if everyone else offers simple terms. Legal precedent
and regulatory capture has evolved us to a local maxima.

------
matt_s
Why don't they just come out with a subscription version of Facebook? $40/year
for no ads, no data miners or data sharing and a customizable "news" feed
(e.g. no shared posts from crazy Uncle, prioritize family, etc.)

Some percentage of users will do that. If 1% of 2 billion users choose it,
then they get $800 million per year.

It seems logical if people don't like being the product, let them pay for the
product, right?

~~~
dfxm12
_$40 /year for no ads, no data miners or data sharing..._

As a point of reference, if you're in the US or Canada, Facebook would be
losing money on this model, according to info on their investors' site [0].

0 -
[https://s21.q4cdn.com/399680738/files/doc_presentations/FB-Q...](https://s21.q4cdn.com/399680738/files/doc_presentations/FB-Q316-Earnings-
Slides.pdf) (search for Average Revenue per User)

~~~
matt_s
Ok those numbers wouldn't work out. I picked $40/yr since it sounded
reasonable.

Maybe this is an opportunity for a startup to create a paid social media
platform?

------
mulletbum
If you've already agreed, then that is too bad, that data is already in their
hands. However, if you would like to make sure to let Facebook know that your
agreement is over, feel free to go here:
[https://www.facebook.com/help/delete_account](https://www.facebook.com/help/delete_account)

------
908087
I never signed up, yet I know Facebook has data about me anyway. How exactly
did I "agree to this"?

------
lmedinas
To be honest what really worries me is the people who have "agreed to this"
without even realizing anything remotely closer to this. I mean people with
poor education to publish everyday photos and texts into Facebook.

------
JumpCrisscross
Many people use their personal phones for work calls. They may have
inadvertently breached NDAs, and in some cases laws, by not paying attention
to their privacy settings.

~~~
paulie_a
No offense but if you have an NDA that can be broken by using your personal
phone you probably shouldn't use your personal phone to make those
communications.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _if you have an NDA that can be broken by using your personal phone_

Almost _every_ NDA, including those standard with employment packages, include
in the definition of confidential information the time, date and duration of
phone calls with customers and sensitive suppliers. Anyone in a customer-
facing role would thus be required to keep those data confidential, _i.e._ not
disclose it without proper authorization to a third party, _e.g._ Facebook.

~~~
paulie_a
Then it's probably not a great idea to use a personal phone to make those
communications then. Whoever wanted the NDA should provide one.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _Whoever wanted the NDA should provide one_

This might work for an employee defending against their employer. It wouldn’t
work for the employer relative to their customers; or a contractor to their
clients; or any other situation. In any case, my point is Facebook may have
caused many people legal harm.

------
diek00
Mark wants to surpass $100 billion in lost stock, like a champ

------
liberte82
Remember when people laughed off Stallman as an extremist?

------
hashkb
He obviously doesn't watch South Park.

------
Balgair
Anecdote: I was in Australia once and idly flipping through the hotel room's
TV channels. I happened upon the Aussie _Dateline_ , their version a popular
US program on NBC that does some alright in-depth reporting on special issues.

As an aside: one thing to remember about Australia compared to the US is that
the Aussie version of things is like the US version, but in a fun house
mirror. Everything is called the same, and is similar, but is just different
enough as to give you 'category-vertigo'. The Aussie BBQ is a BBQ, but not
really anything like a US BBQ. The Aussie seafood is seafood, but not really
anything like US seafood. Aussie radio is radio, but not really anything like
US radio. ETC.

The Aussie version of _Dateline_ that I stumbled upon was taking an in-depth
look at a rancher in QLD and his issues with an oil/gas company. The rancher
quit school at 16 (generally, a wonderful idea in commonwealth countries that
the US should import) and became a boxer, then a car salesman, then a rodeo
bronco rider, and then a cattle rancher with a wife and 3 young kids. Very
importantly, neither he nor his wife could read. His contracts would be signed
with an 'X' and a handshake. From what I could tell about QLD law, every
contract must be read to a person that cannot read, and a sense of 'good
faith' must exist between both parties.

Well, a US oil/gas company came to him and found the black gold under his
ranch. They set up many pump-jacks and ruined his grazing land. He quickly
went bankrupt as all his cattle died. So he went to court over it. The US
company put their hand to their face and basically went: 'Nee-neer-Nee-Neer-
Nee-neer, you signed the contract! Ha!' The contract was written in a very
favorable way to the company and screwed the rancher. So much was the stress,
that the wife tried to commit suicide. Watching that portion of the interview
was heartbreaking. Here was a tough, sunburnt man, brought to tears over
finding his wife just about to commit the act.

But QLD law was very favorable to the man. The contract was voided as it was
created _in bad faith_ and the US company was made to pay to remove the jacks
and pay the rancher back for the damages. The _Dateline_ piece was mostly
following their attempts in international courts to get the company to pay up,
as they had fled Australia in order to skip out on the payment.

Here's my point: What the Zuck is doing, by saying: 'Nee-neer-Nee-Neer-Nee-
neer, you signed the contract! Ha!', is a very _American_ thing to do; and it
won't stand up in many other countries, or even his own. Just because a
contract was clicked on and agreed to _in bad faith_ , doesn't mean that he
will be able to hide behind that shield forever. Even if you have a piece of
paper that says 'I can be an asshole', and everyone has signed it, doesn't
mean that you can be an asshole forever. People don't like assholes and they
will get lawyers/barristers in to express that feeling.

------
api
This is actually the correct response. A better way of saying it is: Facebook
is not free. You pay by surrendering data about yourself and your friends.

~~~
xboxnolifes
I never cared about Facebook using data collected from their platforms, but
the whole "Collecting phone data because you agreed to the very wide
permission system implemented in Android systems", is a bit sketchy.

~~~
austincheney
Facebook doesn't have to anything you didn't deliberately agree to surrender.
That isn't very sketchy.

~~~
tatersolid
No user, even if they read the TOS, believed they were opting into perpetual
call and SMS logging.

It’s dark UX and the terrible Amdroid permissions system that tricked them
into it.

~~~
austincheney
Its not dark UX merely because you don't like it.

Dark UX suggests a control designed to trick you into making a decision you
would deliberate otherwise not make. I looked at their opt-in control and it
is very clear that you have to opt-in.

In other words, if you didn't want Facebook to have all your call and SMS data
then why would you deliberately agree to give it to Facebook with their very
obvious consent form?

~~~
dictum
> their very obvious consent form

I haven't used FB in a long time and I never used their mobile app, so here's
a genuine request: do you have a screenshot or some example of how they gather
consent for this?

~~~
austincheney
The Vanity Fair article about this featured a screenshot if you scroll down a
little bit: [https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/25/facebook-denies-it-
collect...](https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/25/facebook-denies-it-collects-
call-and-sms-data-from-phones-without-permission/)

~~~
dictum
Thanks. It confirms my empirical experience that most users (of all
backgrounds) don't read, those who read don't fully comprehend the
information, and those who comprehend it are thrown off by cute illustrations
or the urgency of what they want to accomplish in the moment.

Personally, I'd prefer the message to be split in two parts, like so:

\------

# Text anyone in your phone

This lets friends find each other on Facebook and helps us create a better
experience for everyone.

## Privacy

This will continously upload:

\- Info about your contacts like phone numbers and nicknames

\- Your call and text history.

\------

(I don't think I'd have gotten FB to a half-trillion market cap.)

