As I've advocated in other commentary on this site: Engineers at Facebook have a moral obligation either reform from the inside or quit. This kind of surveillance apparatus should not be built, by either government or private entities.
Actually you don't even have to be one of its users! Facebook has what they call "shadow profiles" for tracking people who haven't yet created Facebook accounts. That's how they instantly show you everyone you know when you finally create a FB account. You have Facebook cookies on your computer even if you have never visited facebook.com. Try deleting them. Within 30 minutes of browsing random web sites I guarantee you'll once again have facebook cookies. They track everything you're doing online even if you're not one of their users. Then they buy offline data about you from other companies, to complete their profile of you.
Sadly they only way to put an end to all this is by hoping the European Union will introduce new laws -- the only government that actually represents their citizens, as opposed to big businesses.
There are some other ways to identify users, e.g. the E-Tag header or canvas-based methods. But cookies are the main and most reliable tool.
You can go one step further and just always use Incognito/Private mode for sites that don't require a login. If you need to be logged in a lot, Firefox Account Containers are a new feature to separate site data.
I mean, you should stop using Java, but not for that reason :)
Mostly they seem happy to go public while babbling about how they’re “changing the world” as in that pitiful letter from DropBox.
(FWIW, I think there are good and moral people who work at Google. But if they're not going to organize their labor or quit to stop this stuff, it doesn't really matter either way)
So some apps like Facebook might synchronize or make other uses of contacts with their service accounts, but many other service don't do anything with contacts and doesn't EVEN request the actual contacts permission but their permission request is still displayed as "Contacts".
How can the user be able to do responsible choices in giving apps permissions when the permissions layer of the OS make no sense?
Facebook may have been "given permission" but as people are discovering, it wasn't really actually given permission. This is why there is such a notion as informed consent, because giving permission isn't always as simple as agreeing to something.
Not only they executed it, they have thought of it, where to store it, how to download it etc.
It is not just Zuckerberg who is at fault.
Why the hell was this an option? Why wasn’t there a really big ‘holy hell are you sure you want to do this’ dialog box? How do normal apps even get to ask for this in the first place?
All of the teams of people you mentioned work for him. They take direction from him, and ultimately the buck stops there.
To Godwinize for clarity: Hitler wasn't the only war criminal in Nazi Germany.
They need to split that permission if it is combined with other stuff.
I used to think Apple would never grant this entitlement to any other apps other than those that are builtin to iOS, but then there was that whole Uber framebuffer capture entitlement scandal...
From that and other comments it seems like this story may not apply to iOS?
I suspect the peak won't be reached until we read a court transcript with the quote "show us upon this dB schema were Facebook touched you".
I guess this kind of complies with the GDPR. Seems like FB probably has fast internet links somewhere.