Another day, another argument for returning to RSS readers so we can filter for ourselves.
Probably just coincidental. My post will be deleted for pointing this out.
The less generous take is that they don't want to understand because it would obligate them to grapple with the ethics of having that power and the least generous take is that they understand full well and simply do not care.
No matter what take you subscribe to, almost everyone can agree that as long as the money flows and the government (US and EU) stays at bay, nothing will change with that company.
In contrast, Mark purposely lied to mislead the brothers who hired him for UConnect so he could launch Facebook before they could launch, he used the name and concept of facebooks from his university and skipped the whole process of caring and worrying about things like privacy, ethics. There are also the transcripts of him calling his users "dumb fucks" for trusting him with their data.
There's never been accountability for Mark, he's never cared for it, and he's only been excessively rewarded by it. He's only learned to control and control his image more and more tightly.
20/20 hindsight, is obvious now that this would evolve like this based on Facebook's beginnings.
To add, FaceMash that Mark had started - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/04/11... - what kind of game is it of trying to confuse people by using phrases like "unclear truth" as an answer, it's almost in line with "fake news." And I don't care he was younger or the other details, I care that he still hasn't owned up to it, taking responsibility, being an adult about it to help build our trust with him. Instead he continues to play these games, and certain people want him to because it makes them/keeps them rich.
My cynical view is, that this was a way to push FB to censor media content in favor of the establishment. Essentially, FB should allow Washington Post, NY Times, etc. to be shared with no shadow censorship, but the lesser established journalistic outlet should be censored.
You can see it from their side. NY Times or Washington Post are brands. But with FB, their brand value is not bringing them as much traffic as lesser entities. So, if I'm Bezos or others who own these entities, I would be unhappy to see FB providing an equal playing field to everyone.
I think the "RussiaGate" provided the best push for this argument. That if there is no censorship by FB, foreign players can influence our election. Though Comey's letter shown to have impacted the election , the $50k of ad buying on FB, made the news round and continues to pervade among many people that these ads probably changed the outcome of the election.
I'm sad to see Zuck and FB have succumbed to these pressures and are closing down venues for alternative journalist to state their views.
That's probably the reason, FB seems to give preferential treatment to some governments.
When Google changes policies, they have to scramble. The only thing that's different is that some (not many) of these sites have valuable content, so that gives them a soapbox to stand on.
On the other hand, the posts of close friends were just us likely to be lost thirty pages down in my feed as were those of people I knew only peripherally.
I don't use FB anymore, but that's what I'd do. Data is there, so it's only the matter of storing them locally, creating my own wall, and then linking back to facebook for interaction/comments if necessary.
I am trying to build this very thing but Facebook's recent privacy issues have caused it to over react and I keep getting the below error:
"Access to this data is temporarily disabled for non-active apps or apps that have not recently accessed this data due to changes we are making to the Facebook Platform."
The API call getting the error is to retrieve the list of posts from a page. Getting an error for that is just silly. If anyone can help please contact me!
Apple seems to control the podcast database, and its just people submitting RSS feeds.
I've been using IFTTT to build sites that are just feeding multiple sites into 1 location, reddit subs, youtube channels, etc.
The tech is out there, but everyone seems to be thinking they need to be facebook/youtube clones.
Craig Murray is also soliciting donations these days, this only started a week ago. I think he comes across as a bit paranoid.
Hopefully he won't do what that orthorexic vegan did at the YouTube HQ for monetization issues.