Yep. I’ve been explaining this stuff to friends for years. Even the most intelligent and rational dismiss it as paranoia or say, “I don’t care, I have nothing to hide anyway.”
I know many people who care but they think they can "outsmart" Facebook by having workarounds for its annoying and evil nature. They do it by not giving it their permission to access the address book, location, nude pictures, etc. They told me to "just deny Facebook's request to..." It bugged the fuck out of me and I wrote about it last year [1].
They think they can befriend an evil person who they know too well would stab them in the back. They think that they are stronger and more intelligent than the evil friend.
The proper answer is that if you think a friend of yours is a shitty person, then don't befriend them anymore. If you don't like what the fuck Facebook does, then just don't have a Facebook account. It's an inconvenience in the short term because you can't talk to some of your friends, sure. But if you have it and invent those workarounds and ask me to install that piece of shit so I can talk to you, then you complicit with it and make my life shitty too. When I realized that, I realized that's exactly what Stallman meant when he talked about proprietary software -- which is what he doesn't agree with.
I've not read t but guessing its similar to why you shouldn't speak to police without a lawyer even if "I done nothing wrong". Because you will probably say something they can use against you regardless.
Which is a dangerous family of opinions to apply without fully understanding them, as asking for a lawyer when they’re at your door inquiring about a missing neighborhood kid is probably counterproductive and escalates attention on you unnecessarily. It’s a fine opinion when common sense is involved. I don’t have a problem with the sentiment, just watching people who digest YouTube and shout “where’s your probable cause” at the poor guy looking for gypsy moths at the California border.
I'm pretty sure that idiots like that will be idiots no matter what advice they stumble over.
But I have to say,
> Which is a dangerous family of opinions to apply without fully understanding them
I get what you're saying, but the point of the advice is that, in a situation to which the advice is applicable, you don't fully understand the implications of anything you may say, so your best play is to clam up and get a lawyer.
>your best play is to clam up and get a lawyer. //
Your best play if you want to waste police time because you for some reason hate society and think helping to make it run smoothly infringes on your rights - because fuck those guys, right, they're not paying you to search for the kid you just saw walking off with Ann Ominous, why should you help.
Hyperbole; but I think it illustrates the counterpoint sufficiently.
> they're not paying you to search for the kid you just saw walking
I said, "in a situation to which the advice is applicable". Nobody is saying leave Timmy in the well, they're talking about situations involving being detained or arrested.
I probably have things to hide, but: I ignore ads. I don't click on political news. I pretty much ignore everything except my friends' vacation photos. Please tell me in concrete terms a specific downside to staying on Facebook. What's the non-tinfoil hat scenario that I am naively ignoring? Wake up and my bank account is drained, or what?
You don't have to click it. For example I have zero interest in celebrities or reality TV, I've never clicked a link or read an article about them. Yet even I know who Kanye Kardashian is, and that he's married to (or is? * ) a woman with an enormous backside. it's pervasive, it becomes part of the background and what you consider "normal". I absolutely guarantee that despite never having clicked a link about Trump, just having that link there and seeing the headline, will have influenced you, same as it would anyone.
Did you see that through facebook ... ? Friend feeds ? Liked pages ?
I've hidden pretty much everyone, only keeping a few music or art pages, only go on facebook maybe once a week anyways.
I use messenger a lot though. I hate typing on phones so not many texts, and whatsapp web interface is not that great (and it's not as widely used by my friends, and it's owned by facebook anyways so what's the difference ?).
Actually a fun detail is that I entered facebook under the wrong gender : I'm labelled as a male though I'm female. When I looked at my targeted center of interests I had the most average things ever ie sports and such (which I don't follow -at all-). Like, really, you have nothing better on me ?
So I don't care about my data (I don't think I put a lot out there anyways) or whatever and I've yet to be convinced how it matters at all in the grand scheme of the universe.
> most average things ever ie sports and such (which I don't follow -at all-). Like, really, you have nothing better on me ?
To me, that is part of the problem.
For years Facebook, and Google, have been telling the world they understand us better than we know ourselves, and all the fine-grained ways they can categorise and predict us. They actually seem to believe it. Then when they allow us to look at what they have inferred it is usually comically wrong for pretty much everyone.
Then they go on to sell to us, categorise and bubble us as though it were fact, and sell access to this marvellous factual data or sell their marvellous data mining capability to riffle through vast amounts of NHS data, or predict crime, or...
We're building a global infrastructure with a foundation of that 98% bullshit. That was mostly harmless when it was just about product ads. When it moves on to health, justice and politics and it's shown they're able to move the needle I think it does matter. Perhaps not much to anyone personally, but to society as a whole.
Then what's the problem if it's not actually that good for people who leave few, contradictory elements (maybe I would've been easier profiled if I was labelled female for an example). They try to sell me stuff which I won't be interested in, seems fine to me.
As for the last part, could you be more precise ? What exactly could happen that would be bad to you ?
I maybe wrong, but unless he changed his name he is Kanye West and his wife is Kim Kardashian. And I know this not form facebook but probably from reddit memes. And again, unless I missed the fact he changed his name, it does prove the point that you really don't know who he is since you mixed up his name ;)
But Facebook harvests whatever cookies and trackers it can out of your browser, even for activity outside of and unrelated to Facebook itself. You will be productized in every possible way. (For one example, haven't you seen Amazon ads in your feed for items you may gave looked at/for strictly external to your Facebook tab?)
There's a collective impact on society for which everyone participating has some amount shared responsibility. It's up to the individual to decide if that impact is a positive or a negative one.
I don't put that much data out, but I don't mind being profiled. I like being suggested music that I'm susceptible to like based on other people. I think it's fine if one can infer out of my lifestyle that I would be interested in x or warn for risks of y.
What is wrong with it ? I'm probably no statistical anomaly, I don't mind being part of some artificial cluster somewhere, helping having a more accurate portrayal of a type of people. I am not interesting enough that anyone will come for me specifically anyways.
And from time to time, I see worried and lamenting people like here, and I still don't get it.
I was talking to my daughter about that yesterday. Suppose Facebook knows your interests, taste in music, where you live, what good you like, etc. A political campaign could use that information to tell you that their local candidate shares your interests, lived in the same town, loves the same music, supports the same charity or whatever overlaps with your profile, while knowingly avoiding telling you about things you like or are in favour of for which they hold opposing views. So you get a personally tailored, custom ad for the candidate pushing all the right buttons and concealing anything that doesn’t match or it knows you would dislike. Meanwhile it could also show you targeted attack ads on a rival customised to highlight things they know you dislike.
All the information might be true (or might not), but IMHO I don’t like the idea of people intrusively trying to manipulate me like that. We all have biases and preconceptions. We’re all open to manipulation and the last thing I want is my online world to become an echo chamber, turning me into a parody of myself. In the wider context, it’s also a threat to civil society, driving a wedge between us as citizens by magnifying our differences and promoting divisiveness. That’s what the Russian interference campaign was all about.
The thing is, if a candidate seems interesting, you should teach her to look up their website and read their full agenda. If they've held positions before, also to google them to find out what they've actually said and done in the past, and to think carefully about what kinds of implications those deeds may have had. You most certainly shouldn't base your election choices on paid ads - or, really, any kind of information only from a single outlet.
That's also the general recipe for avoiding echo chambers: don't be lazy, and go a little out of your way to find things out.
Of course, but are we really ok living in a world where the vast majority of the electorate are completely unprepared to protect themselves from this sort of manipulation?
It’s not that I’m against advertising, or capitalism, or that I’m some sort of over-regulating socialist. I just think that we need basic, fair rights over and protections for our personal information, and that this isn’t just good for us it’s good for our democracies.
Thing is, it’s not dangerous on an individual level - no different to a friend telling you about a particular candidate and why you should like them.
And personalised ads sound great at the individual level - relevant, interesting products and services that I’m likely to interact with instead of irrelevant crap clogging up my screen. We’ve always had targeting and echo chambers.
But, like the algorithmic kids videos a few months ago or the deluge of fake news, we and our society are totally unprepared for the speed and scale that technology now allows. It’s the sheer quantity and pervasiveness - and the fact that it’s not obvious what’s going on - that makes it dangerous.
To (poorly) quote Charlie Stross, we’ve ripped out the mechanisms for how things work and replaced them with something alien, without anyone noticing.
I don't vote, I don't care. Couldn't care less about politics to be quite honest. They have a very marginal influence on my life, aspirations and happiness.
If that's true, that's a pretty handy description of what many US leftists call "privilege." There are many marginalized people, including in developed western nations, for whom the politics you're able to ignore can have decisive impact on their day to day lives. Many of these people, like many people in general, will not have the knowledge of internet technology and policy they need to protect themselves.
> I am not interesting enough that anyone will come for me specifically anyways.
No single raindrop believes it's responsible for the storm.
They don't care about you specifically, if you can profile people accurately they have a much easier time of adjusting perspectives for your own aims. You've likely already seen the results of this with the latest American election.
It's gone far beyond getting you to buy more music and they're just warming up.
This may be okay for you individually. But Facebook will treat someone with bipolar or serious impulse control issues just the same way... Assuming some level of accuracy, an algorithm could predict when someone is having a manic episode, susceptible. Its predatory and dangerous. The vast majority of people are not aware of how to protect themselves from out-of-hand tech giants and their customers. Getting ahead is becoming about how well you can unplug so that you are not being puppeteered. We all need some counter-intelligence know-how.
I suggest, use rational means to work out for yourself what products are best for you and your budget, or on the other hand what political affiliations actualy represent your interests. Figuring out what's real in the world is a big task and only the most vigilant will be okay, or blow the whistle so the average person might be.
>But Facebook will treat someone with bipolar or serious impulse control issues just the same way... Assuming some level of accuracy, an algorithm could predict when someone is having a manic episode, susceptible. Its predatory and dangerous.
And what would they do out of that ? People with poor mental health don't need facebook to be triggered, it seems even less harmful because it's through an interface and not a direct human interaction.
>use rational means to work out for yourself what products are best for you and your budget, or on the other hand what political affiliations actualy represent your interests.
I don't buy stuff mostly, it's an easy solution. And no political affiliations represent the rare interest I have that I think would undoubtedly be good.
Anecdotal but definitely illustrative: a close friend of my mother had serious trouble managing her bipolar states, she would start manic and it got out of control within hours or sometimes minutes. Bye bye meds, and on more than one occasion, she would spend thousands of dollars in days, vacation scams, grocery shopping for things unneeded that sat and spoiled, you name it. She made comprehensive arrangements with friends and the companies she dealt with repeatedly so she couldn't get more than a few dollars pocket money when off cycle. In this regard, my mom was an angel, saved this friend multiple bankruptcies.
Anyone not so fortunate could be so easily scammed its scary. And heart wrenching.
Is state guardianship not possible then ? Or arrangement with the bank ? No credit card, get cash at the bank counter when needed... I really have a hard time seeing this as an unsolvable problem, let alone scary or heart breaking.
I'm sure it might have been, but her kids took the "bail and never have to deal with it again" option, and she honestly had trouble just staying focused enough to have something of a day job, let alone remember to make appointments and keep them.
Not so much heart breaking, but hard to watch from the outside, she meant to live well and tried but her brain chemistry gave her random minuses to intelligence wisdom and charisma.
You're saying you don't mind being profiled and don't see the harm in it, but in several places downthread you describe in detail how little you use the platform, how poorly it understands you, and how little exposure you get to it. If these things are true, you're not a good example of how harmless their profiling is for other people.
Everybody's got something to hide, just not from everybody else. As much as we share with friends what we would not share with strangers, we have things that we would enthusiastically share with strangers that we would never share with our friends. Something similar applies here: everybody would absolutely do mind if someone in their personal sphere could browse their search term history, but the same data as one of billions of profiles on some corporate datacenter does not appear in that threat model. Ultimately, "nothing to hide" is short for "nothing to hide from them", and the main difference is wether the possibility of leaks is taken into account or not.
The flip side to "nothing to hide" is akin to John Hancock signing his name big and bold because you want others to know what "you" think and are doing.
That is not at all the same as not caring. It's using the platform with intent.
I see a lot of that on FB. I don't agree with the intent all the time but I do pay attention to it and often use it with purpose myself.
When people say "I have nothing to hide anyway." ask them about their weirdest sexual fantasy and their credit card number. Usually then they realize they might have somethings they want to keep private.
