For some reason whenever negative stories come out about Trump or about Facebook or about some political figurehead in today's environment, people drag themselves out of the woodwork to pull out the tired argument that people are just 'jealous' that Trump won.
Could you explain your justification for trotting such an irrelevant point? We can argue all day that everyone knows that Facebook does all this scary stuff (and the nearly tech-illiterate people I interact with have no clue about this sort of thing while being barely able to use Facebook) but I'm more curious as to where your main point comes from.
2) Can you recall a time when a Facebook privacy story ever received so much media and government interest?
There was a time when apps would blindly request a bunch of permissions. Users would blindly accept them. Devs would store tokens in the database. One shoddy exploit later on the application and an attacker had all their photos, friends' photos, and could post and comment on various things impersonating the user.
I can't imagine how much harvesting was done by popular Facebook apps and games in those days.
Because I've noticed in many of these threads about Facebook there is constant whataboutism relating to Obama and a constant attempt to deflect discussion away from the actual contents of the article.
You've been making the unsubstantiated argument that the only reason people care about Facebook nowadays is because they're sore losers. If you're going to make a wide-reaching claim like that, I would love some citations.
I'm really torn in how to respond to claims of whataboutism.
On one hand, if something is simply business as usual, despite any misconceptions otherwise, then cries of whataboutism can be a bit misplaced.
On the other hand, if some sort of tide has shifted, and business as usual can become business of the past, then I think dismissing similar past offenses from others could make sense.
I have hard time attempting to evaluate this, to say the least...
Could you explain your justification for trotting such an irrelevant point? We can argue all day that everyone knows that Facebook does all this scary stuff (and the nearly tech-illiterate people I interact with have no clue about this sort of thing while being barely able to use Facebook) but I'm more curious as to where your main point comes from.